Author: David Dehne

POV: 3 Ways Layered Technology Differs from the ERP Add-On

Most manufacturers have, at one time or another, deployed an “ERP add-on.” These are the bits and pieces of functionality sold through third parties that round out the capabilities of an ERP system. Common ERP add-ons can include core functionality like Advanced Planning and Scheduling (APS) and Supply Chain Planning (SCP), but for major ERP systems, there are dozens if not hundreds of add-ons available.

Because add-ons are such a familiar term to manufacturers, we’re often asked if this is what we mean when we talk about deploying a layered technology approach to Demand-Driven Manufacturing. Not exactly, but before I go into the differences, let me bring everyone up to speed by sharing Gartner’s viewpoint on the layered approach so we can put the differences in context.

Gartner’s 5 Stages of Supply Chain Maturity

In a recent report, Supply Chain Maturity Assessment for the Demand-Driven Supply Chain, Gartner defines 5 Stages of Supply Chain Maturity. On one end of the spectrum, Stage 1 is a reactive environment where the manufacturer primarily uses manual processes (for example, spreadsheets for scheduling). On the other end, Stage 5, is a fully integrated enterprise, leveraging algorithms and predictive analytics for continuous improvement across the supply chain.

Progression through each of these stages does not require replacing an inadequate ERP system with one that is more fully functional. Instead, Gartner advocates layering on technology to progress to ever-higher levels of supply chain maturity. The layered approach allows manufacturers to apply maturity-enabling technology at a targeted and affordable pace. It also drives a faster ROI than a traditional ERP implementation. Here’s an example:

3 Ways the Layered Approach is Different

So, how is what Gartner is recommending different from the add-ons ERP vendors have been offering for decades? We see three major differences. There is some overlap with what some add-on vendors offer, but when taken together, the layered approach is a major step-forward for organizations looking for a fast, affordable way to leverage technology to improve operational performance.

Philosophy before function. Add-on applications tend to focus on addressing capability weaknesses within an ERP system. For example, an APS application may offer the ability to do finite capacity planning. That’s good, but finite capacity planning is a point-solution to a specific problem.

Layering technology provides a broader, more business objective-oriented approach to systems than simply adding on an application to plug a hole. For example, our Demand-Driven Manufacturing layers help manufacturers achieve a leaner, more agile environment by implementing philosophies like Lean, Six Sigma and constraints management.

Source agnostic; big picture. Add-on vendors are getting better at working with disparate ERP systems, but there’s often still an integration challenge to be addressed before the add-on can start providing the promised benefits. If there are multiple sources, e.g. financials, CRM, home-grown point solutions, the project can get very complex. Many questions need to be answered such as: What format does the data need to be in? How do we ensure the data gathered is current? How do we combine the data from multiple sources?

Furthermore, because the add-on is focused on a specific challenge, it only provides one aspect of the big picture. Any given role in a manufacturing organization needs analysis from multiple systems. Requiring that the user access reports and dashboards across systems to get what they need wastes time and resources.

Our approach involves layering technology that can connect to any data source – even raw data from the machines on your shop floor – and standardize the data so that it can be aggregated, analyzed and visualized across the enterprise in real-time. Users don’t have to access multiple point solutions or machines to get the information they need.

Supply chain ready. Layered technologies are web- and cloud-based, where a shared pool of resources are available on-demand. The subtle but important difference is that our approach means that the technology layers can be used across supply chain partners for end-to-end supply chain visibility and management.

Related Resources:

White Paper: The Demand-Driven Supply Chain

Article: The Changing Role of ERP in Manufacturing

February 26, 2018
Guest Blog Part 3: Listen to the Process
Through this guest blog series, my intent is to share some of my experiences implementing supplier quality and Lean manufacturing initiatives by focusing on eKanban systems. My first post offered advice for planning an eKanban rollout (advice that could be applied across any Lean manufacturing project). In my second installment, I reviewed strategies for rolling out an eKanban project that have proven successful for me. In this final entry, my focus turns to continuous improvement.

In thinking about this final entry to my eKanban blog series, it may be helpful to review where we’ve been (irony of this to follow). Previously, we talked about establishing a plan to include what we want to accomplish, why and how we will measure results (Real-world Advice for Getting Started on eKanban). We reviewed the importance of engaging leadership in the eKanban project and strategies for turning frontline contributors into change-agents.

Then, we turned toward execution, reviewing replenishment process mapping and rolling out a pilot with examples of how to engage suppliers (Start Your eKanban Implementation with Value-stream Mapping and Engaging Your Suppliers). I left you with the thought of keeping the goals of the mission in mind and continually reinforcing and communicating key outcomes and progress toward the attainment of those goals. The fact is, you need to keep evangelizing the project; particularly after the software goes live and rolls out across the organization. Keep the momentum strong. Communicate results. Win advocates.

“Knowledge speaks; wisdom listens”

These immortal words from the great Jimi Hendrix couldn’t be truer. With regards to our eKanban project, knowledge and communication were critical to complete the first part of the journey, listening comes next.

As the organization starts to use the new eKanban system, start to listen. Tune into the process and listen for feedback from both internal (inside the four walls) and external (customer and supplier) sources. This is the start to the continuous improvement process.

Through patient listening, you’ll receive good – and sometimes surprising – process feedback that can lead to key quality and performance improvements. As you collect feedback, you will need to start assessing your options. Typically, it breaks down into:
1. What improvements can be done quickly. Tackling some quick wins can be helpful in demonstrating to those providing feedback that the organizations is really listening – and behind the project all the way.
2. What is going to take longer to implement. Sometimes these can become projects in and of themselves. In this case, it’s critical to breakdown the issue to ensure it’s executed correctly: Create a plan; test; validate; implement.
For one manufacturer, I was involved in an eKanban implementation across six facilities. After implementing the software – and listening to the process – an issue came up where suppliers would receive replenishment signals, but wouldn’t know which facility initiated the order. The quick fix was to add a source code to the order. Problem solved.

The same manufacturer also required a fix that took a little more time, due to some software adjustments. They wanted to add a date and/or the revision number of the part to the eKanban label. So, we created a plan with our software partner (Synchrono), tested it, and when it was validated, we implemented. An easy fix that needed to be worked into the software development cycle.

While listening is a very important part of the continuous improvement process, data gained from the eKanban system also has value in identifying areas for performance improvements.

For example, a manufacturer using their eKanban system for tracking their on-time delivery rate, was able to identify suppliers who were consistently late. Worse, because these suppliers were known to be late, purchasers (with the best intentions) would trick the system and override the Kanban quantity. Of course, they ended up with too much on hand inventory. Through access to the eKanban system data, we were able to get to the root cause of the problem and take corrective action.

Go Mountain Climbing

Sometimes the continuous improvement process may leave you feeling like things are never good enough. Not true! Just take a moment to take in the view.

The analogy I use in teaching Lean Manufacturing is mountain climbing. When you’re climbing, you’re just focused on getting up the mountain in the most expedient way. And, in doing so, you may start to lose steam.

Re-energize yourself (and your team) by looking back occasionally to see what you’ve accomplished. Look at the new terrain you’ve traveled; the boulders you’ve moved – and how much you’ve saved the company!

You’ll find that sometimes reflecting back is just as important as looking ahead.

Jim Shore is the Principal of Quality Lean Solutions, a Consultant Firm that specializes in Medical Device companies, Supplier Quality and Lean Manufacturing principles. Mr. Shore is co-author of “Proactive Supplier Management in the Medical Device Industry” (2016: Quality Press). Jim has 25 years of quality and supplier management experience in medical devices, semiconductor, aerospace and defense for firms and organizations including Titan Medical, Nypro Healthcare, Boston Scientific, Aspect Medical, Brooks Automation, Raytheon and ACMI Gyrus (now Olympus). He is Six Sigma Black Belt and Quality Manager/Operations Excellence-certified by the American Society for Quality (ASQ), as well as an ASQ-certified Quality Auditor and Mechanical Inspector. A veteran of Operation Desert Storm, he served in the U.S. Marine Corps for more than 15 years.
February 19, 2018
How the Internet of Things Can Shorten Lead Times

A new study in Modern Materials Handling reports that 86% of industrial organizations are currently adopting IoT (Internet of Things) solutions, and 84% believe those solutions are very or extremely effective. Manufacturers lagged behind the industrial segment as a whole, with only 77% of manufacturers implementing IoT in their facilities.

So, what is holding manufacturers back? Anecdotally, I can share that many of the manufacturers I talk to intend to implement the IoT in their facilities or have already started a project. But, they are less sure about their results than the respondents to the study.

In this series of posts, our goal is to break through the hype and the uncertainty around the IIoT (Industrial Internet of Things) by focusing on projects you can execute and for which you can achieve a measurable ROI in 2018.

In the first post, we looked at how the IIoT can help manufacturers lower inventory levels. (Read the full post here.) We also shared how one of our customers was able to reduce inventory by as much as 55% in one factory, while at the same time reducing lead times from twelve weeks to two.

Some of the customers I talk to are initially skeptical that they can both reduce inventory AND reduce lead times. Achieving these results at the same time seems counter-intuitive because they think they need to keep high levels of inventory on hand and in process to meet customer demand. In today’s post, I want to unpack that by focusing on how the IIoT and Demand-Driven Manufacturing (DDM) can help you achieve both objectives in your facility by implementing one specific manufacturing philosophy.

The IIoT in action: TOC

Today’s IIoT project leverages the Theory of Constraints (TOC) or constraints management principles. Like the Kanban project we talked about (see How the IoT Can Help You Lower Inventory Levels), TOC isn’t inherently an IIoT project. You can implement TOC manually, but when IIoT data-sharing technologies are leveraged, your TOC efforts are turbocharged for even greater benefit to your bottom line.

Many of you are, no doubt, familiar with TOC, but let’s quickly cover what it is so we’re all on the same page. TOC says that, in any given manufacturing environment, there are a small number of constraints that limit the throughput of the factory. Increasing productivity at any other point in the system will not increase overall productivity because the constraint cannot keep up.

For more details on the four types of constraints, refer to my recent post: It’s Time to Revisit Your Constraints.

In the Demand-Driven Manufacturing environments we work in, we apply constraints management technology (based on TOC) to constraints in the system. By understanding the constraints – and their capacity – we can set the optimal rate of flow to that constraint (see CONLOAD™ Scheduling Methodology: Set the Right Pace for Production). This reduces congestion and keeps work flowing throughout production. Real-time, IIoT data allows for automated adjustments based on changes in demand, priorities, etc.

So how does synchronizing the pace of production to the constraint in real time lower both lead times and inventory levels? In a traditional make-to-stock manufacturing environment, as much as 90% of cycle time is queue time, that is, a part waiting for its turn on the machine or in the work center. By synchronizing the flow of material to the constraint in the system, material spends less time in queue and cycle times are shorter. And, because less material is in queue, WIP drops as well.

Related Post: It’s Time to Revisit Vendor Managed Inventory

Some of you may be thinking, “Ok, that explains how cycle times and WIP inventory drop, but how does constraints management affect lead times? We measure lead time from the time an order is taken until it is shipped. I still can’t manufacture anything faster than my constraint, and it doesn’t lower lead times if I can’t start the order any faster.”

Good point. But, what we’ve found is that lead time typically drops as well for a variety of reasons such as better prioritization of projects at the constraint and increased capacity. When all work throughout the facility is synchronized to the pace of the constraint, everyone knows what they need to do next, and no time is wasted running orders through the system that aren’t a priority. This is especially impactful in facilities where changeovers take time either because of retooling or a paradigm constraint, such as a focus on productivity at every workstation that slows the overall factory down.

In my last post, I shared the example of Dynisco, a leading manufacturer of materials-testing and extrusion-control instruments that reduced inventory levels by 55% in one of its facilities while at the same time reducing lead time from 12 weeks to 2. Today, I want to tell you about another Synchrono customer that addressed a lead time issue with Demand-Driven Manufacturing.

Rex Materials Group (RMG) manufactures custom vacuum-formed ceramic-fiber products. In the late 1990s, the company implemented TOC and modified its home-grown systems to apply drum-buffer-rope principles. That system worked for a while, but eventually, the company decided they needed something better to feed their continuous improvement efforts.

RMG implemented SyncManufacturing™ synchronized planning, scheduling and execution software from Synchrono® across three separate facilities. The first facility went live in 90 days and the second and third in 45 days each. By accelerating their TOC efforts, RMG went from lead times of three to four weeks, on average, to delivering 30-40% of products within five days of receiving the order. They can even ship some overnight. Read the full case study.

Want to learn more? Here are some related resources that can help you get started on your next IIoT project in 2018:

Video: What is Demand-Driven Manufacturing?

White Paper: Three Key Strategies of Modern Demand-Driven Manufacturing (Watch the video here.)

Video: Manage Manufacturing Constraints and Optimize Production Flow with CONLOAD

February 12, 2018
Time to Revisit Your Constraints

We talk a lot about constraints management in our work with customers who are implementing Demand-Driven Manufacturing (DDM) in their facilities. That’s because constraints management is fundamental for synchronizing the pace of production and keeping the demand (orders) flowing throughout the shop floor. But, our focus is naturally on physical constraints, e.g., that piece of equipment or workstation that is preventing you from delivering on time or offering shorter, more competitive lead times to your customers.

Not Everything is About Production

Those of you who have spent time studying the Theory of Constraints (TOC) in-depth understand that it’s not always all about the production process. Constraints can fall into one of four categories:

Physical – These are the constraints we focus on with technologies like CONLOAD™ that set the pace for production based on the capacity of the physical constraint.

Policy – These constraints dictate how work is performed. Sometimes you can do something about them (e.g., an old company policy that no longer makes sense), and sometimes you can’t (e.g., a regulation that still might not make sense but needs to be followed anyway).

Paradigm – This is a way of thinking that gets in the way of meeting commitments, such as the COO’s resistance to outsourcing processes to other companies even if they can do it faster, better or cheaper than you can.

Market – Put simply, capacity exceeds demand. Remember, TOC emphasizes throughput (The rate at which the system generates “goal units,” Goldratt) and not productivity.

For some manufacturers, the real constraint over the last decade has been their market. Manufacturing production has seen its share of ups and downs in the last ten years. It wasn’t that our facilities couldn’t produce more, many manufacturers just didn’t have the orders to warrant increased production.

Shifting Your Paradigms

Early indications are that many of the market constraints on US manufacturers may be melting away in 2018 through 2020. (Along with a few policy constraints.) Manufacturing GDP is expected to slightly outpace GDP for all industries (2.5%) and grow by 2.8%. (Some analysts are predicting even higher numbers, but like our customers, we prefer to focus on more conservative estimates when doing mid-term forecasting.) The stock market is also at an all-time high, indicating strong investor confidence and more money for investment. Oil prices are expected to remain low, keeping the cost of manufacturing and transportation of goods to market in check.

In other words, it’s time to take your focus off the market constraints you can’t do much about and place it on the constraints that are within your control. If you have outdated policy or paradigm constraints, it’s time to rethink your thinking. If you have physical constraints – leverage them to set the optimal pace for uninterrupted production flow.

Time flies and so do great economies. Don’t let the best market in a decade pass you by without taking advantage of it. If your constraints are physical, here are a few resources that may help:

Video: Manage Manufacturing Constraints and Optimize Production Flow with CONLOAD

White Paper: Metrics That Drive Action

Case Study: GIW Industries

February 5, 2018
How the Internet of Things Can Help You Lower Inventory Levels
McKinsey Global Institute predicts the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) will have an economic impact of up to $11 billion by 2025. As much as $3.7 billion of that is expected to come from manufacturing improvements in things like operations management and predictive maintenance.

The word seems to have gotten out. In a 2016 study conducted by Morgan Stanley and Automation World, 70% of respondents said it was important for their company to adopt an IoT strategy within the next five years. In fact, Morgan Stanley expects IIoT-related CapEx spending to increase from approximately 8% to 185 over the next five years.

Predictions like these leave many manufacturers with questions such as: How can the IIoT help my business? How can we get our share of that $3.7 billion pie? If I’m going to increase my CapEx spending on the IIoT, where should I focus those dollars? And, what kind of ROI can I expect?

In a series of posts, we’re going to focus on IIoT projects that meet several criteria:
- They don’t require a major overhaul of processes or retooling the factory floor.
- Capital outlay is often minimal.
- They support key manufacturing philosophies like Lean, Theory of Constraints, and Six Sigma.
- The ROI is real and measurable.
- They can be executed relatively quickly, often providing an ROI in less than two months.
The High Cost of Excess Inventory

Lowering costs will probably always be a top goal for manufacturers, so we’re going to begin our series by tackling this challenge. One of the best (but not always the easiest) ways to lower costs is to lower inventory levels. Here’s a quick way to see how much your excess inventory is costing you:

The commonly accepted carrying cost for inventory is around 20%. (Different industries might have a higher percentage, such as when the inventory requires special handling or is perishable.) If a manufacturer has an annual inventory value of $1 million, lowering that by 10% could save $20,000. If the manufacturer has $100 million in inventory, a 10% reduction in inventory levels could save $2 million. ($100,000,000 * .10 * .20 = $2,000,000)

There are more complicated ways to calculate the cost of excess inventory. Go ahead and use them if you are comfortable with the math, but this simple calculation works well for most accountants. Regardless of which method you use, the bottom line is always this: Excess inventory is costly!

But how much of my current inventory is “excess”?

That question encapsulates the challenge for manufacturing. Manufacturers often feel they need to keep a certain number of weeks’ supply on hand to meet lead times and deal with variability. That may be warranted in some cases, but when we talk to manufacturers about lowering costs, we find that many over-apply this principle by treating all inventory the same way and overestimating how much they actually need to keep on hand to meet service levels.

Implementing a pull strategy for manufacturing, where inventory replenishment signals are based on consumption, can lower both raw material and WIP inventory levels throughout the enterprise

Related Resource: White Paper – Gaining Control: Exploring Push v. Pull Manufacturing

A common way to implement pull-based replenishment signals is to implement Kanban. But, there are a couple of inherent challenges to implementing Kanban manually. The first is that manual Kanban requires workers to do certain things, such as to manage physical Kanban cards which are prone to error or getting lost. The second challenge to manual Kanban is in determining container sizes. How large should they be, and how many should you use?

eKanban is the IIoT in action

eKanban can resolve both of those challenges. The signals are electronic, so there isn’t a card that can get lost, damaged, sent to the wrong place, etc. Applications like SyncKanban (the Snynchrono eKanban solution) also responds instantly to changes in demand, resizing containers and adjusting K-loops.

A K-Loop (Kanban-Loop) is the number of Kanban Cards in the replenishment and usage cycle of an item. The K-Loop is created as a closed loop of activity between all involved in the use and supply of materials.

eKanban is the IIoT in action, using technology to connect people, data and processes for improved operational performance. But, at the beginning of this post, I promised to focus only on IIoT projects where the ROI is real and measurable. That demands an example:

Dynisco is a leading manufacturer of materials-testing and extrusion-control instruments, and they take continuous improvement seriously. They implemented a manual Kanban system in several factories but found it was too prone to disruption to help them achieve their goal of a 30% reduction in inventory levels. After replacing the manual system with eKanban software across four factories, they achieved inventory reductions of 51%, 55%, 43% and 29%. The factory that reduced inventory by 55% also reduced lead times from 12 weeks to 2. Read the full case study.

If you’re ready to reduce inventory levels in your organization, you can schedule a demo of eKanban here or reach out to speak to one of our representatives at info@synchrono.com.

Related Resources:

White Paper: Going eKanban: Moving from a manual to an eKanban system

Brochure: SyncKanban

Guest Blog: Real-World Advice for Getting Started on eKanban
January 29, 2018
FAQ: Can I Use Demand-Driven Manufacturing in a Make-to-Stock Environment?

Demand-Driven Manufacturing seems like it was made for Make/Assemble-to-Order and Engineer-to-Order environments. It’s true that Demand-Driven Manufacturing can be beneficial for manufacturers who already produce goods based on customer demand because it improves their responsiveness to customers and lowers lead and cycle times.

Demand-Driven Manufacturing is a method of manufacturing where production is based on actual customer orders (demand) rather than a forecast.

But what about Make-to-Stock environments? These manufacturers also produce goods based on customer demand, but instead of actual demand, production is typically based on forecasted demand. Considering our definition of Demand-Driven Manufacturing – a method of manufacturing where production is based on actual customer orders rather than a forecast – it seems like that would preclude the Make-to-Stock manufacturer from taking advantage of Demand-Driven Manufacturing principles, right?

Not at all.

The challenge in MTS environments is replenishment lead time.

That is, the lead time provided by the customer is less than the lead time needed to complete the finished good. Given this, MTS Demand-Driven Manufacturers use their forecast to establish a stock buffer. Production execution, however, is based on actual demand. The stock buffer provides just-in-time materials to complete the order, ensuring there are no delays in responding to the demand signal. Here’s how it looks:

MTS manufacturers apply Lean/Demand-Driven strategies to make the stock buffer as small as possible. This reduces carrying costs and the potential for waste. As we’ve covered other posts, eKanban software is a great way to not only reduce lead times, but inventory costs. If considering eKanban, you will want to check out Real-world Advice for Getting Started on eKanban.

Lower lead times are one of the primary benefits we see in manufacturers who implement components of the Synchrono Demand-Driven Manufacturing Platform (see the sidebar for other benefits). For example, Dynisco, an instrumentation manufacturer, reduced their lead times from 12 weeks to 2. Rex Materials Group reduced their lead times from 3-4 weeks to less than five days in some cases. You can read their case studies and those from several more customers on our website.

Other ways MTS manufacturers benefit

As noted in the graphic here, Demand-Driven Manufacturing adds tremendous value to MTS environments in a variety of ways.

For example, one of the strategies of Demand-Driven Manufacturing is constraints management – adapted from the Theory of Constraints (TOC). According to the TOC, there are a limited number of resources in any manufacturing environment that limits the manufacturer’s ability to meet demand (e.g., the constraint(s)). Scheduling production flow to the capacity of the constraint resource(s) improves overall production flow and on-time delivery rates.

To show how we work to manage constraints, we’ve posted a short video on YouTube – Manage Manufacturing Constraints and Optimize Production Flow with CONLOAD.

Here are some additional resources that can help you explore Demand-Driven Manufacturing and what it might mean for your organization. And, as always, reach out to us with any questions you have, or if you’d like to discuss a pilot project.

Website: Why Demand-Driven Manufacturing?

White paper: Demand-Driven Manufacturing—Metrics that Drive Action

Video: What is Demand-Driven Manufacturing?

<a href=”http://scapac.aggregage.com/?cmd=best-badge-article&g=87&b=5380&a=7745138&n=4&p=v&s=s&c=” target=”_blank”><img src=”http://scapac.aggregage.com/?cmd=get-best-badge&g=87&b=5380&a=7745138&n=4&p=v&s=s” alt=”Supply Chain APAC Best Article” title=”Supply Chain APAC Best Article” border=”0″ ismap/></a>

January 22, 2018

“test”