Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
M&TE CAL LAB "Use of A3 during Problem Solving" Instruction
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

M&TE CAL LAB "Use of A3 during Problem Solving" Instruction


Published on

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. Application of A3 in the Nuclear Industry “A3 Problem Solving Method” Pilot Team: M&TE Calibration LabTeam Sensei: Todd McCannTeam: Cal Lab Manager, Cal Lab Supervisor and 3 Lab TechniciansTeaching: A3 Proposal, Status and Final Summary, ISHIKAWA,Standardized Work Sheets, Nemawashi, Jishuken, Hansei,Hoken Development, Yokoten, Makigami, PDCA, SDCA
  • 2. Core Foundational Practices of ToyotaFocus: Teaching M&TE Lab the discipline of A3 A3 Background JISHUKEN Translation: A Theme of Self Study The self study improvement projects are linked to business goals, driven and performed by teams of managers. Use A3 for recording data, describing problem, problem solving, sharing of work efforts with others (Note: Genchi Genbutsu = Go See at the Gemba the Materials, Machines and Environment where work is performed for Yourself. Primary Activity for Jishuken) + YOKOTEN Translation: Across everywhere. Horizontal Deployment How plant related activities and/or countermeasures are communicated Work Groups GO SEE other’s improvements NOT Best Practice or Benchmark sharing, Better Yet, Problem Solving Sharing And COPYING of IDEAS Most Often Applied PEER TO PEER No need to Re-invent the Wheel share your ideas with others!
  • 3. Team Learning: 3 types of A3-T• Proposal NO OVERHEAD PROJECTORS ALLOWED ALL WHITE BOARD WORK• Status• Final Report HIGH TOUCH > NO TECH > LOW TECH With Many Examples
  • 4. Proposal Teaching: Use of A3 and assembly of data for problem solving One Point Lesson: Step 1 - Standard A3 format to : “PROPOSE IMPROVEMENT” STEP 1of 3 PROPOSAL STANDARD FORMAT 1. Propose 2. Status THEME: Describe the PROBLEM being addressed. The theme SHOULD NOT advocate a SOLUTION WHO: YOUR NAME 3. Final Summary WHEN: CREATION DATE Note: Approach theme development by applying 5 Why’s - HU Tool “Questioning Attitude” & Ref. Causal Analysis Handbook PURPOSE OF PROPOSAL A3 I. BACKGROUND: (WHAT) Describe any pertinent information IV. DETAILED PLAN TO CLOSE GAP: The Creator describes activities GAP essential to understanding the extent of the condition and in an outline form. Action Item List. PROPOSAL importance of the problem to the local work group and then to the A. WHAT actions need to be performed, not the outcome enterprise. (Items that may be included might be how the problem B. WHEN the actions should be started and completed • Create a single page document by which was discovered, why the problem is important to current goals, work C. WHO is responsible for getting the activity done on time. one can expose & convey the message groups affected, technical issues, process issues, behavior issues & of proposed improvement between The outline should be at a very detailed level of critical activities that are Management & the Individual (s) who are organizational issues created by presence of the problem.) “Literal required to improve the process. The detailed activities should be aligned proposing the improvement. Simplicity Representation”. to achieving the Target Condition. WHAT START COMPLETE WHO • Use words to tell the story of the II. CURRENT CONDITION: “Most Important” Creator draws a CONDITION Performance GAP you desire to improve. diagram “Visual Representation” of Current Condition & Problems Literal Representation in flow of process as it actually occurs, not by assumption. Creator must “GO SEE” Current Condition when assumptions are made & • Diagram conditions through the use of validate through direct observation. Quantify condition with data, V. INDICATORS / MEASUREMENTS OF IMPROVEMENT: IMPROVEMENT icons and images to pictorially describe “Quantified Graphical Representation”, to expose the extent of The Creator develops indicators that are specific, controllable and the Performance Gap. Visual the condition as a baseline. The diagram and graphically Representation measurable to provide evidence that improvement toward Target Condition represented data will focus the creator & the reviewing audience on is being achieved. The indicators are displayed on Team Performance the Problem NOT the People involved with the problem. Deep Lean Board in Continuous improvement section. e.g. Safety, Cost, Quality, • Use Data in graphical form to empirically Analysis is performed at this step. Creator should be reflecting Delivery describe the Performance GAP. Quantified Graphical Representation. deeply for the problems true origin and true causes. Safety Cost Quality Delivery/ Cycle Time Rejects / Defects / 4 $350 $300 100% 200 85% Hundreds of Dollars 3 $300 150 Incidents 3 80% 65% 150 Minutes Rework 2 $250 $200 50% 100 C o nt ro l Current Condition 2 $200 60% 100 R OOM $150 40% 50 1 $100 50 0 $100 20% • Use proposal to communicate and gain 0 $50 0% 0 100 $- 80 Current Status Target Current Status Target Current Status Target Current Status Target 80 IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT Cycle Times IMPROVEMENT SWAMP RAT support and consensus with related Fuel Ret r i eved f r om Cor e Fuel M oved t o Upender C/ T = V ar i es Upender Upender r ai sed B r i dge Cr ane (st ar t pos. wi t h upender i nt er l ock cl ear T ool l ower ed and at t ached t o Hoi st r ai sed t o M ove br i dge M ove Fuel 60 40 20 35 GO SEE 20 groups (Stakeholders) & Management Upender +Fuel A ssembl y t o (T i me due t o di st ance Fuel l oaded l ower ed t o i n t o V er t . enabl ed) moved Fuel +Fuel FULL UP cr ane past Upender move t o Fuel Speci f i ed Fuel dependant on of Fuel t o i nt o Upender Hor z. f or i nFuel B l dg over Upender + r emoved f r om P OSI T I ON wi t h Upender Cl ear Lower s t o Hor z. B l dg. P ool pos. Fuel Locat i on Upender " OW" movement t o Fuel Upender t o Ful l Fuel I nt er l ock pos. i n RX OW or or " NOW" 3 Fuel P ool ST A R T I N G up I nt er l ock * 0 NOW moves) * 4 5 6 P OI NT 9 10 12 move* 8 * 1 2 A B C for improvement. Interaction 7 Activity VI. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: The Creator develops a high level plan of PLAN III. ANALYSIS TO TARGET CONDITION: The Target Condition CONDITION OUTCOMES required to achieve Target Condition. will diagrammatically & graphically display the specific The plan should link directly to the Detailed Plan to Close the GAP. A “Countermeasure” to be put in place to create improvement. Simple GANTT chart can satisfy this requirement as long the audience can Creator draws a clear and concise diagram of Target condition to clearly see the progression of your outcomes to activities. Apply Stepwise Learning: contrast to the Current Condition with supporting empirical data. MILESTONE THINKING HERE. Next Lesson Visual Representation + Quantified Graphical Representation Step 2. STATUS C o nt r o l R OOM Target Condition 100 80 Cycle Time SWAMP RAT 60 50 40 Fuel Fuel M ov ed t o B r i dge Cr ane (s t ar t pos . wi t h 20 Ret r i ev ed Upender C/ T = V ar i es Upender upender T ool l ower ed M ov e Fuel 20 5 f r om Cor e Upender +Fuel i nt er l oc k c l ear and at t ac hed t o Hoi s t r ai s ed t o M ov e br i dge l ower ed t o A s s embl y t o (T i me due t o di s t anc e mov e t o Fuel Fuel +Fuel FULL UP c r ane pas t enabl ed) mov ed dependant on of Fuel t o Hor z . f or B l dg. ov er Upender + r emov ed f r om P OSI T I ON wi t h Upender Cl ear Spec i f i ed Fuel P ool pos . 0 Upender " OW" mov ement t o Fuel Loc at i on Fuel Upender t o Ful l Fuel I nt er l oc k pos . i n RX OW or or " NOW" Fuel P ool 4 ST A R T I N G up I nt er l oc k * A B C 3 7 8 9 NOW mov es ) mov e* * P OI NT 6 * 1 2 Activity 5
  • 5. Example of M&TE Lab A3Theme: Proposal for ImprovementProblem: Torque wrench calibrations workload is not levelized across the year Team Instruction: All A3s must be created in Pencil FIRST and then place into electronic format When owner has developed the insurance (hoken) of the improvement
  • 6. M&TE Lab Supervisor and Sr. Lab Tech receive RecognitionWaste Eliminator Award! PROBLEM: 4000 M&TE Items M&TE in Work Order Process by Calibration Discipline Shaw Site Services Metrology M&TE needs are not identified in the Plant Maintenance 1200 1100 Schedule. Zero Visibility! 1000 STATUS 09/22/09 M&TE 1000 Visibility Roger Adams Wade Jacobs 800 x6471 x6958 550 550 600 I. BACKGROUND: 400 400 V. INDICATORS/MEASURES OF IMPROVEMENT: 400 Planning and scheduling of plant maintenance is dependent upon several factors: qualified personnel, tools, parts, materials, M&TE, etc. PRSIM provided limited M&TE 200 M&TE Item Number Conversion 2009 Work Orders with M&TE look-ahead information (i.e. a work week schedule requires a torque wrench but did not 0 5000 (Values to be determined) provide the type or range). M&TE is not presently tied to the maintenance schedule 80 Dime Elec Pres Torq Temp Misc resulting in reduced M&TE calibration planning effectiveness, emergent calibrations, 70 4000 and delayed plant work activities. Maximo interface is not currently available. Disciplines 60 3000 50 III. TARGET CONDITION: 40 2000 A. Full visibility of M&TE needs for operation and outage work orders II. CURRENT CONDITION 30 B. All M&TE assigned to logical parent-tool groups (item numbers) 1000 20 A. Typically, M&TE personnel are made aware of M&TE needs when the worker C. Affected procedures revised for improved processes 10 checks out M&TE on the way to the plant to perform a task D. Implement the improvement through standard schedule process, naturally 0 0 B. M&TE needs are not scheduled or planned in Maximo populating the system Start Status Target Discretionary Emergent Scheduled C. Zero visibility of M&TE demand = <100% service level E. Include improvement initiative into standardized process for work order generation D. Service level is indeterminate, lacking measures for: and revisions 1. Scheduled work orders Revised Work Orders F. M&TE included in all repetitive 2010 work orders requiring M&TE (Values to be determined) 2. Emergent work G. M&TE included in all 2011 outage work orders 120 3. Discretionary work H. Standardized M&TE look-ahead process 100 E. Zero visibility of M&TE demand in the T-15 schedule results in: I. M&TE needs identified in T-7 week 1. Reactionary response v. Proactive countermeasures J. M&TE needs prepared by T-1 week 80 2. Ripple effects K. M&TE issued to user during T-0 week 60 a. Imposes non-standard conditions L. Develop more sophisticated eye for real demand levels to implement planned b. Lost time – waiting, rescheduling plant work, and shuffled work and assets calibrations and seek further improvement opportunities 40 c. Expediting offsite calibrations requires additional money 20 3. Waste Target Plant Maintenance Schedule with M&TE a. Excess Inventory 0 Start Status Target b. Over-processing c. Waiting T-14 T-7 T-15 through T-7 through T-1 T-0 T-8 T-1 Work Order M&TE Work Prepare Forecasted User Picks Up Help! Current Plant Maintenance Schedule with M&TE Planning Week Query M&TE M&TE Ready M&TE IV. DETAILED PLAN TO CLOSE THE GAP T-14 T-7 Task Start Target Who VI. UNRESOLVED ISSUES T-15 through T-7 through T-1 T-0 Complete T-8 T-1 Review Maximo M&TE inventory for item number tool-parent relationships 11/08 12/08 M&TE A. Measures 1. Work Orders per year Complete Edit Maximo Inventory tool-parent relationships 12/08 M&TE Work Order Worker checks out M&TE 0109 2. Work Orders requiring M&TE per year Planning Complete 3. Progress of Work Order changes Prepare critical M&TE list 02/09 M&TE M&TE personnel made aware of M&TE need 02/09 4. Cost per hour for delayed plant work Train Planning personnel on steps to include 03/09 Complete Planning 1. Operation M&TE in work order planning 03/09 2. Outage Revise work order job plans as an in- Continuing process continuous improvement 03/09 Process Planning 5. Planned M&TE vs. Actual M&TE Compare planned M&TE to actual M&TE 10/09 12/09 M&TE Train M&TE personnel in T-15 work order 01/10 02/10 M&TE process as relates to M&TE calibrations
  • 7. A3 article written inThe Peak Review
  • 8. QuestionsDesire to Learn more?• Todd McCann 815-543-9112