Lean and the Adjacent Thinker | Robert Martichenko | LeanCor

“…As a lean thinker, I can start by asking myself, what are the adjacent processes to my work to which I need to connect and what is the math of the flow between us?  That is, who are my allies, whose outputs are my inputs, and who’s using my outputs as their inputs? And how can I formally collaborate to connect these series of adjacent processes to create flow?…”

Sourced through the LeanCor blog

Michel Baudin‘s comments:

“Adjacent” is a good word for all the processes that directly exchange materials or data with one operation and, if adjacency is locally well managed at every operation, you have a smooth flow from start to finish. I will henceforth use this. At the start of his post, Robert confesses to having studied math as an undergrad, which is another thing we have in common besides having both written books about Lean Logistics.

Continue reading

Is Reflection a Lost Art? | Robert Martichenko

“Michel,

A close friend recently asked me if I thought writing is a lost art.

“Why do you say that?” I asked.

“Mostly,” she said, “because all I see these days are people writing on social media, in short bursts, with multiple typos, poor grammar, and no rigor to the thoughtfulness of the message.”

Having still not answered her question, I thought for a little bit, mostly about why I personally like to write.

“No,” I answered.  “I don’t believe writing is a lost art.  I believe the leadership principle of reflection is a lost art.”

“Interesting”, was my friend’s reply. “What do you mean by that?”

“Well,” I said, “if I think back on the business books I have written, and the recent novel that I published, the true precipice of my writing was to practice the lean leadership principle of reflection. In order to write thoughtfully, you need to put yourself in a quiet place, you need to unplug, you need to assemble your disconnected thoughts on paper, then analyze and synthesize these thoughts in order to package them in such a way that a stranger can understand the lessons and concepts that you are trying to communicate. And often when I’m writing, I reread what I’ve written, and I realize that my thoughts are not even clear in my own mind. This forces me to work at it again – with sleeves rolled up – in order to truly understand what I’ve learned as a leader relative to the concepts I am writing about. This is not always easy. However, to quote Snoopy from Charlie Brown, ‘I am a great admirer of my own writing’, so this allows me to soldier on.

[…]

For me, writing creates an effective environment for true reflection.

What is your process?

 

Michel Baudin‘s comments: Robert Martichenko came to my attention back in 2005, as co-author of the second book on Lean Logistics. Mine was first, by a few weeks, and it’s been a friendly rivalry. As of this morning, on Amazon, mine has 10 reviews and ranks 4.8 out of 5 stars, while his has 6 reviews and ranks 4.7. But his book is cheaper and his sales rank is higher. A few years after both books came out, a seminar organizer for Robert liked the subtitle of my book, “the nuts and bolts of delivering materials and goods,” so much that he used it in a promotional flyer, for which Robert duly apologized.

Continue reading

Question On Optional Components | Arvind Janarthanam

“Greetings! First of all, I am thankful to this blog. It has helped me out with my queries.

I’m working as a scheduler and we are facing sudden change in the optional parts that we supply to our customer. The reliability of the forecast we have is coming down. Most of our parts being imported is affecting our cost due to last-minute freight. Can you please suggest an approach to arrive at the minimum number of stock we could maintain against each options(based on past data) so that we strike a balance between the inventory and availability.

Arvind”

Michel Baudin‘s response:

Dear Arvind:

You tell me you are a scheduler, but many of the actions that can improve the procurement of optional parts are beyond the range of what a scheduler can decide. You are also asking a generic question, to which there is no generic, universal answer. All I can do is lay out a few possible courses of action.

Continue reading

The Routledge Companion to Lean Management | Torbjorn Netland

Screen Shot 2016-08-09 at 9.47.28 AMThe Routledge Companion to Lean Management is now available for pre-ordering. It is a compilation of contributions from multiple authors, edited by Torbjorn Netland, and Chapter 8 is my overview of Lean Logistics. The other co-authors include Dan Jones, Jim Womack, John Shook, Jeffrey Liker, Robert Hafey, John Bicheno, Glenn Ballard, Michael Ballé, Mary Poppendieck, and many others whose work I am not familiar with.

Continue reading

“Ohm’s Law” for WIP — Little’s Law Explained in Russian | Holz Expert

Sourced through Scoop.it from: holzex.ru

Translated from Russian: “Every production manager knows that the amount of work in process (WIP) — stacks of parts lying between machines waiting for processing —  should be reduced. In contrast to the raw materials in the warehouse,  work has already been done on it, and its cost increased by the amount of value added. This makes it an illiquid asset – in contrast to raw materials and finished goods, it cannot be sold. In addition,  WIP costs extra space, heating, transportation and personnel. But, before reducing WIP, it is necessary to properly evaluate it…”

Michel Baudin‘s comments:

 Even though it has a German name meaning “Wood Expert,” Holz Expert is a consulting group based in Moscow and specialized in the furniture industry.

I had not heard of them before, but Oleg Novikov pointed out this article to me on Facebook. It is well done. If you can’t read Russian, check it out with Google translate. They explain all the assumptions needed for the formula to be applicable, and give examples from furniture manufacturing. They even include a smiling picture of John D.C. Little.

Working with Russian clients, I was surprised that they insisted on mathematical formulas in consulting reports. To them, it was essential to the credibility of the recommendations, a feeling that I have never encountered among their counterparts anywhere else.

 

See on Scoop.itlean manufacturing

Fundamental failings in “Lean” procurement | Supply Chain Digital

A side-loading truck

“The famous Lean approach, adopted by companies all over the world, considers the expenditure of resources on anything that doesn’t create value for the end customer as waste and seeks to eliminate unnecessary processes within this framework.

The concern, however, is that companies are losing out by either not fully understanding the practice or not committing themselves enough to the change in thinking adopting it requires.”

Source: www.supplychaindigital.com

Michel Baudin‘s comments:

The points in the article are valid, and could be summarized by saying that, in procurement/supply chain management/logistics, efficiency should never be pursued at the expense of effectiveness.

The more fundamental mistake, however, is the half-baked notion that “anything that doesn’t create value for the end customer is waste.”  Any business activity involves tasks the customer is never aware of, let alone values, and a narrow-minded focus on what customers are “willing to pay for” blinds managers to the need and the benefits of, for example, supporting suppliers.

Customer willingness to pay is not an actionable criterion to identify waste. An activity is waste if, and only if, your performance does not degrade in any way when you stop doing it. If eliminating it does not degrade your quality, increase your costs, delay your delivery, put your people at risk, or make your employees want to quit, then it is waste. But, even with a proper perspective on waste, eliminating it only improves only efficiency, not effectiveness. It’s about getting things done right, not getting the right things done.In a manufacturing company, procurement/supply chain management/logistics is the pit crew supporting production, and the business benefits of doing this job better dwarf any savings achieved through efficiency.

Reducing order fulfillment lead times, introducing new products, or customizing them helps the business grow. And it may require spending more rather than less on the supply chain, for example by moving trucks that are not 100% full.

Formula 1 Pit Stop 1950 to 2013

William Botha posted the following Youtube video in the TPS Principles and Practice discussion group on LinkedIn:

It contrasts a Formula 1 racing pit stop at the Indianapolis 500 in 1950 with one in 2013 in Melbourne, Australia. The time the car was stopped went from 67 to 3 seconds.

The 1950 pit stop used 4 people for 67 seconds, which works out to 4 minutes and 28 seconds of labor. If we include the external setup — before the car arrives — and the cleanup afterwards, the 2013 pit stop used 17 people for 44 seconds, or 12 minutes and 28 seconds of labor. In terms of labor costs, the 2013 pit stop was therefore less “efficient.” In a race, however, cutting the car stoppage time by a factor of 22 is priceless.

Car racing is often used as a metaphor for manufacturing, with machine changeovers as pit stops. In fact, many of the pit stop tricks are used in SMED, from prepositioning everything you need to using quick attach and release tools.

More generally, we can see the production operators as the drivers working to make the product cross the finish line, and everybody else in logistics, maintenance, QA, etc. in the role of the pit crew. This casts the time of operators and materials handlers, for example, in a different light. The operators on a line work in sequence, so that, if you delay one, you delay the entire line. The materials handlers, on the other hand, work in parallel and, if one waits, it does not affect the others.

The pit crew must be ready and waiting when the car arrives, so that it can spring into action, and the car should never be waiting for the crew. Likewise, an operator on an assembly line should never wait for parts, and cutting down on materials handlers to save money is counterproductive. A key point of Lean Logistics is to focus on effectiveness first. You pursue efficiency later, but never at the expense of effectiveness, because it doesn’t pay for the organization as a whole.

 

Lean Logistics Seminars in Spain

Following is a translation of the report posted on Asenta’s website on the joint seminars we conducted in Barcelona, Madrid, and Bilao last week:

Lean Logistics – World Class Practices Series 2013

On October 7, 8 and 10, we held the fourth session of our World Class Series 2013 Lean Cycle in three cities, with more than 100 executives in attendance.

We provided an overview of the meaning and scope of the Lean Logistics as a strategy for competitiveness, together with  case studies, to show the solutions used on specific problems and thus show the benefits of  highly effective management

Among the speakers was Michel Baudin, a recognized expert in operations management and a strategic partner of ASENTA. Since 1987 has been advising companies on Lean implementation across many industries in America, Asia and Europe. He has published four books on various aspects of operational excellence.

Also participating were Luis Mauleon, Managing Partner at ASENTA, who specializes in transformation processes in organizations, and Juan Ortega, Management Consultant and coordinator of Lean Logistics at ASENTA.

These seminars were for CEOs, and Directors of Manufacturing, Operations, and Logistics, and, more  generally, for leaders committed to improving their organizations’ supply chains.

Following are a few shots of the seminars in Barcelona and Bilbao:

 

How the 80/20 Rule will improve the safety of your warehouse | IndustryWeek

See on Scoop.itlean manufacturing
“If companies can identify their high movers from a pick history list, the “vital” 20% can be optimally located within the shelving systems to maximize production efficiencies and to minimize wasted time and effort. The 80/20 Rule can help companies strategically locate “vital” materials so that employees’ efficiency and safety are maximized.”

 

 

Michel Baudin‘s insight:

In this article ergonomist Lance Perry explains that organize items in warehouses by frequency of use improves the ergonomics of manual storage and retrieval.

In Lean Logisitics, I presented the same policies as a means of increasing productivity and reducing the lead times of warehouse operations. Making what you use the most often easiest to reach improves multiple dimensions of performance at the same time. There is no tradeoff; you don’t rob Peter to pay Paul; you don’t make X better by making Y worse. That’s why we call is an improvement.

What is most puzzling is that such a simple idea is not already universally applied.

See on www.industryweek.com

The Porsche Lean Story | Competitive Advantage via Quantitative Methods

See on Scoop.itlean manufacturing

Michel Baudin‘s insight:

Along with information about the history of Porsche’s turnaround since the early 1990s, this article contains strange statements about, for example, Lean Manufacturing being “Non-Quantitative,” which must make Ohno and Shingo turn over in their graves.

It also contains the doubtful statement that “the costs of warehousing excess inventory are a hundred of times more expensive than a delay caused by a missing part.” The point of Lean Logistics is not to trade-off full warehouses for shortages!

The real paradox of stock is that hoarding parts is ineffective at preventing shortages. The Lean Logistics approach is to keep inventories low but monitored with vigilance, and to respond quickly when floods, tsunamis, or earthquakes disrupt the supply chain.

The article further asserts that “Statistical Process Control” was central to Porsche’s effort, but gives not indication that it is even used. I don’t recall it being mentioned or seeing any trace of it in the Porsche plant in Leipzig two years ago.

See on cavqm.blogspot.co.uk