1. Jaideep Chandrasekharan, Carlton & United Breweries Ltd, Campbelltown, Sydney, Australia, Martin Neal,
Carlton & United Breweries Ltd., Campbelltown, Sydney, Australia & Dalibor Ivkovic, Carlton & United
Breweries Ltd., Yatala, Queensland, Australia.
Paper Title: Continuous Improvement – The Westside story
Abstract:
The Carlton & United Breweries (CUB) Campbelltown production facility in Western Sydney produces the
Strongbow & Bulmer’s range of ciders in addition to wine and RTD products. This paper covers the
implementation of a Continuous Improvement program at Campbelltown based on Lean Manufacturing
principles. The initial area of focus was the packaging line and one year into the program, packaging line
efficiencies have increased by over 10% with over significant reduction in wastage levels as well.
Improvements in Employee engagement levels were also realised during the course of the program.
Future plans to embed improvements across the entire Value stream will also be discussed.
Introduction:
The CUB production facility in Campbelltown, Western Sydney, started as the Bulmer’s Australia site where
the Strongbow & Bulmer’s cider portfolio of brands was produced. In early 2003, CUB bought the Bulmer’s
Australia business and in early 2007 embarked on a major expansion of the site’s capability with the addition
of new packaging equipment (De-palletiser & Rinser) and the provision of capability to manufacture Ready to
Drink alcoholic products. The increase in complexity in SKU profile (7 to 21) challenged the capability of the
plant and there was a drop in productivity at the plant with a drop in plant line efficiencies and an increase in
wastage levels. In order to meet demand during the peak summer months, the plant had to run on overtime
at the weekends with a resultant increase in operating costs.
Continuous Improvement at Campbelltown:
In order to arrest this dip in operating performance, the site Leadership decided to embark on a Continuous
Improvement program with the basic principles as outlined below in Figure 1.

2. Figure 1
CI Process in Campbelltown
CI
Campbelltown
Needs
Drivers
Outcomes
Short Term:
• Wastage reduction
• Improved OEE
Long Term:
• Capability (people) development
• Employee engagement
• Common method
• Active employee participation
• Leadership support (vision, inspiration, momentum)
• Improved competitiveness (cost, quality)
• Plant flexibility
• Survival
While the visible outcomes were wastage reduction and OEE improvement, the key focus was on improving
the capability of our employees in order to deliver these results.
Continuous Improvement Program Roll Out:
Management Training:
The first step in the CI program roll out was to carry out training for the management team on CI / Lean
principles in order for them to get a better understanding so that they could apply the principles in their
respective work areas.
The training program covered the following areas:
• Principles of Lean / Continuous Improvement
• CI tools and processes
- 7 wastes
- Plan, Do, Check, Act cycle
- Standardisation
- Structured Problem solving processes
• Lessons learnt from an earlier CI deployment at Wolf Blass (Foster’s wine business)
In order to maintain our focus, it was decided to roll out the program as a start, only in the packaging work
area. This was a conscious decision in order to maximise the limited resources that we had, primarily internal
with some support from the CUB National CI / Capability teams.

3. Operator Training:
The aim from the outset was to build this program from the bottom up with involvement of the shopfloor
employees at every step. We took the opportunity of the annual maintenance shutdown in May 2008 to run a
week long training program for the Packaging department employees. The site leadership team had devised
an engagement survey which had been carried out prior to the training program where employee’s feedback
was sought on a range of issues including performance. The training program covered the following areas:
• Continuous Improvement and the need for change at Campbelltown
• Feedback from the site engagement survey
• Operational performance measures and their effectiveness
• Quality changeovers and examples of improvements made on other sites
• Visual Management systems – including a visit to an aerospace engineering company in Sydney
which had an excellent Visual Management system in place
• Effective problem resolution using a structured `Practical Problem Solving’ process to arrive at
the root cause of problems.
As part of the training program we had a workshop where the employees were asked to evaluate our current
performance measures and determine how they would like to depict the line performance on a real time
basis.
Structure:
At the start of the CI program roll out we reviewed the structure that we had in place in the Packaging work
area. We advertised for the position of Team Leader’s and a CI Operator. Each shift packaging team (4
employees) had a Team Leader and we provided for a CI operator on day shift.
The interest was good with 5 out of 10 employees applying for the role of Team Leader / CI Operator. Rather
than go through a selection process we decided to give all the applicants a chance and prepared a roster
which rotated the employees through the Team Leader and CI Operator role on a monthly basis.
While in the CI Operator role, employees were asked to identify improvement projects that they could carry
out in the work area. This was an excellent way of involving them in improvements and they could observe
improvements made as they completed their projects.

4. Figure 4 is an example of an initiative identified and implemented by one of the employees on a CI Operator
rotation. In this project, the employee identified improvements that could be made in the workstation at the
Filler and layout of Quality Control testing equipment. The improvement project was carried out in
consultation with the other employees and the concerned CI Operator took responsibility for implementing
the project.
Figure 2
This is just an example of a range of projects that Operators carried out in the work area. We found these
Workplace Organisation projects as an excellent introduction into an improvement activity as the employees
could scope out, implement a project and then identify with an improvement made. When we had visitors
such as our Production Director visiting the plant, employees were encouraged to present their
improvements thereby recognising their efforts.

5. Visual Management / Controls:
Traditionally we have used Line efficiency / Operating Equipment Effectiveness as a measure for packaging
line performance. However, our line employees were able to associate performance better with actual output
per shift, e.g., 5000 cartons per shift rather than an OEE of 72%. With this in mind, we asked them to design
a line side performance indication system that would at a glance indicate the performance status of the line.
Figure 2 is the hourly production status board that the employees developed.
The target output rate is displayed on the board. Hourly performance at below the target rate is displayed in
red and performance above the target rate is displayed in green. Reasons for downtime are displayed as
comments. Anyone walking past the line can look at the board and determine if the line is running well (more
green numbers) or not. More importantly, the information provided allows Management to respond to
deviations in performance in real time, thereby lifting performance.
Figure 3
Target
Actual ouput
– 1st
hr
Downtime reason

6. Daily Accountability Process:
The presence of Visual controls helps bring to the surface problems more quickly and we are able to react to
these on a daily basis. At Campbelltown, this is accomplished by a daily management meeting which is held
line side. The meeting is attended by the Site Management team and the shift Team Leader and the
Maintenance Manager. The team reviews the board and actions are assigned to team members to resolve
problems that have surfaced in the last 24 hours. Major downtime issues are subject to a Practical Problem
Solving process which includes the 5 Why’s process to get to the root cause of problems.

7. Standardisation:
The standardisation focus was on the following areas:
1. Labeller operations:
A significant proportion of the bottle wastage was occurring at the labeller. On observation this
was traced to variations in labeller operating procedures with different operators who all had
different skill levels. One of the better skilled operators was asked to observe performance at
the Labeller during production and to standardise the settings on the labeller. This was
achieved and led to a 50% reduction in wastage at the labeller.
2. Changeovers:
Changeovers had traditionally been carried out by the Fitters. However, with only one Fitter per
shift, this was a bottleneck in our quest to get better and faster at carrying out changeovers.
The operators themselves saw that they could assist with changeovers and that this would help
with the operation becoming more flexible.
After providing training on improving changeovers, a joint team of Fitters and Operators were
asked to evaluate our current changeover process and identify improvements. The team
observed and recorded (video) a changeover. The entire process was mapped and
improvement opportunities identified were built into a `new standard process’. This was then
evaluated live as part of the training and after some more modifications was implemented as
an improved procedure.
3. Leader Standard Work:
Leader Standard Work provides a structure and routine that helps leaders shift from a sole
focus on results to a dual focus on process plus results. Quite often in organisations, the
change from one supervisor to the next often sees a ‘new sheriff in town’ mentality. That is, in
these circumstances the management system depends on the person. With Leader standard
work, the lean management system is process dependant, not person dependant. Instead key
aspects of the management system are captured and presented in leader standard work as a
well defined process in which core tasks and routines are clearly called out.
Leader standard work is layered with a degree of redundancy built in, linking the layers. Take a
job responsibility such as filling out the hourly production board.

8. • the Team Leader’s standard work specifies the task
• The Packaging Manager’s standard work calls for checking this at least 4 times a day
• The Packaging Manager’s standard work specifies leading a daily accountability
process where reasons for misses on the board are scrutinised.
The advantage is that there is no ambiguity in the requirement to maintain and monitor
production-tracking charts, paying careful attention to reasons for lost production and initiating
appropriate corrective actions.
Outcomes:
Since we started the program, Line Efficiency has gone up from 55% to 69% (at 80% for our
largest volume SKU and around 60% for the smaller volume SKU’s) and wastage has reduced
by about 40%.
In addition to this, we have started running smaller batch sizes of our larger SKU’s. This is with
a view to reducing inventory levels in our warehouses. With the improved efficiency, we have
not had to resort to weekend overtime production for the last 2 summers even though volume
output has one up. Prior to that we had worked almost every weekend to meet demand
requirements.
The improvements outlined above have led to significant improvements in our cost profile at
the plant.
Next Steps:
The CI program at Campbelltown was deliberately focussed in the packaging work area. We
have carried out a Value Stream Analysis on the Value Stream for the production of one of our
major SKU’s – Strongbow 4X6X355ml. This has identified improvement opportunities in other
areas such as Beverage production and in warehousing. In 2010, the intention is to broaden
the scope to the other work areas with structured improvement plans being developed for each
work area aligned with achievement of our longer term objectives.
While we have focussed on improvements at the shopfloor level, we are also conscious that we
need to focus on the entire supply chain. With the movement to smaller batch size production
on our larger SKU’s, we will be trialling a system of replenishment of stock in one of our major
warehouses based on actual sales rather than replenishing to a forecast. We believe that
moving to this system on our larger SKU’s can lead to a significant reduction in our overall
inventory levels with further cost benefits across the supply chain.

9. References:
1. Mann,D., Creating a Lean Culture, Productivity Press: New York,2005, pp .2-99
2. Drew,J., McCallum, B. and Roggenhofer, S., The Essence of Lean. In: Journey to Lean, Palgrave
Macmillan: New York, 2004, pp.15-23
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Campbelltown team for their active involvement in this program and
would like to thank the management of Carlton & United Breweries for permission to publish this paper.

10. References:
1. Mann,D., Creating a Lean Culture, Productivity Press: New York,2005, pp .2-99
2. Drew,J., McCallum, B. and Roggenhofer, S., The Essence of Lean. In: Journey to Lean, Palgrave
Macmillan: New York, 2004, pp.15-23
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Campbelltown team for their active involvement in this program and
would like to thank the management of Carlton & United Breweries for permission to publish this paper.