Comments for The Lean Thinker

Comment on Rapid PDCA by Rodney

Rodney — Thu, 23 May 2013 03:10:41 +0000

The learning for me is that it is better to quickly try things, see results, adjust as necessary than to spend time designing and hoping. It also gets the users involved.

Comment on Rapid PDCA by Mark Rosenthal

Mark Rosenthal — Tue, 21 May 2013 16:41:17 +0000

Tushar-
This is just an example of rapid, iterative problem solving that evolves toward a workable solution.

Comment on Rapid PDCA by TUSHAR LALADIA

TUSHAR LALADIA — Tue, 21 May 2013 13:12:45 +0000

Hello,

What was the message here with this case study ?
Was it that you dont need to go with jig-fixture design and invest large amount of time in 3D-2D work ?

Comment on What Must Be Done To Make It Happen? by Mark Rosenthal

Mark Rosenthal — Mon, 20 May 2013 20:19:42 +0000

Econobiker-

Your response captures the very essence of what continuous improvement is about.

You talk about trying to do the repair faster – improving the 70 minutes the mechanic was able to spend actually working on the plane.

Rather, though, what are the activities that he has to do that stop him from doing that work?

What interrupts him?
Does he have all of the things – information, tools, supplies, parts and support he needs, where he needs, when he needs?

I’ve worked in and out of aerospace, including mods and repairs, for 20 years, so I certainly know the momentum this process is up against… but just “What if..”.. say the process overhead could be cut by 20 or more % without impacting regulatory compliance, safety or quality?

How much does the overhead distract from paying attention to the critical parts of the job?

Comment on What Must Be Done To Make It Happen? by econobiker

econobiker — Mon, 20 May 2013 14:36:52 +0000

The description seems to be very slow but the repair involves an airframe related repair and related FAA level inspection which add to the time required. And all airplane parts have to be tracked by serial number and lot code from cradle until grave. You cannot speed up the repair here by not fully reattaching a panel or bracket, or just tightening a bolt up “until tight” (versus correct torque settings) like automobile repair mechanics often can.

Comment on First: Define Value by Mark Rosenthal

Mark Rosenthal — Fri, 17 May 2013 15:32:49 +0000

Taking a more sophisticated view, though, there are many things the customer expects that they are not willing to pay for.

As products and services move upmarket in a non-trivial marketplace, features and services increase faster than prices.

What was a premium feature today must be offered “free” tomorrow, because your competitor has figured out how to do it with a stronger cost structure.

The other view is, rather than being product centric, to focus on what the customer is trying to get done.
What is the job he is trying to do?

“The customer doesn’t need a drill, he needs a hole.”

So – I’d be careful with the standard mantras found in common lean training, as they tend to narrowly focus on production and delivery of an existing product or service, without questioning much about the actual experience of the customer.

Comment on First: Define Value by Rob Kucik

Rob Kucik — Fri, 17 May 2013 14:43:58 +0000

1. Changes the form, fit or function of the product or service
2. Customer willing to pay for it
3. Done right the first time

Fulfill all 3 and you have a value added activity.

Miss on just one, and you should look to the 7 types of waste from there.

Comment on Rapid PDCA by Management Improvement Blog Carnival #193 » Curious Cat Management Improvement Blog

Wed, 15 May 2013 15:09:47 +0000

[...] Rapid PDCA by Mark Rosenthal – “All of this happened over less than a couple of hours, and it was in production that afternoon with immediate results. A far cry from the traditional tooling and jig design process.” [...]

Comment on The Simplest “Lean Audit” by Daniel

Daniel — Tue, 14 May 2013 15:12:25 +0000

This is the stage where we are at. My fear is that, the audit and the system to check those audits become the answer. I don’t want that to be the end state, I want to be able to step out on the floor and without any audit sheet know if my team is ahead or behind, and the reasons why.

Comment on Takt Time – Cycle Time by Mark Rosenthal

Mark Rosenthal — Sat, 11 May 2013 18:21:28 +0000

prjc -
Your question reflects what I am trying to address in the original post.

I THINK you are saying that your total operation requires 90 seconds of turning time.
This is the TOTAL cycle time required to complete a part.

But you have to COMPLETE one part every 30 seconds.
This is commonly called takt time, but can also be called planned cycle time, or even “cycle time” by itself. Many books from the mid-1980′s use the term “cycle time” to refer to what we, today, call “takt time.”

It might be technically possible to complete a part with two turning operations.

But if you did it with only two, one of them (or both of them) is going to take longer than 30 seconds, so the system cannot complete a part every 30 seconds as required.

The engineers in your company recognize that, in order to complete a part every 30 seconds, no single operation can be allowed to take longer than that, so they broke the operation up into 3 parts rather than just 2.