A simple motion inside manufacturing. We need to pick up some material from a box to assemble. How do we describe such motion in standardized work?
In the standardized work, we draw a number inside a circle to describe the work or the element’s starting point. Where to place that circle number?
Suppose that this material comes in a box of 10X10X10. When I asked such a question, an engineer drew a big circle that covered the entire container. But that is an area, not a point.
Traditional thinking used “average.” They use this point in the middle of the 500th and 501st units as the representative point. Although this is convenient for calculation purposes, it has many problems from the point of view of TPS. There is a gap between the representative and first points (the best point in the box). Isn’t this gap, Muda? We still have huge fluctuations (Mura) among every 1000 pick points. Trying to devise a convenient number when the reality is full of fluctuations is impossible (Muri; no logic).
So the try & error of the search for a better way starts.
The first try was the “Smaller box.”
Instead of a box of 10X10X10, we use a smaller box of 5X5X5. This way, we “reduce” the Muda, Mura, and Muri. We might use an even smaller box like 2X2X2. We will use the flow racks to provide the materials. We reduced the problems, but not eliminated them.
Then comes the tray. This is revolutionary since it eliminates one dimension. Instead of three-dimensional pick points, there are now two dimensions. The fluctuation of height disappeared. Yet, the two-dimensional fluctuations remained.
Then came the “Minomi.” “Minomi” is written as 【実のみ】. “Nomi” means “only.” “Mi” means fruit or real. In this case, materials are without the box, like fruit without the peel. Such conditions or devices use “Karakuri” and grab the attention of many. Yet, the core design philosophy is often ignored.
The most important thing is to define the best pick point. Where is the best location, without the Muda, Mura, and Muri, so the worker can work efficiently and effectively? What is important here is that before, the pick point was driven by the supply side or the box. Now, we need to think the other way around and look at the worker or the demand side of work. And the size of traditional boxes didn’t allow us to pursue such a location. But now, since we have a new device, we should search for the best point. As my coach said, “think outside the box.” As we draw each point on the standardized work, we must change the question from “How to write?” To “Where is the best location to pick?”
Another rule for pursuing the best place to present the material is: “Do not add additional waste or work at another worker or in other work.”
One of the classic mistakes of “Minomi” implementation is adding work. For example, there was a “Minomi-like" rack in a factory. The operator stopped the line when the material ran out of the rack, walked to the container, and loaded the rack one by one—tremendous periodic work. This is an entirely wrong implementation; it is just the shape of a tool.
On the other hand, my coach would ask, “Where is this material coming from?” He asked to go when he discovered this came from a supplier. We visited the supplier. He ignored the warehouse. We walked towards the last station, where an operator touched the material. “Here.” Then, we designed a cart that would allow us to transport it without any repacking or loss of transportation efficiency. His ignorance of the warehouse meant the supplier process had to be stable and high quality. At the end of the project, the workers and suppliers were happy since the process was easy, stable, and high quality. Then my coach whispered, “One kaizen done.” Although how he counts Kaizen is interesting, this thinking not to create additional work inside the entire supply chain just because we pursue the best pick point was clear.
Organizational effort is required to challenge the best picking point without creating additional work throughout the supply chain. How often do we encounter situations where material packages change into ridged, almost impossible-to-open huge containers due to the changed origin of suppliers overseas? On the other hand, fake improvement activities move work elements to outside processes. In other words, an organization that allows Genba to pursue the best pick point of materials is ideal. It is very rare.
In many cases, they don’t care about the best pick point. Muri-Mura-Muda boxes are pushed to the Genba to deal with them. The responsibility to challenge the best pick points belongs to the Genba. However, the genba receives full support from the organizations. They won’t be shot from behind. An environment that allows Genba to focus on import points, such as pick points, is essential. This is a crucial way to respect.
“Pick up the component.” Simple motion. Full of philosophies and structures. How is it at your Genba?
Σχόλια