Quality improvement without improving quality

Transcription

1 Quality improvement without improving quality Presented By: Kojiro Tobita & Goldratt Consulting Japan team Date: 11, June,

2 My quality management history Have served as an executive officer of Omron Corporation for 11 years During my term as an executive officer, worked as the head of Manufacturing Innovation HQ and the head of Quality Assurance HQ. Gave many lectures and speeches at JUSE, which is the examination authority of Deming Prize, and at JMA, which is a pioneer organization of improving efficiency in Japan. (JUSE: Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers JMA: Japan Management Association) Serving as a group discussion leader of Quality Control Symposium of JUSE. Have published articles and papers on Quality Management bulletin of JUSE and Japanese society for Quality Control. As just described, I have led Japanese quality control for 36 years in and outside 2 of the company.

3 History and the current reality of quality improvement in Japan Quality as well as price and delivery is one of the most important factors of company s competitiveness. In 1960s-70s, TQC (Total Quality Contorol) is the main activity of Quality improvement (QC circle activities and Kaizen at Gemba by bottom-up ) In 1980s, TQM (Total Quality Management) aligning with business objectives by policy management became popular. As a result, company s all functions became scope of Kaizen(by top-down) Since TQM, no good alternative for quality improvement method have emerged Do we get the result which 3 is worth the effort?

4 Quality improvement activities are stuck in achieving more? Achievement Quality improvement by applying TQM aligning with business objectives Break through Diminishing Gemba Kaizen Quality improvement by TQC 4 In spite of continuous Kaizen efforts, we don t see improvement exceeding noise level Time

5 Mystery analysis UDE: DE: Original DE UDE: DE: Air Entity: Entity we did not aware of Action: Action to cause DE Injection: Air entity: Action: 5

6 Applying mystery analysis to quality management UDE: Un-Desirable Effect The number of defect does not decrease as wanted The same control items obtained from Palate analysis stay at the top. Quality improvement does not lead to the improvement in company s bottom line DE: Desirable Effect The number of defect is decreased continuously Control items on Palate analysis are always changing by reflecting the result of quality improvement activity Quality improvement leads to the improvement in company s bottom line Acceleration factors? Individual improvement activities will always contribute to the organization level achievement A:Air(Assumption) 6 Provide quality education and the technical training Improve working environment Improve machines and inspection process Align business objective with quality management objective C:Cause

7 Acceleration factors Organization Factors All works are parts of process flow from the company to the end customer Silo approach may lead the company to neglect the cooperation among departments / functions People Factors Kaizen activities are done by the people People have a nature wanting to deal with problems in front of themselves People tend to act to avoid long lasting pain People love Kaizen activities The work flow, which needs horizontal cooperation, gets worse just because we put so much emphasis on policies from dissected organization structure. The human nature leads to the silo improvement which does not take the entire work flow into consideration. 7

8 Applying mystery analysis to quality management Acceleration factor Silo approach ignores the corporation among departments People has a nature to deal with things just in front of them I:Injection? UDE: Un-Desirable Effect The number of defect does not decrease as wanted The same control items obtained from Palate analysis stay at the top. Quality improvement does not lead to the improvement in company s bottom line A:Air(Assumption)? Individual improvement activities will always contribute to the organization level achievement DE: Desirable Effect The number of defect is decreased continuously Control items on Palate analysis are always changing by reflecting the result of quality improvement activity Quality improvement leads to the improvement in company s bottom line Provide quality education and the technical training Improve working environment Improve machines and inspection process Align business objective with quality management objective C:Cause 8

9 And - A better flow makes a good process. - A good process creates better quality. - A better flow makes better quality. 9

10 Our Hypothesis Better flow makes better quality 10

11 Applying mystery analysis to quality management Acceleration factor Silo approach ignores the corporation among departments People has a nature to deal with things just in front of them Make the entire work flow better I:Injection UDE: Un-Desirable Effect The number of defect does not decrease as wanted The same control items obtained from Palate analysis stay at the top. Quality improvement does not lead to the improvement in company s bottom line A:Air(Assumption)? Individual improvement activities will always contribute to the organization level achievement 11 DE: Desirable Effect The number of defect is decreased continuously Control items on Palate analysis are always changing by reflecting the result of quality improvement activity Quality improvement leads to the improvement in company s bottom line Provide quality education and the technical training Improve working environment Improve machines and inspection process Align business objective with quality management objective C:Cause

12 Kaizen efforts before TOC implementation - 5S is widely recognized as the 1st step of Quality improvement. All the departments tackled 5S under HQ QA instruction. - However, the factory s 5S marks were the 8th place out of 13 factories, when our champion had appointed as a new factory manager. - The project to retrieve this dishonor was inaugurated by the factory manager and was intensely worked on. - The full-time manager for 5S and quality improvement was appointed. - All possible activities were put in place (Ex. Strengthen instruction, Operation skill training, Warehouse expansion, etc. ) - As a result, the mark became the lowest. 13th place out of 13 factories. The members were depressed. 12

13 Status of Gemba before TOC introduction - The development delay of a new product was recovered by TOC-CCPM. The product was launched on time. As a result, expectation to TOC grew rapidly. - Simultaneously, the company hired a consulting firm. Cost reduction activities were thoroughly done in three years, having spent hundreds millions of yen. - As a result, the company got a "bunch of documents" and "local optima culture. Expected profits was not realized. - The bad inheritance of consulting firm remained and since then using consultant had been banned. - However, the company continued studying TOC from public sources. 13

14 TOC introduction Just as they are about to start TOC Restructuring of IT system across the company became the top management subject matter. 14

15 Their dilemma: Across-company system implementation -Too Complicated system -Become Silo system -Mounting costs TOCICO -Budget running 2014 Conference out -Bloated local system A: Build the effective IT system across the company B: Build the system Focusing on Gemba s usability D: Design a system by conducting survey at Gemba Conflict C: Satisfy the essential need D : Design a system from ideal IT point of view 15 -Not realistic system which cannot be used -Far from actual Gemba operation -Too many change requests from Gemba -Mounting costs -Budget running out -Bloated local system

16 Injection for across-company system implementation A: Build the effective IT system across the company B: Build the system Focusing on Gemba s usability D: Design a system by conducting survey at Gemba Injection: Build the best practice first. Then, implement Conflict the best practice into the IT system C: Satisfy the essential need D : Design a system from ideal IT point of view 16

17 Proof of Concept (PoC) results after 3 months Sales Design Production Construction Before PoC Result of PoC after 3 month - Always price - Sell the value of Shortened LT(Lead Time) - Sales closing rate dramatically up 5% 80% - Release work orders as much as there are - Always Bad Multi Task - Leveling by planning - Pursuing efficiency by batch production - Every machine s efficiency is always thought as important - 35% reduction of design LT - Production LT 2 weeks => 3 days - Finished product inventory => 0 - Work in process => 70% less - 35% reduction of construction LT 17

18 Voice in surprise from Gemba -No suggestions for improvement from 5S assessor. (Nothing to be sort or to be set in place) - Handling damage" became zero! -The surprising thing happened. One quality control item totally disappeared. (no more need to be controlled!) - Moreover, the other quality control items are also improved 18

19 Quality after 3 month s PoC 製品破損発生状況 Hnadling damage (Nos.) Proof of Concept start Site 現場 Sipping 出荷m2 m2 工場内 Gemba Nos. 件数 月 8 月 9 月 10 月 11 月 12 月 1 月 2 月 3 月 m 製品破損率 Product damage ( 出荷m2当り (ppm) ppm) Site 現場 Gemba 工場内 Site: Construction site Gemba: Production Gemba ppm 月 8 月 9 月 10 月 11 月 12 月 1 月 2 月 3 月 19

20 Observations and insights - Overall production flow becomes better by synchronizing production and the progress of construction ( in other words, produce as late as possible! ) - Better flow leads to dramatic reduction of WIP as well as finished products inventory - No cumbersome handling work to manage or relocate WIP or finished products inventory - The number of defected products becomes almost zero as a result of reducing the number of handling - Bad flow (longer detention time in the process) could be the root cause for bad quality!? 20

21 It s not Luck! After 12 month s PoC Nos. Handling damage (Nos.) POC start Site Gemba Sipping m2 ppm Product damage (ppm) Site Gemba 21

22 Dr. Goldratt said: 4 Concepts of Flow Standing on the Shoulders of Giants Production concepts versus production applications Eliyahu M. Goldratt, Improving flow (or equivalently lead time) is a primary objective of operations. 2. This primary objective should be translated into a practical mechanism that guides the operation when not to produce (prevents overproduction). 3. Local efficiencies must be abolished. 4. A focusing process to balance flow must be in place. 22

23 Conclusion - A better flow makes a good process. - A good process creates better quality. - A better flow makes better quality. Hypothesis is verified. Better flow makes better quality 23

24 Lessons Learned Focusing only on improving individual productivity causes stagnation and may lead to worse quality 24

25 Predicted Desirable Effect Focusing on better flow can lead to further quality improvement, because shorter lead time enables shorter feedback cycle 25

26 Acknowledgement This article has been supported by Yuji, and other GC members. I would like to express my sincere thanks for giving me a chance to learn TOC body of knowledge. All processes including new findings in this presentation are validated by GC Japan team through the implementation at Gemba. Thanks to them I could have an honor to present this. 26

27 About Kojiro Tobita Kojiro Tobita, Principal of Goldratt Consulting Japan. In 1974, he started his carrier in Omron Corporation as a tool designer. He was appointed as managing executive officer in 1999, and he was in charge of a head of Manufacturing & Quality Assurance HQ of Omron Immediately after retirement he joined Goldratt Consulting in He is appointed as Affiliate Professor of Osaka Institute of Technology from April,

28 End of presentation 28