The document outlines a quality improvement project at Independence Corrugated to reduce damaged products being shipped to customers. It describes the current process which is resulting in high costs from customer credits and returns. A plan is proposed to standardize loading procedures, provide training, implement visual controls, and analyze failure data to reduce damage by 50% through prevention and process improvements.
The Problem Statement for Team Independence has remained the same since its conception.
Ultimately, we want to reduce customer credit requests and the costs associated with this issue.
The current “as-is” work flow was laid out in the define phase so we could establish every step of the process as is currently exists.
This detailed view helped the team understand the process in depth as well as helping to start visualizing where data could potentially exist for the measure phase.
Now that we have our recommendations, we have developed a future, more ideal process.
Interestingly, most of the process has not changed; our recommendations focus more on personal buy-in, training, and competency of the fork lift drivers.
Personnel; the most probable root is this category is drivers crushing units by pushing too hard into a unit while moving it into tight trailer spacing.
Process; the most probable root here is setting a unit down inside the trailer.
Equipment; the most probable root here is stabbing a unit with the end of the forks.
Metric; the most probable root here is that no metric is posted/advertised throughout the department/organization.
Management; the most probable root here is that no SOP or remedial training has been documented to date.
Environment; the most probable root here is the false belief that haste does not make waste; process first and speed later.
Here we can clearly see 80% of the customer credit requests pertained to damage that occurred on 3rd and 2nd shifts.
The team will use this data to not only focus on those two shifts for process improvement but also look at 1st shift for any best practices.
Million Square Feet (MSF) is used to determine direct materials and direct labor. There is a ratio of 94% to 6%, respectively.
The average number of returns (QVRs) per month is 4.4
Average monthly materials = $776.27; (.94 * $825.82)
Average monthly labor = $49.55; (.06 * $825.82)
Total annual failure costs = $52568.04; (52 occurrences * $1011)
The two steps we did add were the damage detection audits, once the product is loaded into the trailer and if damaged, the product must be removed.
This ensures less damage is shipped to the customer.
Our recommendations such as annual training and competency checks, regular communication of metric performance.
Frequency of damage to the drivers is new and will help the drivers make the connection between their position and company outcomes.
Our team approach is logical and continues with what has been done and leads into a chronological flow:
The implementation strategy starts with the continuation of specific tasks that have deemed useful in the measure phase such as internal damage audits. This leads into the identification of best practices internally and externally so this information can be included in the written Standard Operating Procedures (SOP), training, and competency skills check. Afterwards, the SOP and training will be developed followed by actually doing the training and checking driver competency skills.
The top exhibit represents costs without Failure Reduction Analysis.
Whereas, those costs outlines below will be considered as we move forward.
The top exhibit represents costs without Failure Reduction Analysis.
Whereas, those costs outlines below will be considered as we move forward.
The top exhibit represents costs without Failure Reduction Analysis.
Whereas, those costs outlines below will be considered as we move forward.
A control plan is a process management document that summarizes the measurement details (what? Where? How? Etc.) for each process step.
CPs provide increased detail on the measurement controls that will remain in place as ‘business as usual’ after a Lean Six Sigma project is closed.
For each process step, a CP defines the characteristics that are measured, their specification, applicable historical capability, measurement method used and a response plan if out of specification.
