Published on

Published in: Education
  • 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

No notes for slide
  • >Process improvement is fundamental to success. >Lean is the outgrowth of decades of work and Learning. >Lean is not a quick-fix flash-in-the-pan program. Frederick Taylor – Scientific Management 100 years of Luminaries: Fredrick Taylor- Time and Motion (Standard Work Elements) Eli Whitney- Interchangeable (Standard) Parts Henry Ford – Mass Production System Alfred Sloan – Voice of the Customer W. Edwards Deming – Total Quality Control Taiichi Ohno – Toyota Production System
  • The term “AFSO21” came about in Dec 05 when the SECAF and CSAF held the “Lean Across the AF Summit” with MAJCOM CVs. Lean had been happening in the Logistics world for the past several years, but the concepts were not being used universally. Two factors went into the decision to create the term “AFSO21.” First, leadership wanted to term that would take the concepts out of the logistics world and imply applicability across all functions (lean had come to be associated with logistics). Second, it serves as an umbrella term for other methods called for in the DoD Continuous Process Improvement Guide. Lean Principals make up a majority of AFSO21 (officially 80%). The AF has used numerous other methods (tools) to improve effectiveness and efficiencies. Examples include: TQM (has a negative effective due to its focus on small battles, single effects achieved by our great Airmen without an overarching strategic vision), 6-Sigma, etc. AFSO21 provides an umbrella of strategic vision based on Core Processes to bring together all the improvement techniques. There are 3 other methods under AFSO21 that make up the other 20%, but we’re not going to focus on those today.
  • The focus of this slide is to bring forward the fact that all AF personnel (military and civilian) have a critical role into continuously evaluating processes and look for ways to eliminate waste (those things that don’t add value to the mission or process).
  • What if? We could do the following: Reduce leadtimes within HQ processes Use less floor space to perform work Improve quality in all we do in core, enabling, and governing processes Increase productivity to allow workers to be more effective and efficient on a daily basis.
  • Discuss the fact that it is also a mindset . This is key. If only thought of as a tool bag to be used under the same underlying business rules we’ve been using for the past decade, any improvements made will simply reverse themselves within a very short period of time. AFSO21 requires a change in the way we look at and measure/manage work The primary focus is the reduction of waste. Easy example: if you order a take home pizza there are some things that are of value in the process. A customer is willing to pay for the ingredients and the delivery – things of value to the customer. In the process of making your pizza other factors come into play. Example: they take other orders and must wait to make your pizza or all delivery cars must be washed and cleaned daily prior to delivery, etc…the waiting time to make your is of no value to you and we call that waste. If we eliminate the steps in a process that are of no value to the customer or that the customer is willing to pay for then we would have a more satisfied customer. As you teach this block, think about things in your everyday life that cause you to wait…are you willing to pay for those things…if not, it is waste and slows down the process. Think about the number of times an OPR/EPR is sent back-n-forth for corrections or checks…if you streamlined the process you would spend less time on it. Eliminating waste is the fundamental target of Lean Principles. Last example: a crew chief must push his/her tool box from hanger to aircraft or to another aircraft. The time required is waste…not only in time but physical demands on our Airmen. Lean Principles will show you how to look for waste and eliminate it thus improving the efficiency and effectiveness.
  • Specify value : recognize customer’s concept of value in terms of specific products and services Identify the value stream : map out all the linked actions, necessary for transforming inputs to outputs Make value flow continuously: identify and eliminate waste; make remaining value-creating steps “flow” Let customers pull value: replace only material that is used or requested Pursue perfection : maintain continuous process of improvement… striving for ultimate perfection (totally eliminate waste)
  • Always look at the process from the customer’s perspective: What does the customer want from this process? Only the customer is able to define what they consider valuable in your product or service. Both the internal customer at the next steps in the process and the final, external customer You need to be able to recognize who the customer is. (internal/external). Some non-value added steps are necessary; the point is to minimize the time spent on non-value-added operations In the exercise, did we have any steps not specified by the customer? What type of non-value-added activities did you notice?
  • In most organizations, management is organized by process or function. In other words, managers own steps in the process and nobody is responsible for answering to the customer. Since we’re in AETC, let’s look at pipeline training, for example. BMTS – 6 or 8 weeks “ Casual status” 1 st Tech school – 6 to 52 weeks “ Casual status” 2 nd Tech School – x number of weeks Is there waste in this process? What are the metrics that we track? # dropouts # recycles “ On time graduations” Once students leave us, we are finished with them. We can’t see the waste b/c we only see one portion of the value stream Value Stream Mapping/Analysis is our first step in the improvement process It creates a picture of the entire value stream from the customer’s perspective Allows us to see pockets of waste. The next step is to zero in on each pocket, one at a time
  • Performing one process activity on each piece in a group or batch (of 5, 10, 20, etc) BEFORE sending it to the next step. Each piece waits in a queue while a batch is processed. A good example is the tech training that we just discussed; Local metrics that don’t measure how long it takes, but only “on-time/late,” encourage batch and queue. Packages sit around waiting for weeks, NOT FLOWING In Lean Thinking , the authors theorize that humans tend to think naturally in terms of batch and queue, so single-piece flow (the ultimate goal of lean) fells wrong to us. I sometimes use the example of the daughter being asked to tell how she would process the newsletter..she went straight for the batch and queue method. How was the flow during our exercise? Was that batch & queue or steady flow? After you wrote letters on the first sheet, what was it doing as you proceeded to the next sheet? NOT FLOWING. How effective was it? Was our method specified by the customer? Would the customer know or care if we did things differently internally? To illustrate the point here, I tell stories about grocery shopping in England vs the US. In England, they have very tiny houses with little storage space and little tiny refrigerators. They go to the grocery store about every day, and shop for small batches. They use up most of what they buy, and go again tomorrow. In the US, we go about once per week, and buy huge batches of groceries, that we have plenty of room to store. But then we (at least I do) sometimes have to throw out the fuzzy yogurt, green cheese, moldy bread; or find spices in the cabinet from 1975, etc. Someone may point out that they make more trips. This is a good time to point out that lean solutions USUALLY involve trading one waste for another. They KEY is the overall cost at the end of the day. It costs the British much less to go to the store every day because they don’t have to pay for the larger houses, and the spoilage. This example is not to suggest we should buy smaller houses, or that they are better than we are. It’s just a different culture, and I use it to illustrate the example of batch and queue vs small batch flow. In the AF, we have an excellent example of batch and queue in the pilot training pipeline. They are brought into SUPT in batches, and not allowed to progress at their own rate. Instead they must progress as a class (batch) so that they may graduate on the same day. Classic batch and queue.
  • When you’re deciding what processes need to be “leaned,” it can be helpful to ask if the process yields results close to the above. If anyone mentions benchmarking, note that the book says it’s a waste of time and effort because your goals for your process should be perfection. Point out that the concepts we just mentioned must be applied carefully. There is a risk factor involved that must be paid attention to. You can’t change your old process until you get rid of the need for it. Example, many companies will look at Toyota and say, “aha, they have pull systems, and keep very low inventory on a just-in-time basis. That’s what lean is.” So they lower their inventory levels, and find themselves quickly out of business, saying “this lean stuff sucks!” They got rid of inventory before they got rid of the need for it! They didn’t have reliable systems in place to meet demand. They had a lot of waste still in their processes. You must stabilize process and get rid of the big waste before you can start to explore single-piece flow, or pull systems with low amounts of WIP. You must tie processes together into inter-dependent systems, measuring and managing as a system, before you can apply some of these concepts. Also, it is key to understand that lean is NOT about cutting capacity!!!! People sometimes hear how lean has allowed them to reduce head-count and inventory levels, and conclude that it was just a cut-drill. This is not so! Lean is about matching capacity to demand (enough to do the mission) at the lowest cost. You don’t ever cut capacity to below demand!! Make transition from core concepts to waste categories. Significant gains continue to be made by running events four and five times on the same process.
  • Value Added Time is only a very small percentage of the lead time. Traditional cost savings methods focused on only Value Added Items LEAN THINKING FOCUSES ON NON-VALUE ADDING ITEMS THE PROCESSES OF VALUE ARE GOOD. IF IT IS NOT BROKE DON’T FIX IT. FIX WHAT IS BROKE THE NON-VALUE STEPS (WASTE). “ In Lean we’ll be dividing up all processes (the way we do work) into basically two categories, value-added and non-valued added (waste). In this slide they use “wait time” as pure waste . But it isn’t the only category. Humorous, but important point…you’ve now shown slides that say lean’s goal is to reduce waste. Now you can ask them (tongue in cheek), “so what is the goal of lean?” Then ask, “what was the goal of TQM?” People will be thinking about it anyway. You might as well get it out on the table. You’ll get answers like “continuous improvement” (but that’s the goal of EVERY industry method), empowerment, putting slides on the wall, getting rid of regs, having off-sites to develop mission statements and vision statements, etc. The key is that it was all over the map! We didn’t really know what the key focus was, but we knew we wanted a bucket-full. Lean has a laser-beam focus…reduce/eliminate waste (NVA)! That’s it. You must acknowledge that lean was a part of the TQM effort, along with a dozen or more other efforts. But this time we are moving carefully, hiring professional facilitators (which we didn’t do in the TQM days to any significant degree), providing a select few people the training AND guidance to facilitate AFSO21 events (they have to go through a week-long course, and participate on 3 events before being allowed to facilitate one solo). So there are several key differences in the way AFSO21 is being rolled out. You can give BRIEF examples here (towing aircraft is necessary waste, etc). Highlight the fact that some waste still exists after Leaning. Some waste is necessary or just can’t be eliminated right now (constraint). Just about impossible to eliminate all waste. For laughs, I usually say, “lets take an example everyone is familiar with…EPRs/OPR, which as everyone knows, only takes 7 days right? Ha ha…we can live in fantasy land for a minute.” I point out that the only value-added work for those is the raters piece, the rater’s rater’s piece, and the reviewer’s piece. All other processing (reviews, in-box time, transit back and forth, etc.) is NVA. The lean method is NOT to focus on the VA pieces…the red…which frequently stay the same in the before and after picture. The key is to focus solely on the NVA. This is really important when improving, say, an aircraft maintenance process. Folks start out worrying that we are trying to make them turn wrenches faster, or do inspections faster when we try to reduce lead time on the process (say taking a 26 day phase down to a 19 day phase). But we then show them it is not about working faster at all! Its about removing NVA obstacles like moving a stand, searching for a stand, or TO, waiting for one job to be done before starting another, not ever knowing where the wash is going to occur, etc. We’ll see in our ABC exercise that lean reduces lead time WITHOUT reducing cycle times. Note: this is not to say that some cycle times don’t also have waste in them. When they do, that gets targeted for reduction as well.
  • Batching is not always bad! The answer to the question of when to apply the concepts is…it depends on your need If batching speeds things up, and doesn’t cause waiting, or excess cost, then don’t switch just because “lean says batching is bad.” But if throughput velocity is important, batching will slow thing down Inventory may not need to be reduced if it isn’t costing you to store it (managing it, floor-space, etc.), shelf-life isn’t an issue, etc.
  • Note: cycle is continuous, inter-related, these are the 6 “S’s” Sort : Eliminate all excess materials in the work area. Straighten : Everything is positioned in a specific, consistent, and organized manner. Shine (“sweep” or “scrub” sometimes used): Everything is clean, allowing undesirable changes to be immediately visible. Standardize : Keeping the area organized, orderly, and clean, making standards visual and obvious. Sustain : Education and communication to ensure that everyone continues to follow the 6S standards. Safety: Reduced safety hazards due to first 5 S’s.
  • Ideally, each standard operation is based on an efficient production layout which accommodates multi-function operators. You can’t improve something until it has some measure of stability and predictability. The main differences between AF standard work (regs, TOs, etc.) and those of a lean organization are that current AF guidance tends to be primarily “Functional / Stove Pipe” focused and top-down directed. Whereas a lean organization uses workers who are involved in cross-functional process to assist in determining the standards (best known way), and that they change frequently! In the AF, it is difficult and cumbersome to get a standard changed, and then it remains the standard until someone decides otherwise. There is no continuous and deliberate (formal) drive for improving standards. At Toyota they say, “if standard work isn’t constantly changing, something is wrong.” This is not to say that adherence to the current standard is not strict…it is VERY strict. This only means to say that processes must be in place to constantly look for a way to improve upon the old standard.
  • Expect some pretty wild looking pigs.
  • Instructor should note that task 10 and 11 are the same. Task 11 should refer to the pigs eyes vice a second mouth. See how many students catch this error. The SOP for step 3 has been revised.
  • Basically just highlight that waste is very simple and specific in Lean , not the “trash” connotation that people normally give it. Go back to the value and non-value added definition. If it doesn’t move the job along toward completion, it stops flow, and is NVA (waste). Remember, waste in lean can still be valuable to someone, but is considered NVA when compared to the specific value definition.
  • Fix defects through mistake-proofing or error-proofing, NOT through inspections or regulations
  • The Air Force is the #1 user of carbon fuels in the entire federal government This shows how its use of fuels is broken down among facilities, ground transportation and aviation Aviation accounts for 81% of the AF total consumption Energy bills are a must-pay meaning as these costs go up we need to take the money from somewhere else
  • To address this strategy the Air Force and the ANG are taking huge strides to meet the challenges. This links energy conservation initiatives or actions for consideration with the AF strategy.
  • - This event is one of 15 initiatives identified by the Strategic Fuels team in Dec 06. This initiative has the potential of yielding $6.8M/year in savings (based on avg of 1000lbs removed on all MAF aircraft); all 15 initiatives have the potential to yield $750M/year in savings. - This KC-135 event was the initial weight reduction (Six-S, RIE) event for Mobility Aircraft. A3/5 CASCO has successfully identified 100s to 1000s of lbs of excess weight on each MWS (C-5, C-17, C-130, KC-10, KC-135), through a three phased approach including standardization policy update. Exceeded original goal of 100lbs per acft, determined need for updated fuel savings formula, business case analyses, and way-ahead. - The teams removed all items within the aircraft fuselage including life support items, seats (except for the cockpit), floor mats, tool boxes, squadron fabricated baggage containers, maintenance T.O.s, tie down chains, baggage bins, unused navigation equipment, etc. All items were inventoried/weighed - Total weight identified/documented was 5369.50 lbs: Msn Critical=181.50 lbs; Msn Critical but less quantity=1547.50 lbs; Msn Critical but modified=1301.00 lbs; Non Msn Critical=2339.50 lbs The individual weight reduction events led to a culminating event – the Weight Reduction Summit The Weight Reduction Summit’s goal was to standardize configurations dependent on mission type and implement a phased approach to remove excess weight across the MAF (AD, AFRC and ANG) without adversely affecting combat capability, training and safety. 10 WR events (HI ANG – KC-135, Fairchild – KC-135, Stewart ANG – C-5, Jackson ANG – C-17, Dover – C-5, McGuire – KC-10, Travis – C-17, KC-10, Little Rock – C-130E and C-130H3), included local experts plus HQ Stan Eval reps analyzing findings & making recommendations The WR summit discussed and validated recommendations on each MWS based on event inventories - Can remove “100s of pounds” of equipment depending on mission type (training, contingency, DV, etc); many cases of 1000lbs or more can be removed thru depot/modification Weight saving recommendations/results will be incorporated in three phases Phase I = 30 days (remove non mission critical weight, policy updates) Phase II = 180 days (less quantity of non essential items - no msn/safety degradation) Phase III = 180+ days (depot level changes, future modifications, IT solutions)
  • All items were inventoried and weighed - Total weight documented was just over 5000 lbs ( 5369.50 lbs) of which a meaningful portion was deemed non-mission critical (2339 lbs) and may be removed from the aircraft. Msn Critical=181.50 lbs; Msn Critical but less=1547.50 lbs; Msn Critical but modified=1301.00 lbs; Non Msn Critical=2339.50 lbs
  • MN – Still calculating the numbers
  • IT solutions around the corner?
  • ×