Formulation of the problem
Theorists and some practices of production consulting are well aware of the Western classification of types of production (enterprises) in relation to the main goal of the business - to satisfy customer demand. These are: “development-to-order”, “production-to-warehouse”, “production-to-order”, “assembly-to-order”. So long ago, after a particularly emotional conversation with the manufacturers of one of the Russian factories, which, generally speaking, was working “on order,” but really - not at all, I threw in the heat of the discussion: “... what are you saying, now you have ... payroll production. ”
After thinking about this new classifier of production, I regretted the conclusion: yes, a lot of our (first of all, talking about machine-building and instrument-making production companies) manufactures work on the basis of the “production-under-salary” type.
The main characteristics by which the enterprise can be attributed to this type are:
- piecework wages, depending on the closed (accepted details) standard hours per month,
- a monthly workshop plan for implementation, except for the item list (who has it) - in standard hours;
- exceeding the production plan of the capabilities of the workshop (s).
In fact, simple workers, sometimes masters, manage industries that work on a “sub-salary” basis: every day they first “make” a salary for themselves, that is, make the parts most advantageous in terms of the ratio “real time production and batch size / labor input of the operation”, then, in the remaining (if any) time, “custom-made” parts.
What we have in the end:
- there are always shortages at the assembly, while PROSki of assembly shops or GOSKi of detailed business (or - warehouses of PDO, finished parts, etc.) are overwhelmed with what is not needed (at the moment = month / quarter / year),
- fulfillment of the inventory plan by workshops - not more than 80%. But at the same time (!) ...
- ... the implementation of monthly plans for labor costs (standard hours) is always 100 ± 1%,
- production management is carried out in the mode of rare (once a day) or frequent (several times a day) meetings. The production director, and sometimes the general director, at least 30% of his time, and at the end of the quarter / year - “work” as the main dispatchers under 80%.
From Lean’s point of view, all this is a solid, very obvious and extremely heavy loss for the enterprise’s economy (forgetting the Russian language - “muda”): pushing instead of pulling, and not even under the forecast / plan, but under the planned abstract standard hours (salary) , overproduction, production at the wrong time, etc. From the point of view of the beginning of Lean, or of any transformations, this is where to start! It is here, from t.zr. Toytoa is the “pitfall” closest to the surface, preventing the decrease in the level of “water” (reserves), and therefore - the increase in throughput (according to TOC). And this - not just important - is deadly, for overloaded, growing industries.
Why tell me to put 5C, standard operations (here I will exaggerate a little, of course), SMED - if the result is only a more efficient and convenient production of wipes? How do you say, with the help of kanban, to limit / plan the start of production if the worker receives for "standard hours" and not for the closed amount of kanban? And if there is no kanban, will he still sharpen the details?
But, in the practice of most Lean projects that I know of, this is exactly what consultants and enterprises never start with. Why? Difficult! Actually - this is the Augean stables No. 2 (No. 1 - setting up a system for managing the electronic composition of the product).
What consultants are usually limited to: they recommend switching to a time-based payment system, forcing them to complete the workshops, etc. Good advice, but from the series “you need to become hedgehogs”. How to apply them? In factories, for the most part, they either know or surmise that a “deal”, like cigarettes, “is harmful to your health” or even “Kills”. But how to get away from her? Pay on time - workers will stop working. Pay for the implementation of the stock plan? And if there are no details in terms, but do you need to? The part did not hit the month, the designer / technologist did not make the change at the right time, or DEFICIENCY AT THE ASSEMBLY ("... Ivan Ivanovich must be very very emergency !!! ..."). And how to pay the worker his "usual" monthly salary, without which he will simply leave - and there will be nothing to fill the shortage of skilled workers with that just? Etc. etc.
These are uncomfortable and difficult questions. And the lack of understanding (of the consultants) of the problem, of “what to do, how to do”, and, on the other hand, the lack of will of the plant’s management “we will do”, lead to the emergence of production of such a new, unique type. “Production-by-salary”, not “by-order” or even “on-stock”.
In my deep conviction, for the vast majority of Russian factories, especially large ones, of the old formation, it is with the solution of this issue that the construction of Production Systems should begin. To build, first of all, a planning and production management system that provides:
- clear to everyone (down to the worker at the machine) - a plan of what needs to be done for the period,
- gathering a fact with which you can’t argue and imagine how profitable it is,
- monitoring of what is happening in the framework of the period, for the timely provision of managerial influences.
On the basis of which (the system) it will be possible, but very phased and cautious, to begin leaving the transaction. Arriving, in the end, to order production "Just In Time".
I note that Lean methods and tools are quite applicable here. It’s just that they need to be applied, not for building “lean production” - an enterprise that “implemented” “Lean”, but working in an explicit or hidden form of “under-wage”, and we already have a lot of such people - this is absurd!
Transition stages
The proposed and described below the path from the "transaction" is the transition to the salary-bonus system. Salary - for qualification, bonus - for the implementation of the plan (production). With the simultaneous change and motivation of workers to “production-to-order”, starting from procurement and stamping redistribution. I note that avoiding the "transaction" is not an end in itself, but a necessary condition for switching to order-based planning and management of production and procurement, synchronized with orders (contracts). What is inevitable for our factories, as most of them are managed by CUSTOMERS (note, not PDO, general or management company).
Goal formalization
Purpose: to transfer production from “production-to-pay” to “production-to-order”.
Create conditions under which workshops:
- it will be advantageous to fulfill, first of all, the nomenclature order plan;
- it will be unprofitable not to fulfill the nomenclature order plan;
- a plan will not be put in the standard hours (one of the typical practices of "wrecking" PEO in traditional enterprises).
What to do. Concept and stages of transition
The system (production system) of production management should be changed to the following.
1. For workshops should be calculated and calculated automatically - the plan is not the subject of negotiations, but the subject of a "dumb" calculation, the nomenclature order of the shop floor production plan. This is the task of the IT production management system, which, I note, should be Lean (i.e., not ERP / APS / MES). For each workshop, the plan should have the following characteristics.
a. “Release plan” = what details, in what quantity, to what number and in which workshop should be delivered . This is a traditional requirement for production system plans, many have it.
b. “Launch plan” = what details, in what quantity (excluding consolidated lots), when they should be launched . But this is an unconventional requirement for a production management system in traditional enterprises. On which only the "release plan" exists and is tracked. This leads in particular to the fact that information that some parts are not started on time is detected only at the assembly. As a result - “deficit”, “emergency”, etc.
c. The plan (release) is “open”, i.e. not visible to the entire planning horizon, but only for a limited period (“planning window”). Through the production plan, the workshop sees and can plan production preparation for what will need to be done.
d. The (launch) plan is also “open” for a limited period (“launch window”), sufficient to consolidate into a batch and simultaneously launch one part on several orders. Through the start-up plan (“start-up window”), the workshop can start only a certain batch of parts (parts determined by the plan) - no more.
2. An absolutely “iron” rule is established: “all the details necessarily go to sections / workshops only accompanied by a route map (MK). The principle should be established, with a change in the quality control system (if necessary) and (necessary!) The principles of accounting for finished products / execution of orders: “no MK = no part = no order”. Therefore: there is no order = no offset of production = no salary. Practice shows that this is not so difficult. MK are formed only from the IT production management system (handwritten - not accepted), at startup, i.e. beginning of production of the part.
I note that the transition to a limited launch, the automatic (non-manual) MK formation is the first step towards the transition to pull planning and control of production flow by electronic kanban.
3. To the supplier workshop, only those details are "counted" for the period that:
a) were in the plan (release) of the workshop for the period
b) were accepted (capitalized and not returned) by the consumer shop for the period.
4. The payroll system is modified as follows (stage 1).
a. Engineering (technical and technical workers of the workshop) of the workshop receives a fixed part of wages based on their rates. The variable part is automatically calculated based on the% completion of the plan. "Implementation of the plan" - see paragraph 3.
b. ODA workshops receive an almost piece-rate salary, based on closed labor costs, but only for the details of the completed plan.
5. Summary. This system is a carrot and stick type system.
a. On the one hand, workshops simply cannot physically launch “distant” or simply unnecessary details (details outside the plan), because the “correct” IT production management system simply does not provide information about what he (the workshop) can do outside period "planning window". Accordingly, “no start = no MK = no (counted) part”.
b. On the other hand, motivation is aimed specifically at fulfilling a custom nomenclature plan. Formed by a planning system.
6. Further development of the payment system.
a. Differentiated payment of both engineering and technical support for the rhythmic, within a month, delivery of parts to the consumer. In other words, different payments for “red”, “yellow”, “green”, “blue” parts. Where “red” - there are parts delivered with a deadline, “yellow” - “off wheels”, “green” - on time, “blue” - ahead of schedule. Also, you can enter the "gray" details (set out of the plan for some reason), "purple" (set from the free balance), etc. - fantasy here knows no limit. For this option, the system for calculating the premium part may be, for example, this:
- “gray” details - do not count;
- “green” and “yellow” delivered parts are counted as 100% of the closed hours / hours,
- “blue” - 80%,
- “red” - 10%.
The above, among other things, very strongly motivates a complete change, but this is a topic for another discussion.
b. The transition to "retractor planning", where MK plays the role of "kanban", a card that allows and restricts the launch at the same time.
Transition notes. In order to soften the transition to a new scheme (it will not be simple anyway), you can start a new scheme in parallel with the old one. To calculate and charge - “in the old way”, but at the same time issue both engineering and ODA quotes, indicating how much they would receive “in a new way”. Practice shows that a 6-month transition period is enough to rebuild the attitude of adequately tuned personnel, survive several open or hidden strikes and find a replacement for the dissatisfied (as a rule, a greater number of them will be among the engineers, oddly enough).
An example of practical implementation . Custom (push-button) pull-pull system with electronic kanban and TOC planning principles
Below on a generalized example of implemented projects for the transfer of production to work under the order, a description of the practical steps of building the system and its work is given. The scheme is best applicable for machine / instrument-making enterprises.
Initial Actions.
1. Before the “bottleneck” of the assembly shops - as a rule, this is the first shop in the product assembly line, or / and the workshop / final assembly section is organized by “Production Warehouse” (if it is not).
Note : very often in factories this function is performed by the “Warehouse of Finished Parts” or “Warehouse of PDO” or “Central Assembly Warehouse”, in which workshops / sections hand over lots of parts. So - it’s better to disband it (at least partially, because it is not always possible to do this completely) by transferring the storage and assembly places directly to the assembly sites - in PROSXI. As well as disbanding the Warehouses of Finished Parts at the exit from each workshop - remove excess stocks, leaving only the “buffer” in front of the “bottleneck”.
2. PROSKI establishes (implements) a system of preliminary configuration of units / assemblies for assembly sites. Best of all - with the use of special containers / trolleys, configured to be equipped with specific units / assemblies. In fact, the container will perform the function of kanban, by generating signals to ensure assembly. If the parts are simple and running, instead of containers, racks (including moving ones) can be installed - the Kanban / Supermarket system.
3. A “buffer” is defined (it is also the number of kanbans in circulation) - that is how many orders in advance should be in PROSK sets.
4. For each workshop (site) operating for a specific PROS, the number of orders / finished products (M) is established for which the production plan is “open” for launch (for example, the monthly “batch” of finished products is 8-10).
5. In the “Lean ERP” system, a plan is calculated (nomenclature, workshop (precinct), custom) - “drum” for TOC. For the entire planning horizon. But "opens" for each of the shops / sections only for N + M orders.
After this stage, you can already start the system. How does it work ...
1. The initial moment of time - the trolley / container / supermarket is equipped for the assembly of specific units / assemblies for specific orders / finish products.
2. Beginning of assembly of a particular assembly / unit of order / product No. N - there is a fact that a complete set was issued (rolling out the cart, transferring the container) to the assembly. The fact is noted in the system, as an option for simplicity - using bar coding.
3. After that, automatically, for each workshop / section supplying parts to this vehicle, the launch plan is "opened" in the system (or - "electronic kanban" appears) for the set of parts for ordering N + M + 1 .
4. Next, the planners of the launching workshop / site:
1) either they see in the system the opportunity to start the parts that have "opened" to start and start them, or ...
2) automatically, for launch sites, without the participation of the planners of the launch workshop, a kanban is printed - a signal to start (implementation of the “rope” by TOC).
Notes.
- At the same time, workshop planners have the ability to assemble parts in a batch. But, only under the details “open” for orders and with the formation of kanbans for the number of orders in a batch.
- The standard accompanying document can act as a "kanban", as an option - an accompanying tag or a route map, preferably with a bar code.
Below is an example of a MK-Kanban tag.
6. Further, the part is “pushed” along the entire route through the workshops / sections, with the accompanying MK, which accompanies the part launched under the order / batch of orders, throughout its entire life cycle, until the consumer shop is entered into PROSK.
7. The launch control of the “authorized” parts is controlled by the PDO planners (hereinafter the planners of assembly shops responsible for specific assemblies or finished products) including using the "Lean ERP" system.
The general scheme of the system is given below.
Extensive "limited" planning for "detailed" workshops and the principle of the formation of MK. MK = kanban = production task. General scheme
Status and priority of kanban (= MK - production tasks in production), incl. and during the production process, it can be determined according to the extended TOC rules, by comparing the planned and expected dates of receipt of the part in the PROSK (aggregate) assembly shop / section (in the figure - ACS) - see below.
Upon completion of the task - replenishment of PROSK, each (electronic) kanban will have its own color status.
Gathering over the period the number of parts made with their statuses, we get the following picture (example below). Notice how well the example illustrates the real situation: most parts are delivered to the assembly either ahead of time (blue and gray) or later (red and white), while it should be the other way around: most should be yellow and green.
On the basis of which the differential payment system for “delivered standard hours” is built, depending on the priority of the delivered parts:
White - positions not completed.
Red - did not have time for the planned date. Paid with a reduction factor.
Yellow - “off the wheels”. I managed to the limit. 100% paid.
Green - on time. Passed on time. 100% paid.
Blue is sooner than necessary. Did much earlier than necessary. What for? Paid with a reduction factor.
Gray - details are out of plan. Not paid.
Such a payment scheme is not certain. But, in “difficult” cases, it doesn’t just help, but the only way to move relatively quickly from “Production-to-pay” to “Production-to-order”.