There is One Best Way
In 2019, Process Improvement Partners was asked to run a reliability Kaizen for a factory in Missouri. A month in advance of the event, I conducted a site visit and took a walk to the line to be improved. Cluttered, dirty, and lacking organization, the line was operating at extremely low levels of efficiency. There was an hourly production board and it was filled with red numbers, meaning production output was below target levels most of the time. Working with the sponsor, we aligned around efforts to improve safety and productivity of the operation using reliability and Lean principles.
We built the charter for the event together. I coached the team leader around building the best team for the effort. We needed representation from all crews and the team members had to care about making the line better for everyone. I also advised to include some line mechanics and a few “Kaizen Rock Stars”. These were team members from other locations who had demonstrated their passion and willingness to make things better for everyone. Two weeks before the event kick-off, we had commitment from all team members.
On the morning of the first day of the event, I went around the room for team member introductions. We had operators from all four crews, two mechanics, one engineer, two supervisors, one operations manager, and two “Kaizen Rock Stars”. Half of the team had never been in a kaizen event, they weren’t sure what to think, and they were understandably skeptical.
After some initial training, we took a walk to the line to see what was happening and generate some improvement ideas to improve safety and reliability of the line. I directed the team to focus on equipment reliability, using the principles and techniques we had just reviewed. When we returned to the meeting room, we generated more than 100 improvement ideas. A vast majority of the ideas focused in two areas: carton wrapping and container filling. The team agreed carton wrapping was the highest source of stress and downtime, with the container filler a close second. We decided to work on the carton wrapper first. To do this work, we had to shut the line down for a few hours. Knowing that we would be working on the container filler next, we asked the crew on shift to clean it during the downtime.
Shifting Lanes
The conveyer leading to the carton wrapper had three lanes that product could utilize as it traveled to the wrapper. The wrapper had two lanes of products to be wrapped. I asked the operators if they ever utilized the third lane and they told me no and in the many years since the equipment was installed, they had never seen the third lane utilized. This third lane was in the way of their work when they had to interact with the equipment. The next questions I asked were, “Can we remove the third lane? Are we expecting we will need it in the future?” All team members agreed it would be best to remove the lane and we did.
Next, we found the center of the carton wrapper and balanced both lanes around the center. It turns out the equipment was ¾” off-center, which doesn’t sound like much, but helped to explain why products were getting jammed in the carton wrapper. Finally, we realigned the lanes leading into the carton wrapper to match the newly balanced lanes inside the wrapper. When we sent product through this newly balanced portion of the line, it flowed smoother than anyone on the team had ever experienced. I knew they were becoming believers in the methods I was demonstrating.
There were many more improvements to be made on the carton wrapper, and a portion of the team stayed with those efforts, while the rest of the team turned their attention to the container filler. Newly cleaned, we were able to see that some of the parts in the filler didn’t look like they matched the other parts. Some of the parts from one product size were mixed in with parts from a different product size and some of the parts were in a state of disrepair. All of this had been hidden by the coating of dust and dirt. Once we saw this, we knew what we had to do: Put the proper sized parts in the filler and repair the broken parts. Over the next few days, the team made numerous improvements to the carton wrapper, product filler, and other components of the line.
Analysis Over Emotion
On the fourth day, we had to determine the best way to run the line, utilizing all of the improvements and standardizing efforts across all crews. This can be challenging, as most operators think their way is the best way. I took the team leader aside and reviewed the strategy for this next effort. We would take all of the operators and attempt to come to an agreement on how to best run the line. There were so many changes and improvements to the line in the first three days, none of the earlier procedures would be relevant to our newly improved processes.
The operators didn’t see it that way. Two in particular, let’s call them Sue and Jane, thought their way was best. The other two operators didn’t necessarily agree with Sue and Jane, but weren’t willing to argue as passionately as Sue and Jane. After 30 minutes of describing their methods, both Sue and Jane agreed that their methods were essentially the same. We had to commit to one method we could use to train others and hold them accountable to. I asked Sue and Jane to demonstrate their methods separately. The other two operators and team leader would review both approaches using two methods of analysis: spaghetti diagram and timing. The spaghetti diagram measures the distance a person travels when they’re doing their work. Timing tells us the impact of the work as measured in minutes and seconds. We all agreed to let the analysis rather than emotion tell us the best way to proceed.
A Natural Approach
Sue and Jane were advised to work at a comfortable pace, without putting themselves in a safety risk. It was more important to learn the best way and do it in a way that would make it easy to train others. The observers were to identify any further improvements from this analysis. Sue went first, confident she had the best way to accomplish the work. She went in a clockwise fashion around the line, performing all of the required tasks. On a couple of occasions, she overlooked some of the changes. We stopped the clock to remind her of the new method. We restarted the clock when she utilized the new methods. She finished in under 25 minutes, satisfied her way was best.
Jane went next and worked in a counterclockwise fashion around the line. As she did her work, she followed the new steps in an efficient and stress-free manner. She didn’t seem to have to walk very far to accomplish any next steps and also didn’t forget any steps. It looked so simple and natural. Fourteen minutes later she was finished. The team was surprised and excited. They didn’t think there would be so much difference. Sue had to admit Jane’s method was the better one. This was a breakthrough. All four operators would need to represent the new method to their co-workers when they returned to their normal jobs. If not, all of the great work of the team would be wasted.
At the report out the following day, Sue and Jane admitted to the audience they had to be open to thinking differently about how they did their work and there is always a better way to get things done. The team was proud of their accomplishments and the plant had a much more safe and reliable process than before. One month later, I received a text from the team leader. He shared a photo of the hourly production board, filled with green numbers.