Muda of Transportation (?)
- hidet77
- 12 minutes ago
- 3 min read
On LinkedIn, you see many posts about Muri, Mura, and Muda that use a truck as an example. When the truck's capacity is 1.5t, always load 1.5t.
That is push.
What matters is market needs. Loading the truck to full capacity while ignoring market needs is a push. This is the same logic as production. Consistently producing at a process's maximum capacity is a push. We need to pace production to market demand.
Muda of Transportation.
Many Japanese words can be translated as 'transportation'.
Yusou 【輸送】 means long-distance transport; various methods, such as ships and airplanes, are used.
Haisou 【配送】 means delivery—the last mile.
Unsou 【運送】 means transportation by truck and cars.
And the word Ohno used, and what the Japanese use as the type of Muda, is Unpan 【運搬】. This word refers to short-distance transportation within an area, typically inside a factory or a warehouse. In some cases, it is translated as conveyance, which is probably a closer meaning. Another term is material handling. The catch is whether this covers the truck. Some short distances could be included, but not always. In other words, the first mode of transportation we focus on is within a plant or warehouse.
The distinction in some of the words raises questions about the meaning of this Muda.
There is a special focus on transportation work within a plant. We should not be moving materials around in a factory without a reason. Instead, materials should flow without requiring transportation work. This should be designed from the beginning. Yet some materials will still require transportation work.
When we design transportation systems, we don’t consider the maximum capacity. The pull is necessary. To be pulled, we will create the following.
Fixed time, flexible quantity
Fixed quantity, flexible timing
We need to create flexibility so transportation can respond to demand. Of course, we don’t want the Mura, or fluctuation, to occur. To avoid this, we need to make the Kanban size small so the trigger aligns with actual use and implement Heijunka to level demand. We also need to prevent the Muri, or overloading of the transportation methods. Since there will be some change, we will not fully load, but we will be able to handle slightly higher demand. There is always a paradox between capacity and pull.
Now, let’s look at the external transportation. Am I saying we shouldn’t load the truck at 100% efficiency?
Absolutely not. We know the truck should be loaded to 100%. But we must also respect the pull and customer demand. This dilemma is what drives innovation in transportation.
“High-frequency milk-run” is one such solution. But does this guarantee that we can achieve both 100% load and pull? No. Sugita’s paper states that only 17% of suppliers reported loading the truck at close to 100%. Most were operating at 60%. This is data from 1991, which is ancient, but it gives an idea of how difficult it is to satisfy the truck load 100% of the time and pull.
But because this is difficult, innovation emerges.
The milk-run is innovating. Milk-run is not just between OEMs and tier one suppliers; more downstream tiers are involved. Another example is cooperating with different industries.
These ideas for collaborating with other industries are amazing. A company in North America did this. When it began providing transportation services to other local manufacturers, the logistics function shifted from a cost center to a profit center. At the same time, local manufacturers benefited from Just-In-Time delivery and lower transportation costs.
This is definitely the area where we have many opportunities for improvement. Therefore, I would start with internal logistics, specifically Unpan 【運搬】. This will lay the foundation for more creative ideas to improve external transportation. However, I wouldn’t use the truck to explain Muri, Mura, and Muda.
Comments