Attention to Detail

In 2007, I moved my family across country to take a new role as Production Manager for a ceiling tile plant in Oregon. The plant had a strong team-based culture. People genuinely wanted to help each other work in as safe and productive manner as possible. It wasn’t unusual to see the Plant Manager on the factory floor, assisting the technicians with their work or helping them stay safe.

Plant performance had deteriorated over the years and we were operating at less than budgeted levels. I was determined to identify the reasons and work with the technicians to turn things around.

The first two months of my time at the plant, I spent more time on the factory floor than in meetings or in my office. I came into the plant at any hour of the day or night, trying to assess and understand the reasons for the lowered performance. People had the right attitude. They wanted to win. What was holding them back?

The Team Managers had strong relationships with their people. The equipment was in generally good condition and there was an established preventive maintenance program. Something was missing and I had to find out what it was.

One morning, while taking a walk around the plant, I noticed papers on clipboards at each operating station on the line. They were titled “While Running Tasks.” Taking a closer look, I saw operations checks to be completed and signed off by the technicians on shift. There were many blank spaces on the papers, meaning that checks weren’t completed during the week.

I reviewed these papers and found that less than half of the checks had been completed and signed off. The Team Managers told me the checks were defined as critical to the performance and safety of the line. Teams of technicians had identified and agreed to the tasks. They met every three months to review and update the “While Running Tasks” as new issues arose.

I reviewed the forms to see if there was any correlation between tasks not completed and downtime or scrap events. In a two-month sample, more than one-third of the downtime and scrap events could have been prevented if the checks were completed properly and on time. I now knew what had to be done.

Working with my three Team Managers, we came up with a plan to rapidly improve performance. We would rededicate ourselves to the “While Running Tasks.” Nothing less than a 100% completion rate was acceptable. Technicians would be accountable to complete and sign off on all tasks during their shift. Team Managers would audit the tasks on every shift, and I’d audit randomly every day and do a complete audit at the end of every week.

My Team Managers wanted to conduct crew meetings and share the new requirements with their crews. I told them I wanted to be a part of every meeting, sharing my logic and belief in our new requirement. They agreed and we planned crew meetings for the next day at 6:30 am, 3:30 pm, and 10:30 pm.

I kicked off each meeting. I told the crews how impressed I was by the teamwork I had observed. I also talked about the honesty of people working there. No one ever signed off on anything unless they had actually completed a task. Now, it was time to use our teamwork and honesty to improve performance at the plant.

I reviewed my findings about the “While Running Tasks.” I shared examples of line failures and scrap events directly impacted by the incompletion of the critical work they had identified and agreed to. We owed it to each other to perform the work we agreed to. Next, I laid out the principles and expectations moving forward:

1.       Attention to detail will improve performance and keep everyone safe.

2.       While Running Tasks are the first line of defense to prevent problems and reduce safety risk.

3.       We must achieve 100% compliance to While Running Tasks – anything less increases risk for downtime and injuries.

4.       Completing While Running Tasks is a condition of employment.

I then handed the meeting to the Team Manager, who described how he would work with his crew to attain 100% compliance. He described how he would hold himself and each crew member accountable to their “While Running Tasks.” Crews were also encouraged to review their “While Running Tasks” and verify they were practical and designed to prevent problems.

We received many questions. It was easy to answer any concerns. We truly believed this approach was going to keep everyone safer and more productive. People were worried they were going to be fired if they forgot a task once in a while. We understood and put in levels of discipline. We didn’t want to fire anyone. We did believe that 100% compliance was the best strategy to improve performance at the plant. We couldn’t compromise our beliefs.

During the first two weeks, there were a few “forgotten” tasks. There was some discipline recorded. No one was fired. The first month, compliance reached 90%. Plant performance was noticeably improved. The second month, compliance was 98%. The third month, we achieved 100% compliance. Everyone could tell the difference. The plant was running significantly better. For the next year and a half, compliance stayed at 100%. During that time, the plant attained company records for performance. Attention to detail cost us nothing; except time, focus, and commitment.