Mar 6 2016
Bodo Wiegand heads Germany’s Lean Management Institute. In his latest newsletter, on Wiegand’s Watch, he discusses the case of a company he recently visited that is rushing to invest €12.3M ($13.4M) in a new warehouse and new machines but “doesn’t have the resources” to improve current operations.
Mar 3 2016
“It is with this enigmatic sentence that one of my Japanese mentors introduced the growing difficulty with continuous improvement. What it means is that at the beginning of an improvement program or when starting in a new area, the first and usually the easiest actions bring big improvement, hence the “easy” 50%. This is also…”
Sourced through Scoop.it from: hohmannchris.wordpress.com
Michel Baudin‘s comments:
I have been using this method, but for the categorization of improvement ideas within a project rather than whole projects. For example, starting a SMED project on a machine with a 30-minute setup time, you find that you can get it down to 12 minutes in one week for $300 by organizing and prepositioning tool carts. This is your A idea.
Then you find that, by modifying a fixture on the machine, you can get it down to 4 minutes, in three months for $5,000. That’s your B idea. Finally, you discover that an automation retrofit can get it down to 2 minutes, in a year for $50,000, and it is a C idea.
The one issue I have with applying this kind of thinking to whole projects is that the scope of “low-hanging fruits” changes over time with the skill level of the work force. Much of what appears inaccessible at the outset of your transformation becomes cheap and easy by its third year.
I also find that how long and how much money it will take to implement an idea is easier for teams to work with than a metric like ROI. The economic justification of improvement projects is a difficult and sensitive subject.
See on Scoop.it – lean manufacturing
Mar 2 2016
“It seems to be popular these last years and more recently to explicitly state that Lean is not (only) about cost reduction or cost cutting. See the recent posts by Mark Graban or Matt Hrivnak. So let me be somewhat controversial in this post (which I think is allowed to spark the discussion) and drop a bombshell: I think Lean is about cost reduction.”
Sourced through Scoop.it from: www.linkedin.com
Michel Baudin‘s comments:
I know that much of the TPS literature is about “reducing costs,” but it never includes any discussion of money! Ohno is even quoted as saying “Costs are not there to be measured, but to be reduced.” On the face of it, it makes no sense, because cost is an accounting term intended to represent the monetary value of all the resources spent to achieve a result.
Feb 16 2016
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.it – lean manufacturing
Feb 1 2016
Bodo Wiegand heads Germany’s Lean Management Institute. In his latest newsletter, on Wiegand’s Watch, he discusses the significance of recent problems in well-known German corporations, specifically VW, Siemens, and Deutsche Bank. The VW emissions test scandal has been covered in the media worldwide. Siemens executive were indicted for bribery last year in Greece, for acts related to the Athens Olympics in 2004, and the top management of Deutsche Bank was replaced in 2015 after scandals that included manipulating the London inter-bank lending rate (Libor), and mis-stating financial reports.
Mar 9 2016
How is Lean Different From Taylorism? | Michael Ballé | LEI
“They are completely different indeed. They differ in their purpose, their practice and their outcomes. Lean is about self-reflection and seeking smarter, less wasteful dynamic solutions together. Taylorism is about static optimization of work imposed by ‘those who know’ on ‘those who do.'”
Sourced through Scoop.it from: www.lean.org
Michel Baudin‘s comments:
Yes, “Scientific Management” was just a marketing label for theories that weren’t truly scientific but were instead based on a simplistic view of human nature. And Taylor’s stopwatch time studies were just aimed at increasing production at every operation with no consideration of flow. I would, however, ask for a more accurate and complete story
Continue reading…
Share this:
Like this:
By Michel Baudin • Blog clippings • 2 • Tags: Lean, Taylor, taylorism, Toyota, TPS