Author: David Dehne

Visual Beats Verbal

If a picture is worth a thousand words, then visualizing a factory floor says a lot for an organization. The ability to translate any environment into a visual representation is incredibly empowering and is a strong step toward evolving a manufacturer into a connected, cutting edge company. I have had the privilege of working with organizations in their journey to becoming a ‘visual factory.’ What I have learned is that the drive to become a visual factory is founded less on a technology revolution, but more a basis to communicate with users in more natural ways.

Dominant Visual Learners

I believe the manufacturing evolution toward visual factory information systems is an example of technology catching up with basic human behavior. At 65%, visual learners make up most of the population. However, you wouldn’t think this if you consider all of the written reports, emails and spreadsheets that the average company outputs. Often, this is in absence of a tool that allows users to create the same information visually. When the result is verbose and hard-to-absorb written communication, it’s no surprise that people have difficulty retaining information. When the objective is to have all people within the system on the same page and informed, it’s best to communicate according to their preferred learning method.

Pictures are a Universal Language

A significant advantage of a visual information system is its universal nature and language independence. Visual factory systems use elements such as diagrams, charts, and colored indicators to communicate status with very few words. In my experience, organizations have a wide range of language and literacy levels. User adoption increases based on the tool’s ease of use, but also by having all users comfortable with using the information that the system presents. Additionally, removing written components also makes the information more understandable across languages. This is an important feature for global enterprises.

Allow Antidotes to be Created

In a slightly contradictory way, the other advantage of a factory visualization system is that it doesn’t spell out everything for a user. In my experience, writing out what people should be learning doesn’t always lead to higher information retention. It’s good for them to create an antidote in their mind about what they see. Naturally, when someone looks at a simple, clear diagram or picture, they take a brief moment to absorb the information and come to some sort of conclusion. They are taking in the visual elements and making a judgement or asking a question based on what they see. If they have a question, ideally they interact with screen components and drill into the visualizations to learn more. Creating the antidote of what they observe leads to more user investment and sense of ownership with the tool and information. Sharing this antidote with other people also increases understanding. This is key to making a visual factory system the primary tool in a continuous improvement journey. For example, when an employee sees a downward trend in on-time delivery, perhaps they drill through to escalated maintenance information related to a resource. The maintenance information may display time series data to the employee, showing increased downtime every day around a consistent period. The employee could come to a conclusion that to improve and prevent this downtime – and avoid compromising deliveries – planned maintenance could occur weekly to make sure the utilized resource is running at its maximum available capacity.

While manufacturing companies have been creating reports for many years, only now do they have options when it comes to visual factory applications. Being able to reach users at every level in the organization and clearly communicate status is the dream for any manufacturer. The benefits of a visual factory are far superior to the verbal and written alternatives. Next time, I will explore the potential and power behind real-time visual factory metrics. Until then, feel free to send me your questions or experiences on anything visual factory related.

September 24, 2015
Thought Leadership: CONLOAD™ Scheduling Methodology

The two key elements of Demand-Driven Manufacturing are synchronization and flow. That is, the ability to synchronize production activities and manage constraints in order to drive flow. And while Synchrono® synchronizes (as the name implies) all layers of manufacturing operations and the extended supply chain, this article addresses the company’s patented scheduling methodology for driving flow: CONLOAD™.

Download

September 21, 2015
Smooth the rough spots with TOC, then Lean – and fine-tune with Six Sigma
What Grade of Sandpaper Will You Use? Part Four

Here we are at the final installment of our four-part, Sandpaper blog series about when to use the tools of Lean Manufacturing, the Theory of Constraints (TOC) and Six Sigma to address constraints, drive flow and promote continuous improvement. With regard to sandpaper, I talked a lot about what level of grit you will need to smooth out your processes—and what could happen if you try to start with Six Sigma as a first step in creating continuous improvement momentum.

Refine with Six Sigma

Six Sigma is the fine grit sandpaper, best used on a relatively smooth board that you want to make like glass. After TOC has helped with global flow and directed you to the location of numerous 5s and Kaizen events, you are beyond the point of dealing with special-cause variation. You identified processes that are within statistical control, but now, you need to move the baseline for the process. To do this, you need the depth of understanding that Six Sigma lends.

I have seen countless presentations by companies that begin with Six Sigma. There seems to be this focus on how many hundreds or thousands of Six Sigma projects they performed as an indicator of the value of their continuous improvement dedication. For me, the number of projects you run in an organization that is not ready for the level of refinement that Six Sigma provides, only means doing more work, at more cost, to get fewer benefits.

There are some improvement metrics that in my opinion, are based on funny numbers. But if you start with TOC, you can really see what is changing. That’s because TOC only impacts financials if you move Throughput (T) up, Operating Expense (OE) down, or move Inventory (I) down. (It is important to note that OE includes both direct and indirect labor.) If you take 25 percent of the labor content out of a process but there is no actual reduction to the payroll expense, then you have not impacted the financials unless that 25 percent of freed-up time can be spent increasing throughput. Six Sigma is exceedingly effective, but it can be a costly, slow, and exhausting process if you are trying to apply its fine-grit approach on a very rough board.

The Right Tools at the Right Time

Let’s quickly go through the steps to using TOC and Lean Manufacturing—before you try to use Six Sigma to significantly move the needle.

1) Start with the coarse grit sandpaper – TOC – to point you toward critical constraints that when managed, will provide the greatest return.

As you maximize throughput through constraints and remove obstructions to flow, global throughput and flow goes up. This causes the next level of items impeding flow to come to light as you begin to see more global changes affected—and it creates momentum and visibility for “the next right thing” to do.

2) Use the medium grit tools of Kaizen events and Lean Manufacturing to refine further.

As you get rid of the more glaring impediments to flow, you begin to see where your Kaizen events should be staged. You have more data to make value stream mapping and other Lean tools smooth the process even further.

3) The fine grit of Six Sigma is a great way to finely-tune to your continuous improvement processes.

Six Sigma tools allow you to refine and adjust big picture items with laser-like focus. It allows you to understand common-cause and special-cause variation. So you can determine if you need to bring the process into control or overhaul the process to move to the next level of performance. These areas for improvement may have been hidden until you applied TOC and Lean tools that revealed the changes you need to make the most impact to both global improvement – and the bottom line.

If You Could See Me Now

When I was first working with Lean Manufacturing, TOC and Six Sigma, I made plenty of mistakes and I learned a lot about how to refine the continuous improvement journey. One of the last things I would like to say to help you— keep your eyes open.

A very wise man once said there is a vast difference between looking and really seeing something at depth. I found for myself that when I look at the surface of the issue, I don’t make as much progress as when I try to really see. If you keep these methodologies at hand and combine them with the ability to see (with context and clarity) what to do next to keep your continuous improvement ball rolling, you’re sure to experience great improvements for you, your processes and your people. Let me know what you are doing to keep the continuous improvement fire burning at your company.

-John Maher

This is part four of a four-part series. Here are the links to the earlier posts in this series:
- Part 1, What Sandpaper Will You Use?
- Part 2, Fast Results Using TOC for Demand-Driven Manufacturing
- Part 3, Using TOC, Lean and Six Sigma to Become More Demand-Driven
John’s passion for demand-driven manufacturing is equal to his interest in how this method improves the lives of employees within these environments. “I’m here to help, not to judge” comments John whose posts reflect why demand-driven matters and are based on his experience working in manufacturing environments and expertise in ERP, MRP, APS, supply chain, manufacturing planning and scheduling systems and constraints management.
August 4, 2015
The Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) and the Modern Marketer

For your customers, it’s more than just connectivity

I was recently reading about the Industrial Internet of Things as it relates to my business—manufacturing software. It’s exciting that technologies are now available that will liberate manufacturers from the rigid systems and processes of the past. For today’s manufacturer, the IIoT boils down to the ability to capture and connect data from multiple sources to attain truly meaningful information.

An interesting outcome of all of this is that it’s driving manufacturers to a more service-driven model to effectively compete. Manufacturing.net noted that 77% of manufacturers polled view improvements in services as a key competitive factor. (FYI – Interesting article.) They also described this movement in a blog entry:

“In this new era, manufacturers need to look beyond the single product sale transaction into a new relationship between themselves and the consumer—characterized by an ongoing delivery of value—exchanged over a platform in the form of a smart, connected product.”

Similarly, I have found that marketing manufacturing software requires me to position our services as a differentiator. Yes, most of our products can be purchased on a Cloud-based software-as-a-service model. Today’s manufacturers, however, need more than agile software, they need long-term business partners to help them navigate the changes brought on by digitization and connectivity (e.g, the Industrial Internet of Things, the Factory of the Future and Industry 4.0).

On Board Early

It’s interesting to see manufacturers really collaborate with us during the early part of the sales cycle. Long before we get to software implementation, we work with clients to address their goals and plot a course to achieve their vision. (The Orbital ATK case study is a good example.) We draw from various tools – Lean Manufacturing, Theory of Constraints and Six Sigma – to drive a demand-driven change. (Where demand equals actual customer need.)

Our prospective clients are not looking for us to just install software and leave. They need assurance that we will be true partners; always available to not only help them get the most out of their system, but to help use their new found digitization and connectivity to best manage constraints, drive ongoing continuous improvements and make informed decisions. Francis daCosta describes this perfectly in his book, Rethinking the Internet of Things:

“With the increasing automation of the factory floor, the autonomous or semi-autonomous lower–level control and feedback loops made possible through distributed intelligence within the Internet of Things may allow for higher production and better use of human resources. If integrator functions can handle lower-level adjustments and controls of operating machinery, human eyes and minds may be freed for longer-term analysis and optimization, based on exception and historical data collected at a higher level. (p. 135).”

So, with the factory floor more digitized and your machines and systems connected, you suddenly have access to an incredible amount of data. The question then becomes how do you turn that data into meaningful information? Information that will improve workflow, pre-empt issues, lend focus to continuous improvement efforts and more? This is the service component – and where experience really counts. In many cases, we become trusted advisors to our client’s in-house teams, not just because we know the software inside-out, but because we’ve been successful with a variety of similar manufacturing environments.

Selling Consultative Value

With the rate of change brought on by the Industrial Internet of Things, connected factories will look completely different in a decade. Because our clients know that Synchrono has always been ahead of the curve, they know we are not just selling them software—we’re selling them tools to better service their customers and better compete. And we’ll be there to help them realize it.

If you are a marketer engaged in classic features-benefits selling, I would urge you to move beyond that discussion. Practically speaking, of course, these matters are extremely valuable to clients because they can check off all of the boxes on their functional requirements list – but you don’t distinguish yourself. Communicate how you will help them win in a competitive market through stellar service enabled by a more informed workforce.

Case studies provide a great vehicle for communicating service value. For example, we have service plans that build continuous improvement processes into the implementation plan. We have ROI numbers from other clients that show how much they realized in waste reduction—and also, about the time they saved through our standard integrations into their ERP.

We can plot a compelling graph that shows cost-avoidance numbers because we have helped put an end to expensive expediting in their production environment. We have testimonials from our clients’ suppliers about how their new, end-to-end eKanban inventory replenishment software repaired adversarial relationships and helped them become more responsive to customer needs.

These are just a few of the stories we tell that were a result of the added services we provide. Clearly integrating services (and their results) into your value proposition helps differentiate your company in a cluttered market.

Customers need to know they can trust us—their supply chain depends on it. Building this trust requires sharing our strong record of success with other clients. Are there unique ways that you have done that? Let me know, I’d love to hear from you.

July 8, 2015
Common Lean Manufacturing Software Project Constraints
Leveraging Project “Constraints” and Maximizing Results

As a project manager for demand-driven, lean manufacturing software, I have more than a nodding acquaintance with the theory of constraints (TOC). What I find quite remarkable is the ability to apply the theory of constraints to other mediums beyond the manufacturing of goods – even something like project work. When a client understands the theory’s principles, it can be powerful in driving a truly transformational project that outperforms their other software installations. It becomes a new way to frame how you and an organization collaborate to create something new – a better business with better and faster results.

If you want to learn more about how constraints management works in manufacturing, definitely check out my fellow blogger, Rick Denison. He’s the go-to guy for this practice on our site. What I’d like to talk about today is constraints management during projects—specifically—what are some of the more common project “constraints” and how do I deal with them?

Every project contains a standard set of parameters that become initially defined, but are continually balanced throughout the project lifecycle. These are competing project constraints, which include, but are not limited to:
- Scope
- Quality
- Schedule
- Budget
- Resources, and
- Risks[1]
These elements will pull against each other throughout the project, but it’s wise to identify them not as “bottlenecks” or issues, but as constraints that can be leveraged to drive outputs and faster progress. To give you some ideas about how to leverage these constraints, I will focus on three from the list: schedule, resources, and risks.

Schedule Time to Schedule

Sometimes people consider project planning a phase that can be glossed over so that the “real work” can begin sooner. Talking about the work does not accomplish the work, but it will make you consider ways to work smarter. Working smarter means different things to different teams, but can include creative scheduling solutions like:
- Several “sprint-like” mini projects instead of one big define-and-deploy project. This mini-project approach can mean functionality is delivered to business users faster and in more palatable scope amounts.
- Parallel paths of work to get more out of the project timeline.
- Understand the benefits of building in purposeful “buffer” time, which can at first seem like it’s unnecessary or that there’s no time allowable. I encourage teams to do this so that they protect the most constrained project resources and create a project system that is able to handle the inevitable, yet “standard” project disruptions, such as new business climate factors, changing team members, etc. Buffers are central within the TOC framework. Since the constraint resource becomes the pacemaker for the rate at which project deliverables are output, building in this time becomes critical to remaining on-time and not slipping in either schedule or scope.
It’s easy for a project team to complain about not having enough time in the schedule – even if they are just starting out. Instead, think about the full project timeline as a blank canvas and an opportunity to get creative on how to best leverage the time.

Your Most Valuable Resources are People

Your project team is about finding the perfect combination of two elements: quality and quantity. The “quality” of your team members cannot be overvalued. Capable team members that know their role, the business needs, and can deliver on the project objectives are the most valuable assets that any project could ask for.

But even top-performers only have so many hours in the day. Whether team members are allocated 25% or 100%, the important thing is to maximize the time, or capacity, that these resources have available. It’s not about labeling your most “valuable” resources, but inevitably, one team member will be a constraint. So, acknowledge the constraint and have everyone rally around the team member(s) to support their activities. In my experience, that means doing everything I can as a project manager to align tasks, schedules, and being extra-prepared for these specific (and valuable) resources.

The second leverage point to boost your project resources would be to add capacity by increasing the “quantity” of resources. When you have fully maximized the results from all of the current resources and are still not meeting the project scope, many teams consider relieving the constraint by increasing headcount. While this can be a helpful solution over time, be aware of the upfront time associated with bringing more people up to speed and that their output quality may not initially match others. Just like a manufacturing environment, additional resources (machines/assets) add to capacity, but require management and attention too.

Risky Business

Consider project risks to be like identifying project “flow disruptions” — ahead of time and concurrently adjusting course to mitigate those disruptions. Risks can range from small to significant, but discussing them openly and planning accordingly can sometimes be enough to avoid them all together. This means you increase the overall velocity of your project when you deal with less surprises downstream and you are able to deliver results to the business faster and with more clarity.

A team that does not spend time identifying risks throughout the project lifespan will likely regret it at some point. Discussing project risks can seem like more time taken away from “doing work” or a “gloomy” way to kick off a project, but it’s actually incredibly productive. The project paranoia that people raise can seem like an energy drain, but pay attention because often these concerns are based off of real experiences and legends of projects past from which the current team can learn.

The act of going through risk identification can surface two categories of topics. The first category is the potential risk scenarios for which a mitigation plan should be developed and executed. These would be the most common notion of project risks that people consider – the “what-ifs” and their consequences. The second category are issues that may seem like risks, but are really actual and necessary project tasks that were overlooked in the project plan. Be grateful that these were identified and plan them into your project activities like everything else, with a pat-on-the-back for your thoroughness in planning and the confidence in knowing you delivered a higher-quality output.

Next time, we’ll take a deeper dive into the project risks category and talk about ways to overcome them. Until then, feel free to send me your questions or experiences on anything implementation related.

[1] PMBOK Guide, 5^th edition

Sarah takes a customer-focused and results-driven approach to project management and demand-driven manufacturing systems implementation. With hundreds of projects under her belt, Sarah is fearless when it comes to challenging the status quo and delving into the details to ensure an optimal user experience. As such, her posts reflect tips and best practice advice for managing people and processes through projects – and getting the most out of your systems.
June 4, 2015
Using TOC, Lean and Six Sigma to Become More Demand-Driven
What Tools to Use to Get the Most of Your Demand-Driven Changes
Last time, we looked at specific companies that I have worked with and how they became more demand-driven using the Theory of Constraints (TOC) as a first step. As you saw from these real-life examples, TOC works well as a pointer to see where you need to change – and what should be the first items on the list.

I have watched TOC solutions work exceedingly well in manufacturing, scheduling, replenishment, and project management for continuous improvements that truly revolutionize environments. Just as coarse-grade sandpaper can quickly address a rough surface, TOC quickly identifies global changes that can smooth flow and impact the bottom line. However, to get to that next level of improvement, we need to start using our Lean Tools.

Kaizen

Continuous improvement of an entire value stream or an individual process to create more value with less waste.

There are two levels of kaizen (Rother and Shook 1999, p. 8):
1. System or flow kaizen focusing on the overall value stream. This is kaizen for management.
2. Process kaizen focusing on individual processes. This is kaizen for work teams and team leaders.
Value-stream mapping is an excellent tool for identifying an entire value stream and determining where flow and process kaizen are appropriate.

– Lean Institute

Tools such as kaizen (after you understand the global system) delivers profound improvements to your production process—and, ultimately, high-quality business results.

A way of thinking

The TOC thinking processes allow you to build current and future reality trees that give you an excellent understanding of the environment, its core conflicts, and the root causes that are holding the company back. Its buffer management methodology lets you identify disruptions to flow and pare out disruptions to find the points in the organization that, if resolved, would have the largest impact on increasing global flow. Now you have a “board” that is smooth enough to let you switch over to medium sandpaper and start employing the tools of Lean to resolve the disruptions that TOC has pointed out.

Just as I have never seen a more effective tool than TOC when you’re first starting a company on the continuous improvement path, I have yet to see a methodology as effective at rapidly improving processes (once the focal point is known) as the process of Kaizen. Use Kaizen—along with the tool set that comes with the Lean methodology –and watch your improvements exponentially increase.

Costly mistakes

In order to get the largest global benefits, you need the pointer – TOC. This is another place where sandpaper comes into play. If you take a really rough board and use medium sandpaper (Lean tools) on it, you can still get it as smooth as you would if you started with coarse paper (TOC) and then moved to medium paper. The difference will be in the time, effort, and expense that it takes to reach the same point when compared to using the coarse first and then the medium. I have seen companies use only Lean tools to achieve phenomenal success. However, the kaizens were directed only from intuition; I have found over and over again that real leaps in global performance were not made until an enormous number of kaizens had been completed. If your management has enough patience, tenacity, time, and cash to wait until tens or hundreds of kaizens are completed, you can be successful. If not, the Lean transformation is doomed to fail – not because it doesn’t work, but because we started with the wrong methodology and focus.

I want to be clear here: When I say global improvement, I am talking about improvements that show up on the bottom line.

Numbers Game?

There is often a problem with how improvement results are measured. Too often, they are measuring local optima, with cost accounting principles that ignore whether or not actual bottom line or global flow gains are made. For example, if you cut the setup time in half on a specific machine – from one hour down to 30 minutes, and then you setup the machine 1,000 times each year with an overhead burden of $500 an hour, you do not get to say that you achieved $250,000 in cost savings. The cost/ depreciation does not change for that machine and the cost of your overhead does not go down due to this improvement, either. There are only two possible ways that actual impact to the bottom line occurs:

1) If you are able to ship more product because of the change. (It must leave your shipping dock and the customer needs to be invoiced for it to count.) Extra throughput through the resource does not count if the other resources in the chain cannot get it through at the same rate.

2) If you can send the operator home early or give them days off – but this certainly doesn’t get you $250k.

You need the pointer to make sure that the changes you make have the largest impact on the bottom line and for me, TOC is the best methodology for determining this. TOC will show you the areas that, if improved, have direct impact on global throughput.

Yes, I recognize that Lean has value stream maps. However, those are snapshots of the system at one point in time, and they are product-specific flows. They do NOT look at the aggregate and interconnected environment that most manufacturers live with every day.

A Smoother Board

It has been my experience that Lean produces the most refined, disciplined, and productive manufacturing process. If I walk into two environments, one that only used TOC and one that used only Lean, and they both made it five years into the journey with management staying committed, I would fully expect the Lean company to have had the most success in transforming their operation. If we looked at the same two companies one year in, the reverse would be true.

This is not about which methodology is better. The fortunate thing for companies is that TOC and Lean are pieces to the same puzzle and if used together, the results are formidable.

Next time we’ll talk about an even more fine-tuned refinement tool- Six Sigma. Until then, please let me know how you have used the tools of TOC, Lean and Six Sigma to refine your continuous improvement projects.

-John Maher

This is part three of a four-part series. Here are the links to the earlier posts in this series:
- Part 1, What Sandpaper Will You Use?
- Part 2, Fast Results Using TOC for Demand-Driven Manufacturing
John’s passion for demand-driven manufacturing is equal to his interest in how this method improves the lives of employees within these environments. “I’m here to help, not to judge” comments John whose posts reflect why demand-driven matters and are based on his experience working in manufacturing environments and expertise in ERP, MRP, APS, supply chain, manufacturing planning and scheduling systems and constraints management.
May 19, 2015

“test”