Lean Kitting - etd.adm.unipi.it

DIPARTIMENTO DI INGEGNERIA DELL’ENERGIA DEI SISTEMI, DEL TERRITORIO E DELLE COSTRUZIONI

RELAZIONE PER IL CONSEGUIMENTO DELLA

LAUREA MAGISTRALE IN INGEGNERIA GESTIONALE

Lean Kitting A study about waste elimination and improvement

opportunities in low-volume/high-variety kitting processes

RELATORI IL CANDIDATO Prof. Ing. Gino Dini Marta Lupi

Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile e Industriale [email protected]

Dott. Peter Ball

Academic Supervisor, Cranfield University

Dott. Andrew Carroll

Head of the AIT department, Airbus Defence and Space

Sessione di Laurea del 24/09/2014

Anno Accademico 2013/2014 Consultazione NON consentita

Lean Kitting Marta Lupi

ii

Marta Lupi

Sommario

Abstract

The kitting process is a practice used by all kinds of companies to drive the assembly operations. Wastes

and inefficiencies can slow down the pace of this process, causing quality and productivity issues, and the

understanding of this problem is the starting point for the application of the lean concepts and creation of a

leaner kitting process. However, while the literature has always focused on studying the best practices for

the improvement of high-volume/low-variety environments, little attention have been paid to how the lean

features may fit in different types of environments. This represents the challenge faced by the research

and the gap where the creation of a methodology to evaluate and address the most common kitting issues

fits as the main objective. In order to gain a deep understanding of the lean kitting process, an industrial

case study was used to support the development and test the research. The methodology created

incorporates the research of the best practice and a bottom-up problem analysis. Furthermore, the

definition of the kitting requirements and possible industrial constraints has been essential steps for the

creation of an ideal and a realistic solution proposal. This research project derives from the Individual

Project that was developed at Cranfield University in the period May/September 2014.

Il processo di kitting rappresenta una pratica utilizzata da ogni tipo di azienda per guidare le operazioni di

assemblaggio. Potenziali sprechi e inefficienze che possono rallentare il ritmo di questo processo multi-

livello, causando problemi di produttività e qualità, sono il punto di partenza per l'applicazione dei concetti

di lean manufacturing e riflessione sul concetto di lean kitting. Tuttavia, mentre la letteratura si è sempre

concentrata sul miglioramento della produzione di massa, poca attenzione è stata prestata ad ambienti

lavorativi diversi. Questa rappresenta la sfida affrontata dal progetto di tesi e il gap dove si inserisce l’

obiettivo di creare di una metodologia per affrontare e risolvere i problemi più comuni del processo di

kitting. La necessità di risultati di valore ha innescato l'utilizzo di un caso di studio industriale, che ha

contribuito a costruire il quadro generale del processo di kitting e ottenere una più profonda comprensione

del tema lean kitting. La metodologia creata spazia dalla ricerca delle best practices alla proposta di

soluzioni ideali e realistiche, includendo un’analisi dei problemi con approccio bottom-up, la comprensione

dei requisiti ed eventuali vincoli industriali del processo stesso. Questo lavoro di ricerca deriva

dell’Individual Project svolto presso Cranfield University nel periodo Maggio/Settembre 2014.


iii

Acknowledgments

This thesis would not have been possible without the guidance and helpful

contribution of several individuals.

First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere thanks to prof. Gino Dini,

Professor of my Master Degree in Industrial Engineering at the Universita’ degli Studi

di Pisa. He allowed me to join the Double degree program, which has been agreed

between Cranfield University and Pisa.

Furthermore, I am also extremely grateful to my academic supervisor, Dr. Peter Ball,

for his availability, effective guidance and valuable feedback. He helped me to do my

very best and surpass the expectations set and he has been a source of constant

encouragement throughout the entire project.

In addition, I take this opportunity to thank my industrial supervisor, Mr. Andrew

Carroll, who courageously accepted the project challenges and has always been

supportive and present throughout my period of stay in the Airbus D&S site. Also, I

would like to thank all the managers, the production controllers, the operators and all

the other people that made this project possible and accepted me as part of the

Airbus family.

A special thank to Dr. Patrick Mclaughlin, who generously shared his knowledge,

technical expertise and industrial experience with me and all the Academic Staff for

being helpful and supportive throughout the entire year.

Most importantly, I would especially like to direct my deepest gratitude and thank my

family, my boyfriend and all my friends for their continuous and unconditional support

and encouragements. Even though many of them have been far away from me, I

never felt lonely. Thanks.


iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SOMMARIO .................................................................................................................................... II

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... II

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................ III

LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... VII

LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................................X

LIST OF EQUATIONS ...................................................................................................................XI

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................... XII

1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 RESEARCH PROBLEM ............................................................................................................ 2

1.3 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................................... 4

2 STATE OF THE ART ................................................................................................................ 5

2.1 THE CONCEPT OF LEAN ........................................................................................................ 5

2.1.1 Lean Framework .......................................................................................................... 5

2.1.2 Relevant Tools ........................................................................................................... 10

2.2 KITTING PROCESS .............................................................................................................. 12

2.3 LEAN KITTING ..................................................................................................................... 18

2.4 KEY FINDINGS .................................................................................................................... 22

2.5 RESEARCH GAP ................................................................................................................. 23

3 BEST PRACTICES FROM INDUSTRY .................................................................................. 24

4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................... 29

4.1 METHOD ............................................................................................................................ 29

4.2 INDUSTRIAL CASE STUDY .................................................................................................... 35

5 PROBLEM ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................... 40

5.1 RELEVANT AREAS OF THE KITTING PROCESS ....................................................................... 41

5.2 ANALYSIS AT THE SHOP FLOOR LEVEL ........................................................................... 42

5.2.1 Results of Interviews .................................................................................................. 43

5.2.2 Results of Observations ............................................................................................. 45

5.2.2.1 Example of Practical Case Studies ...................................................................................................... 45


v

5.2.2.2 Wastes Identification ............................................................................................................................ 47

5.2.3 Pareto Analysis .......................................................................................................... 49

5.2.4 Further Analysis ......................................................................................................... 51

5.2.4.1 Incomplete Kit ...................................................................................................................................... 52

5.2.4.2 SOP Issues .......................................................................................................................................... 53

5.3 ANALYSIS AT THE AREA MANAGER LEVEL ...................................................................... 54

5.4 ANALISYS AT THE STORE LEVEL ...................................................................................... 55

5.5 ANALYSIS AT THE PRODUCTION CONTROLLER LEVEL.................................................. 56

5.6 ANALYSIS AT THE MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING LEVEL .......................................... 61

5.7 ANALYSIS AT THE SCHEDULING LEVEL ........................................................................... 63

5.8 ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................ 64

5.9 DATA COLLECTION CONSTRAINTS ....................................................................................... 66

5.10 GENERAL METHOD ........................................................................................................... 67

6 PROPOSED SOLUTIONS ...................................................................................................... 68

6.1 KITTING REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................................................... 68

6.2 CONSTRAINTS .................................................................................................................... 70

6.3 REFLECTIONS .................................................................................................................... 71

6.4 IDEAL SOLUTION ................................................................................................................. 73

6.4.1 Ideal Changes ............................................................................................................ 73

6.4.2 Summary of the Ideal Changes .................................................................................. 77

6.5 REALISTIC SOLUTION .......................................................................................................... 78

6.5.1 Short Term (ST) Implementation Plan ........................................................................ 78

6.5.1.1 Suggested Improvements .................................................................................................................... 79

6.5.1.1.1 Shop Floor .................................................................................................................................... 79

6.5.1.1.2 Store ............................................................................................................................................. 91

6.5.1.1.3 Production Controller .................................................................................................................... 93

6.5.1.2 Impact of Changes ............................................................................................................................... 95

6.5.2 Medium Term (MT) Implementation Plan.................................................................... 97

6.5.2.1 Suggested Improvements .................................................................................................................... 97

6.5.2.1.1 Shop floor ..................................................................................................................................... 97

6.5.2.1.2 Store and Production Controller ................................................................................................. 100

6.5.2.1.3 Area Manager ............................................................................................................................. 101

6.5.2.1.4 Manufacturing Engineer.............................................................................................................. 102

6.5.2.1.5 Scheduling .................................................................................................................................. 102

6.5.2.1.6 Management ............................................................................................................................... 103

6.5.2.2 Impact of Changes ............................................................................................................................. 104

6.6 GENERAL METHOD ........................................................................................................... 105

7 DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................................ 106

8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... 110


vi

8.1 FINAL METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 110

8.2 PROJECT VALUE .............................................................................................................. 112

8.3 SUGGESTION FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS .............................................................................. 113

8.3.1 Academic Research ................................................................................................. 113

8.3.2 Industrial Case Study ............................................................................................... 114

9 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 116

10 APPENDIX I – STATE OF THE ART .................................................................................... 121

11 APPENDIX II - PROBLEM ANALYSIS ................................................................................. 123

12 APPENDIX III - PROPOSED SOLUTIONS ........................................................................... 126


vii

List of Figures

Figure 1 - Kitting Process Overview ............................................................................ 2

Figure 2 - Product/Process Matrix(Quizlet LLC) .......................................................... 3

Figure 3 - Mura/Muri/Muda wastes(Leanisrael,2012) .................................................. 7

Figure 4 - 7 Ohno's wastes(Prateek,2011) .................................................................. 7

Figure 5 - 5 Lean Principles(Cardiff University) ........................................................... 8

Figure 6 - The House of Lean ...................................................................................... 9

Figure 7 - 5S(Dorsett,2012) ....................................................................................... 11

Figure 8 - Example of a kit(MID,2014) ....................................................................... 12

Figure 9 - Central Store Kitting Method ..................................................................... 14

Figure 10 - Logic of the Kitting Process ..................................................................... 14

Figure 11- Traditional Approach before SPS(Lean Enterprise Institute,1997) ........... 20

Figure 12 - SPS Approach(Lean Enterprise Institute,1997)....................................... 21

Figure 13 - Comparison traditional/SPS(Lean Enterprise Institute,1997) .................. 21

Figure 14 - Lean Key Concepts(LeanCor,2014) ........................................................ 22

Figure 15 - Bomford Logo.......................................................................................... 25

Figure 16 - Cerulean Logo......................................................................................... 25

Figure 17 - Change in the Layout .............................................................................. 25

Figure 18 - Initial Supply Chain Configuration ........................................................... 26

Figure 19 - Modified Supply Chain Configuration ...................................................... 27

Figure 20 - Change Management Cycle(NHS,2000) ................................................. 28


viii

Figure 21 - Areas Involved in the Kit Preparation(Airbus,2014)................................. 34

Figure 22 - Air View of the Site in Stevenage ............................................................ 35

Figure 23 - Airbus Defence and Space Logo ............................................................ 35

Figure 24 - Telecommunication Satellite(Airbus D&S, 2014) ..................................... 35

Figure 25 - Decomposition of a Satellite .................................................................... 36

Figure 26 - Research Methodology ........................................................................... 39

Figure 27 - Relevant Areas of the Kitting Process ..................................................... 41

Figure 28 - Steps of the Kit Use ................................................................................ 42

Figure 29 - Issues Identified with Interviews .............................................................. 43

Figure 30 - Issues Identified with Observations ......................................................... 49

Figure 31 - Pareto Analysis ....................................................................................... 49

Figure 32 - Fishbone Diagram-Incomplete Kit ........................................................... 52

Figure 33 - Fishbone Diagram-SOP Issues ............................................................... 53

Figure 34 - Steps of the PC Job ................................................................................ 59

Figure 35 - P6 Software(Oracle,2014) ....................................................................... 63

Figure 36 - Common Issues ...................................................................................... 65

Figure 37 - Logic Behind the Creation of the Proposed Solutions ............................. 68

Figure 38 - Kitting Process Requirements ................................................................. 69

Figure 39 - Airbus D&S Key Constraints ................................................................... 72

Figure 40 - Over-the-wall Approach(Entrepreneurness,2010) ................................... 72

Figure 41 - Simple Example of Visual Management .................................................. 79

Figure 42 - Window for the Mix Request-Shop Floor ................................................. 85


ix

Figure 43 - Window for the Mix Request-Lab ............................................................ 86

Figure 44 - Re-Organisation of the Boxes ................................................................. 87

Figure 45 - 5S Posters .............................................................................................. 89

Figure 46 - SOP Label ............................................................................................... 90

Figure 47 - Additional Bags ....................................................................................... 91

Figure 48 - Segmented Boxes ................................................................................... 92

Figure 49 - Digital Process Flow ................................................................................ 98

Figure 50 - Overall Final Methodology .................................................................... 111

Figure 51 - Potential Connection P6/SAP ............................................................... 115


x

List of Tables

Table 1- Kit Preparation Methods(Adapter from Vujosevic,2008) .............................. 13

Table 2 - Most common kitting wastes(Adapted from Hanson,2012) ........................ 17

Table 3 - Kit Creation Guidelines ............................................................................... 19

Table 4 - SPS Benefits and Drawbacks .................................................................... 20

Table 5 - Methodology ............................................................................................... 30

Table 6 - Satellite Components Legend .................................................................... 36

Table 7 - Size of the Analysis .................................................................................... 42

Table 8 - Example of Case Studies ........................................................................... 46

Table 9 - Excel Spreadsheet ..................................................................................... 51

Table 10 - PC Walking Time Estimation .................................................................... 60

Table 11 - WI Creation .............................................................................................. 61

Table 12 - Ideal Changes .......................................................................................... 77

Table 13 - Original Excel Spreadsheet ...................................................................... 80

Table 14 - Modified Excel Spreadsheet ..................................................................... 80

Table 15 - IT Requirements-Visual Management ...................................................... 81

Table 16 - Visual Management: Cost/Benefit ........................................................... 83

Table 17 - IT Requirements-Mix ................................................................................ 85

Table 18 - Mix: Cost/Benefit ...................................................................................... 86

Table 19 - Visual Order: Cost/Benefit ........................................................................ 19

Table 20 - Paperwork: Cost/Benefit ........................................................................... 91


xi

Table 21 - ST Store Changes: Cost/Benefit .............................................................. 93

Table 22 - ST PC Relocation: Cost/Benefit ............................................................... 94

Table 23 - ST Suggested Changes ......................................................................... 196

Table 24 - MT Digital System:Cost/Benefit .............................................................. 199

Table 25 - MT Area Manager Relocation: Cost/Benefit ........................................... 101

Table 26 - MT Suggested Changes ......................................................................... 104

Table 27 - Key Findings-Academic Research ......................................................... 109

Table 28 - Key Findings-Case Study ....................................................................... 109

List of Equations

Equation 1 - Calculation of the Issues’s Frequency ................................................... 50

Equation 2 - Savings Formula ................................................................................... 94


xii

List of Abbreviations

AIT- Assembly Integration and Test

AM- Area Manager

BOM- Bill of Materials

CPS- Combined Propulsion System

ERP- Enterprise Resource Planning

IT- Information Technology

JIT- Just In Time

ME- Manufacturing Engineer

MT- Medium Term

NCR- Non Conformance Report

PC- Production Controller

PR- Purchase Requisition

RC- Routing Card

SAP- Software used by the company

SOP- Shop Order Pack (WI+ RC)

ST- Short Term

TPS- Toyota Production System

WC- Work Centre

WI- Work Instruction

WIP- Work in Progress

WO- Work Order


xiii

This page was left intentionally blank


1

1 Introduction

This section aims to provide an extended explanation of the research background

together with a clarification of the research problem that will be addressed.

1.1 Background

This research is based on the idea of merging and analysing two key concepts: lean

manufacturing and the kitting process. As the manufacturing world is generally

struggling because of a period of crisis (Alcorta, 2011) that has been lasting for many

years, many manufacturing organizations have realised over time the importance of

practicing lean techniques.

According to the Lean Enterprise Institute (1997) “Lean is a set of concepts,

principles and tools used to create and deliver the most value from the customers’

perspective while consuming the fewest resources and fully utilising the skills and

knowledge of those who do the work”. Lean is the concept that derives from Toyota

Production System (TPS) and it is applied to many industrial environments through

the use of techniques and tools, which have different features, but all the same

objective of improvement: waste elimination and process flow (Tapping, 2002).

Kitting is the name for the practice of feeding components and subassemblies to the

assembly area in predetermined quantities that are placed together in specific

containers (Corakci, 2008), to simplify the material handling and reduce the time

spent on fetching parts. A kit can be used in a variety of industrial environments and

can fit with both automatic assembly lines (i.e. automotive industry) and manual

assembly operations (i.e. Airbus D&S)(Hanson and Mebdo, 2010). What may change

is the size of the kit and the components/parts/tools that it contains. From a logical

point of view, the generic kitting process comes before the assembly process, while

other processes precede and enable the preparation of the kit, as shown in the

simple example of Figure 1.


2

Figure 1- Kitting Process Overview

Even though each organisation may adapt the features of the kitting process to its

working environment, there are some guidelines to follow regarding the design of a

kitting process that would allow efficiency, quality and flexibility (Fong-Yuen, 1990).

When kitting is not the common practice for the operations, the so-called method of

continuous supply, where each component is presented separately in a container on

the shop floor, can be used. The principle of kitting is often discussed, as it has been

stated to offer a number of advantages over the more traditional principle of

continuous supply. However, even though kitting has been used in industry for years,

relatively little research has examined its impact more specifically.

1.2 Research problem

Companies tend to consider the kitting process an essential step in the whole

workflow, as kits are usually used transversally by the shop floor (Bozer and Mc

Ginnis, 1992). So, being inefficient in the kitting process means creating a knock-on

effect to the assembly operations and this is what generally wants to be avoided and

prevented. Usually, there are many departments, organisational levels and people

involved in this process: managerial, operational and support roles. However, the

importance of the operator on the shop floor that manually assembles the product

and works directly with the kit should be always highlighted. Since it is the shop floor

work that creates the value (Bicheno, 2009), the priority is to help and facilitate the

operator, understanding which is the best way to deliver the kit.

Design Purchasing Kitting Assembly


3

As the starting point for the improvement of the current state is always the

understanding of the real situation, the research required the complete study of the

kitting process, including all the relevant areas. According to Hanson and Mebdo

(2010), kitting can be used in any type of company, but the literature extensively

documents only how to include the lean methodology into a high-volume/low-variety

environment.

However, there are many other companies operating in a low-volume/high-variety

environment (PROJECT section in Figure 2), receiving almost unique orders from the

customer and then organising the processes to satisfy the customer’s requirements.

For these reasons, the challenge faced by this research is related to the application

of those lean concepts that have originally been analysed and introduced in

assembly lines as well as continuous process in an opposite type of environment.

In order to develop a methodology that would make the kitting process leaner, all the

relevant areas were considered in terms of waste and issues, to identify possible

improvements that would fit with the operative conditions of a low-volume/high-

variety environment.

Figure 2-Product/Process Matrix (Quizlet LLC)


4

The best way to evaluate and assess both the issues and the possible improvements

is to work closely with an industrial company that becomes an essential source for

the data collection and the validation of the proposed ideas. Consequently, an

industrial case study was included in the research to test the methodology for the

kitting improvement.

1.3 Aims and Objectives

The aim of the research is to apply the lean thinking to the kitting processes to

improve the flow throughout the process, considering a low-volume/high-variety

environment of companies.

A set of objectives was defined to support the achievement of this aim:

Identify the existing Best Practices for the kitting process in literature, which

would contribute to the understanding of the ideal framework for the kit

preparation and the lean kitting concept;

Find and assess evidence of potential inefficiencies and wastes affecting the

process, considering the relevant areas involved. The focus is on the

development of the key steps to follow in a generic kitting process analysis;

Develop and validate a generic methodology for the solution of the common

issues of the kitting process, which can be applied to different companies

operating in a similar environment, taking into consideration a realistic industrial

environment.


5

2 State of the Art

This section aims to investigate and explain the main concepts that create the basis

for the research. According to the aim and the objectives, the literature research was

focused on three main areas:

The concept of lean;

The kitting process;

The concept of Lean Kitting.

After reviewing the literature, it was possible to identify some key findings and most

important the research gaps that are currently affecting these topics. Then, a

glossary of terms regarding the lean manufacturing has been introduced in Appendix

I, to facilitate the understanding about Lean.

2.1 The Concept of Lean

2.1.1 Lean Framework

Lean means reducing wastes, optimising cost and quality. Regarding the

terminology, the word lean was first used in the 1990s in the book “The machine that

changed the world” by Womack and Jones (1996) and the concept derived from the

Toyota Production System (TPS), developed by Toyota (Tinoco, 2004). The term

lean manufacturing is synonymous with different names, such as agile, just-in-time

(JIT), synchronous and world-class manufacturing.

In other words, lean manufacturing is a management philosophy that is based on an

integrated set of principles, practices, tools and techniques designed to address the

root causes of operational underperformance. However, it is essential to highlight the

fact that lean is definitely more than just tools.

Indeed, the two main pillars of lean are (Larman and Vodde, 2009):

Continuous Improvement: change everything and always embrace the

change;

Respect for people: invest in all the people involved (employees, supply

partners, customer etc).


6

This philosophy is based on the active engagement and commitment of the

management, which is required to involve the whole enterprise in the everyday

learning and improvement.

It involves a systematic approach to eliminating the sources of loss, optimising cost,

quality and efficiency, while improving safety. In order to meet these objectives, it

aims to increase the value-added activities by eliminating wastes and reducing

unnecessary work (Drew et al., 2004). The waste elimination is related to the need of

a process to flow without interruptions that can prevent the smooth sequence of

activities. So, flow is the key word for the lean production.

To deeply understand what lean production means, it is important to highlight the key

concepts and features of this philosophy.

Lean is based on the definition of value added and non-value added activities and

this distinction can be explained with regard to the manufacturing processes. Indeed,

the process of transforming raw materials into finished goods is the objective of any

manufacturing company (Dudley, 2005). The processes that make that

transformation possible are the result of two different activities: those that add value

and those that do not.

Value-added activities are considered the actions and the process elements that

accomplish those transformations and add value to the product from the perspective

of the customer.

Non-value-added activities are those process tasks that do not add value to the

product from the perspective of the customer and have to be eliminated or optimised.

There are three types of wastes: MURI, MURA, MUDA derived from the Japanese

language (Bicheno, 2009):

Muri represents all the unreasonable work that management imposes on

workers and machines because of poor organisation;

Mura is related to the unevenness or irregularities in the production;

Muda means waste and it refers to a wide range of non-value-adding

activities.


7

A graphical explanation can be found in Figure 3.

Taiichi Ohno (1988) defined 7 types of Muda and these are illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 4 - 7 Ohno’s wastes (Prateek, 2011)

Figure 3 - Muri/ Mura/Muda Wastes (Leanisrael, 2012)


8

There are 5 principles that are central to the lean thinking, illustrated in Figure 5

(Womack and Jones, 1996):

Customer value: specify value from the customer point of view is the first

principle, because it is important to produce what the customer wants;

Value stream: identification of the value stream is the process of

understanding all the activities that are performed across the areas, to be able to

propose improvements;

Flow: create the flow means that the product or service flows through all the

value adding steps in the most effective and efficient way possible;

Pull: understand what the customer wants and organise the processes and

the whole enterprise to meet that demand with a short-term response;

Perfection: pursuing perfection does not mean defect free, but being able to

deliver exactly what the customer wants, when it is required, at a fair price and

with minimum waste.

Figure 5 - 5 Lean Principles (Cardiff University)


9

This philosophy with the principles and techniques embedded are conceptualized in

the “House of Lean” model derived from the TPS (Tinoco, 2004). The house is shown

in Figure 6.

As the “House of Lean” model suggests, lean is a conceptual and physical system,

therefore it is not a toolbox. Lean practitioners who consider lean as a toolbox and

become familiar with only one or few tools and try to implement them in their

organization do not capture the real essence of lean (Liker, 2004).

It is based upon a foundation of standard and stable processes and works together

with the other pillar Jidoka or Built in Quality (additional details and definitions can be

found in Appendix I). Typically, organisations want the benefits of JIT, but often

reduce inventory to a level lower than their processes are capable of supporting. This

can result in missed schedules, customer service problems and higher costs. For this

reason it is called “Just about in Time” or “Almost in Time” and has a bad, almost

negative, connotation to it. In fact JIT can be very powerful in driving quick response

to problems by making problems visible and urgent. However, it is needed to have

some pre-requisites in place first including stable and standard processes and a

Figure 6 - The House of Lean


10

human response system capable of responding to problems as they arise and putting

counter measures in place before running out of materials (Norval, 2011).

It is important to keep in mind that it takes time to become a lean organisation and

the change process can be compared to a journey, as the book “Journey to lean” by

Drew et al. (2004) suggests. It states that only with the commitment of all the teams

and the willingness to change the final objective is achievable.

2.1.2 Relevant Tools

It has previously been stated that lean manufacturing is not only about tools, but

there are plenty of them that are currently used to apply the lean philosophy. The

main tools associated to lean manufacturing that are considered relevant to the

research are in the visual management category: kanban and 5S. Only these tools

are presented because in literature they have been used to solve many of the issues

that are expected to be experienced in the kitting process, as it will be fully explained

in the section 2.2.

Visual Management: it is a clear and simple way to organise and present

information. It affects the so-called visibility and is a key theme of the lean

manufacturing (Williamson, 2009). Not having immediate, apparent and up-to-date

schedules or problem solving process is a symptom that the operations are far off

lean (Bicheno et al., 2009). Visual management is a generic expression and concept

that is spread across the whole shop floor and can be applied in many ways. It may

affect machines, people and the physical work area as well. A few examples are:

transparent covers for the machines, light to indicate a status, a skill matrix that

indicates the experience of the operators etc. The impact that visuals can have on

productivity, cost, quality, on-time delivery, inventory and equipment reliability is truly

enormous.

Kanban: it is a system that helps programming, controlling and regulating the work in

an extremely simplified way and apply JIT to the working environment. Kanban is the

name for a card (physical or electronic) that accompanies the single container of

materials or parts. The information contained in a kanban refers to what to produce


11

or handle and generally indicates: name of the part, the design number, the amount

and the name of the final product (Santillo, 2008).

The first rule of the kanban is that nothing can be produced without an available card

authorization; departments upstream should, therefore, produce only the parts that

have been consumed by the downstream stages with the eventuality of stopping the

operations when there are no kanban to authorise production. Another rule than

needs to be strictly respected is that the downstream departments can request

upstream only those components/parts that are needed in the necessary quantity

and when needed (at the moment of consumption).

5S: the method of 5S is an attempt to always get the order and cleanliness in the

workplace of each operator, as prerequisites for quality, reliability and efficient

production. Each S (described in Figure 7) represents a Japanese word that have

been translated according to the meaning:

Using this method can be very beneficial for the workplace as there are numerous

advantages for the elimination of superfluous material: operational staff, for example,

will be able to move more freely on the shop floor without walking between obstacles.

Then, they will not have to spend time searching to find some tools to use or wasting

time in releasing the benches occupied by unnecessary materials. Moreover, the

working environment will result in a safer place to work. Also, keep unnecessary

items involves a "maintenance costs" and, in the case of stocks of products, even of

Figure 7 - 5S (Dorsett, 2012)


12

"borrowing costs". Remove all unnecessary items from the work area means

therefore saving money (Santillo, 2008).

2.2 Kitting process

The assembly process plays an important role in the production environment. Indeed,

there are a lot of strategies for modelling the assembly systems (Yu et al., 2003) and

for the design of assembly systems for which expert systems have been developed

(Sanders et al., 2009). Nevertheless, another important subject related to the

assembly process is the assembly operation feeding systems. The two main

common methods (Hua and Johnson, 2010) are: kitting and continuous supply.

Bozer and McGinnis (1992) define a kit as “a specific collection of components

and/or subassemblies that together (i.e. in the same container) support one or more

assembly operations for a given product or shop order.” Simple examples of a kit is

shown in Figure 8.

The kit may contain not only physical components, but also documentation that the

shop floor needs, for instance work instructions, the routing card describing the

operations required by the specific component etc. Generally, plastic boxes are used

to present the kit and this may be segmented or not, depending on the purpose and

the materials involved. The quantity and the need for the paperwork vary a lot

according to the requirements of the end product and components, as well as the

features of the organisation (Ramachandran and Delen, 2005).

Figure 8 - Example of a Kit (MID, 2014)


13

The kitting process, that is the name for the process that creates the kit, is usually

compared to the continuous supply method, where each part number is generally

presented in a separate container directly on the shop floor.

According to literature (Vujosevic, 2008), there are several methods associated to the

preparation of the kit (Table 1) and each of them affects the physical layout of the

company.

Method Description

Central Stock Room

The information for the preparation of the

kit and the whole process is derived from

an Information Technology system (i.e.

ERP).

The storage location may be located

directly on the shop floor close to the

assembly area. The kit may be prepared

in the stock room or in a separate area.

Shop Floor Supermarket

Fed by:

Supplier directly (no central stock

room, so it requires integration with

the supplier)

Central stock room (kanban are

used to replenish the

supermarket).

The operator in the assembly area

creates the kit and is responsible for the

material management.

Outsourcing

The kitting process is externalised. The

supplier delivers the complete kit on the

shop floor.

The lead-time may increase and it

requires supply chain management skills.

Table 1- Kit Preparation Methods (Adapted from Vujosevic, 2008)


14

Each method explained previously has pros and cons and what the literature does

not state is which is the best one, the so-called best practice. However, the preferred

method and by far the most used is the one that involves the presence of a central

store (Baudin, 2004), even though it may be not the best method.

Figure 9 illustrates a simple example of the first kitting method, where the kit is

prepared according to the parts stored in the central warehouse and it is then

delivered to the assembly area. The picture shows the assembly line, but this method

can also be used with manual assembly operations (Dudley, 2005).

The kit preparation is an intermediate step in the whole process that leads to the

creation of the final product (Bozer and McGinnis, 1992). As it is shown in Figure 10,

the kit is prepared with components that may be raw materials (nuts, bolts etc.) or

subassemblies, which has been previously assembled. Regardless of what is in the

kit, each assembly operation requires one of them to deliver the final product to the

customer.

Figure 9 - Central Store Kitting Method

Figure 10 - Logic of the Kitting Process


15

Especially in assembly lines there may be different starting points for the part

production that would be then included in the kit (Hanson et al., 2012):

Pulled by part: the kit is empty and the parts to refill the kit are taken from an

intermediate storage. Whenever a part container is empty, that triggers the

production for the specific component. This is usually the most commonly used

method, as it allows a faster process and more flexibility;

Pulled by kit: when the kit is empty the production is triggered and the

components will be included in the kit when ready. The kit will be complete only

when all the parts have been manufactured.

Furthermore, the kitting process can be classified according to the type of material

fetching: picker-to-part, when the picker is travelling to the picking locations to collect

the kit or part-to-picker, where the materials are brought to the picker for the use. The

choice of the system configuration has a big impact on the travel time and distances,

however there is not a right or wrong decision (Brynzer and Johansson, 1995). It

depends on the company and the specific features.

According to Johansson (2006), the reasons for implementing the kitting system

usually involve parallelised assembly systems, product structures with many part

numbers, quality assurance of the assembly and high value components, but this is

only a guideline.

Compared to continuous supply, where the material is delivered directly to the shop

floor, kitting has been associated with a number of potential advantages

(Christmansson et al., 2002):

Space-efficient parts presentation that means saving space in the work

stations when the materials are supplied in containers (i.e. tote pans, with

numerous identical components in the same container, this would have resulted

in an enormous plant) (Hua and Johnson 2010; Bozer and McGinnis 1992);

Improved assembly quality due to reduced part damage because of excess

handling. Indeed, high value components can be secured in kitting packages

(Hanson, 2012) and it also allows an early identification of low quality

components (Bozer and McGinnis 1992; Johansson 1991);


16

Reduced and better controls over the WIP, as the parts of existing kits

provide immediate information regarding the WIP level (indeed each kit consists

of a predetermined quantity of parts) (Anonymous, 1997; Applied Industrial

Technologies, 2014);

The assembly areas could become more flexible and free from leftover

components. Moreover, it can bring an improved control and better visibility of

the flow of components on the shop floor (Bozer and Mc Ginnis, 1992);

Less time spent by the assembler looking for parts that are supplied all in the

same kit, so it increases productivity (Hua and Johnson 2010; Johansson 1996).

On the other hand, kitting is also associated with certain drawbacks (Hanson and

Melbo, 2010):

The kits need to be prepared in advance, which requires space and

additional handling (Hua and Johnson 2010; Bozer and McGinnis 1992);

Preparing the kits requires some time and effort which is a non value adding

activity (waste) (Bozer & McGinnis, 1992);

Additional transportation may also be necessary if kits are prepared in a

separate area that is not linked to either storage or assembly. Furthermore, an

increased number of handling occasions increases the probability of damaging

the components, therefore not all components are suitable for kitting (Johansson

and Johansson, 2006);

Additional planning is required (Bozer and McGinnis 1992);

Missing, defective or wrong parts in the kit negatively effect the assembly

operations. Components that may fail during the assembly process will require

special consideration or exceptions (Bozer and McGinnis 1992).

Each of these issues may trigger other issues with an overall increase in downtime,

manpower costs (unproductivity costs money) and lead times.

It has been argued that the main difference between kitting and continuous supply is

that the non-value-added activities are moved from the assembly to the kitting area,

but this has never been confirmed. What it is true is that both methods have

advantages and disadvantages and that there is not set of rules stating which is the

best solution to implement (Baudin, 2004).


17

It is important to highlight that kitting can also be used together with the continuous

supply, according to the type of component needed. Indeed, bulk and commodity/low

value items should be directly supplied to the shop floor, without being kitted (Baudin,

2004).

Taken into consideration both pros and cons, it has also been stated that kitting is

preferable in a low-volume/high-variety environment, while the continuous supply fits

better in an opposite type of organisation (Hua and Johnson 2010), however this is

only a rule of thumb.

As this research aims to apply the lean thinking to the kitting process, it is considered

relevant to summarise the most common issues that may affect the kitting process

identified through literature research and link them to the 7 Ohno’s wastes. For this

purpose, Table 2 has been created. Data refers to literature research and also

include personal judgment and understanding.

Waste Common Kitting Wastes

Overproduction More parts in the kit than required

Waiting Kit waiting on the shop floor or

operator waiting for the kit

Transportation Kit prepared far from the shop floor

Overprocessing Operations in the kitting process

repeated more than once

Inventory Higher level of inventory than

required (store or shop floor)

Movement Unnecessary movements in the

whole kitting process

Defects Defective parts in the kit

Table 2- Most Common Kitting Wastes (Adapted from Hanson, 2012)


18

2.3 Lean kitting

In a lean world, kitting is considered a waste. Indeed, following Toyota’s lean

thoughts of the past, the organisation should provide component storage racks,

replenished using kanban signals, alongside assembly lines and let the operators

pick the parts to set up the job when appropriate (Bozer and McGinnis, 1992).

However, there are two aspects to highlight: the focus is always on the high-

volume/low-variety environment, as that is the environment that requires the

assembly lines and also eliminating the kitting process may not be the solution to

completely eliminate wastes, because other types of wastes may be created in other

areas that might more damage the company in terms of time and quality (Vujosevic,

2008). This means that currently there is not one right answer to the question: What

does lean kitting mean? What is important, however, is a deep and careful

evaluation of the existing constraints prior to a possible kitting elimination.

If elimination is not the right answer or it takes a long period of time to be

implemented and it is postponed in a future timeframe, there are some principles that

helps making the kitting process lean (Henderson et al. 1993):

Eliminate waste related to downtime caused by invalid kitting;

Kit right first time;

Eliminate waste in kitting.

According to Fong-Yuen and Puvitharan (1990), there are a few guidelines that are

expected to help the design of a JIT kitting process and they involve 3 key aspects

(described in Table 3):

Part size;

Lot size;

Kit size.


19

Part size

Influence

Material handling methods

Choice of kit containers

NB: Bulky parts may not be introduced in the kit,

but pulled separately with kanban.

Lot size

Part production

Pulled by kits: kit empty triggers the

production

Pulled by parts: kit refilled by parts stored in

an intermediate storage (most used)

Kit size

(Number of sets of parts in

the kit)

Storage container should be compatible with the kit

size because if the n. of units in a container of a

part is < kit size container useless for the kit

Table 3-Kit Creation Guidelines

Kanban is good tool to use to create a lean environment, however the practical

implementation requires a behavioural change together with the physical one, and

also the collaboration of the parts that are working together.

There are some case studies in literature developed to explain the concept of lean

kitting, but many of them describe a high-volume/low-variety environment (Kilic et al.,

2012). Indeed, a study conducted in an electronic company (similar type of

environment) (Vujosevic, 2008) suggests that replacing the central store with

supermarkets on the shop floor fed by daily deliveries from the supplier can be

extremely beneficial. In this case, the kitting process was not removed, but the

responsibility for the preparation was shift to the shop floor and kanban used to

control the supermarket.

Another example of lean kitting process comes from Toyota, that started using kitting

in some of its plants for high volume assembly operations (Lean Enterprise Institute,

1997). Toyota implemented a new kitting process, called Set Pallet System (SPS), in

its new production facility in San Antonio (USA). This new approach is mainly based

on the removal of line-side storage racks, so that operators no longer walk from their


20

assembly stations to get parts. Instead, electronic signals to tell the material handlers

what parts to select from bins separated from the line, to then select and place them

on pallets traveling with the engines being assembled (Lean Enterprise Institute,

1997).

There are several benefits associated to this concept, but at the same time there are

some drawbacks to take into consideration. Table 4 summarises the SPS main

aspects.

Benefits Drawbacks

More value added time by the operators/

Easier training Increased Manpower

Cleaner work areas with visual control Takt-time Changes

Fewer part selection errors Best suited to automated lines, rather

than cells.

Table 4 - SPS Benefits and Drawbacks

Figure 11- Traditional Approach Before SPS (Lean Enterprise Institute, 1997)

Figure 11-Traditional Approach before SPS (Lean Enterprise, 1997)


21

Figures 11 and 12 are presented to visually show what changed from the traditional

assembly line concept and the new SPS method. Operators on the traditional

assembly line at Toyota spent non value-adding time walking to the racks to select

parts, while with the new configuration the time spent on fetching parts and walking is

dramatically reduced (Figure 13). This brings an increase in the productivity and

efficiency.

Figure 12 - SPS Approach (Lean Enterprise Institute, 1997)

Figure 13 - Comparison traditional/SPS (Lean Enterprise Institute, 1997)

Figure 12 – SPS Approach(Lean Enterprise, 1997)


22

2.4 Key findings

After collecting information and creating the conceptual framework, it was essential to

summarise and identify the main key learning points that were then addressed by this

research, that are visually represented in Figure 14.

The lean philosophy is based on the 7 wastes investigation (8th waste related to

people knowledge may be included as a separate category) and the main aim is to

remove them from the activities, to obtain the flow with only value-adding tasks. This

is what the research focused on with the kitting problems identification and analysis.

Kitting means organising the needed parts and components to be easily used by the

operators and this is considered a waste in the lean environment, but the elimination

may not always be the right decision and trigger other issues. The research

addressed the ideal way of performing kitting process, evaluating the possibility of a

future elimination.

Figure 14 - Lean Key Concepts (LeanCor, 2014)


23

2.5 Research Gap

Best practices for the kitting systems have rarely been described in the literature and

many uncertainties regarding the performance and design options of these systems

exist, leading to assembly systems providing kitting sometimes being rejected.

The literature is mainly focused on the comparison between the continuous supply

and the kitting methods choice, investigating the pros and cons. Moreover, attention

is primarily paid to the study of how high-volume/low-variety environments may be

improved, but a little time is spent discussing about how lean concepts may fit

opposite types of environment.

Indeed, traditional lean manufacturing is set up for relatively high-volume/low-mix

operations, in which the workflow can be balanced. This really does not apply to most

job shops. In fact, high-mix causes variations in loading the production operation

(Dick Kallage, principal of KDC & Associates, Barrington)

Furthermore, the concept of lean kitting has not been fully cleared and different

researchers may consider kitting a waste or a value-adding activity, in the way it

helps the flexibility and the cleanness of the workplace.

This is the context where this research is insert, aiming to contribute to the

understanding of the kitting process best practices and also whether kitting is more a

waste or a value-adding activity.


24

3 Best Practices from Industry

Creating the state of the art and building the understanding about the best practices

existing in literature is always the starting point for a study. However, there are not

many case studies in literature, as explained in the Research Gap, to take into

consideration representing the so-called best practices. Furthermore, the low-

volume/high-variety environment has never been extensively documented.

For this reason, investigating about industrial best practices to understand how other

companies are dealing with the kitting process is considered an essential step to use

as a basis for this research. This type of information is not available in literature (this

is way this data has not been introduced in the State of the Art section) and the main

sources of information are interviews with the person who was personally involved in

the following case studies (McLaughlin, 2014). These two case studies have been

labelled best practices because of the idea that the kitting is considered a waste in

lean manufacturing. Indeed, both the companies cited completely removed the

kitting process and the store, with benefits in terms of productivity, people’s

motivation and inventory reduction.

However, it would be meaningful to investigate more collecting additional case

studies about kitting best practices in a low-volume/high-variety environment, as

these two case studies can be considered as ultimate solution for the kitting process

since the whole process is removed.

These two case studies from industry are presented to build the understanding

around possible radical changes that may be exploited and become the future key to

the success of the companies’ operations; as previously mentioned, they are both

based on the idea, stated in the State of the Art, that kitting can be considered a

waste in lean manufacturing. The aim of this section is not to give a decisive answer

for the lean kitting definition, but to create space for reflection.

However, it is always essential to keep in mind that every company has specific

constraints to take into account.


25

Case Studies

Figure 15 - Bomford Logo

Figure 16 - Cerulean Logo

Bomford (Figure 15) is a company that produces vegetation control machinery, while

Cerulean (Figure 16) supplies process control instrumentation, test and measuring

equipment. The former produces about 50-60 types of products and 2-3 is the

maximum quantity for each of them. The same products may not be repeated for

weeks or months. The latter is characterised by less product variants, but still low

quantities for each of them. Even though they operate in a completely different area,

they both belong to the class “low-volume/high-variety”.

They were similar also in the fact that the initial layout was functional, so organised

according to work centres. Furthermore, they both had many problems with

shortages and inventory management as well.

The very first change that was introduced in their facilities was a change in the

layout. Indeed, cells replaced the initial functional layout (see Figure 17). This was

done because the cellular layout allows more independence and gives additional

responsibilities to the operators that are likely to feel more motivated and involved in

the work.

WC 1

WC 2

WC 3

CELLS

Figure 17 - Change in the Layout


26

Following the modification of the layout, the existing central store was dismissed and

the cells used that amount of free space.

Moreover, a kanban system was introduced to control and regulate the internal flow

of the materials moving around between the cells. So, it is the downstream request

that is pulling the whole process.

The other important change was organisational; in fact, the management and the cell

team agrees in week 1 it what to produce in week 3 and that triggers all the steps of

the manufacturing process, according to each operation’s lead times.

A big change also addresses the operators. Indeed, they are now in charge of the

quality inspection, task that was previously performed by the store. Currently, the

shop floor is much more involved in every aspect of the business, as it participates

through the team leaders to the design phase as well as the scheduling and the

manufacturing and this is a big incentive to have the right thing done correctly the

first time.

An additional change that was beneficial for the companies was related to the

material management area. Indeed, both companies performed a rationalisation of

the suppliers, keeping only the so-called consolidator suppliers. Bomford reduced the

number of vendors from about 250 vendors to less than 100, while Cerulean cut the

number down to roughly 50 (from the initial 250 suppliers). The idea is the have a

change in the whole supply chain, going from the configuration shown in Figure 18 to

that in Figure 19.

Company

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 etc

Figure 18 - Initial Supply Chain Configuration


27

The responsibility for the preparation of the kit is shifted from the company to the

supplier that is required to deliver the full kit to the shop floor on a weekly basis,

according to the agreement made in week 1.

The low value items are kept directly on the shop floor and refilled by the supplier on

a regular basis. This helps the control and the reduction of the inventory and at the

same time facilitates the operators, who are more independent in the way they

manage the materials. Even the high value items that are not kitted because of

specific requirements are held on the shop floor. This allows more visibility and helps

the operators organising their own work.

The changes explained required the reorganisation of the whole supply chain:

company, suppliers and suppliers of the suppliers. Also, the high commitment of the

management and even more of the operators it is required to make things working.

The timeframe for all these changes described has been 12 and 18 months (different

in the two companies), including steps of changes explanation and trials before

reaching the steady state.

It is also to highlight that lean tools such as visual management, 5S and kanban were

used to improve the working environment, but it would have been useless without a

cultural and behavioural change.

Company

S1

S11

S12

S2

S21

S22

S23

S3

S31

S32

Figure 19 - Modified Supply Chain Configuration


28

Positive Outcomes of the Changes

Operators felt more responsible for their own work and more involved in all

the production process;

Inventory levels and shortages were reduced;

Free space was reorganised;

The kits are now prepared outside the company and delivered ready-to-use,

saving time and costs;

Value-adding activities are kept inside the company, while the non-value

adding externalised.

Problem of Change Management

At the beginning of the change process operators were sceptical and most of them

could not believe in a system without a store and especially without shortages.

Indeed, shortages had always been part of the everyday life in the two companies.

Furthermore, even the management was obstructing the changes implementation,

mainly because it was not fully ready for a radical behavioural and organisational

change.

It is true that people are all different, but the change management path has been

proved to be real (Chapman, 2005). Fear for something new is innate and is a natural

feeling at the beginning, but than the feelings change, as illustrated in Figure 20. To

allow the change, a lot of time was spent, in the case studies, on the shop floor

working closely to the operators.

Figure 20 - Change Management Cycle (NHS, 2000)


29

The incentive for the change is what can make the process flow. Indeed, the

management should be extremely careful about encouraging the change, without

pushing the operators against his/her will that may have the contrary effect. What

was used in both cases is external help, because people feel less threatened and

more open to the change when the top-level management is not directly involved in

the process (Kotter, 2002).

4 Research Methodology

The best method to develop a research starts from building the framework through

the analysis of what exists in literature. To increase the value added by the research,

an industrial case study has been identified and involved as an essential element for

the whole research development. This allowed detailed understanding of kitting in

addition to the literature, in order to build a generic methodology, which can identify

and address process waste. Furthermore, because there are some gaps in literature

that did not allow the complete picture of the best practices for the kitting process to

be established, this research included two industrial case studies that represent the

industrial best practices for the kit preparation.

At the end of the section a scheme that summarise the whole methodology, including

the use of the case study, will be presented.

4.1 Method

The whole methodology used to develop the research has been summarised in Table

5 in terms of steps and aim of each of them. The method described in Table 5

includes the work developed in a timeframe of 4 months.

Follows then the detailed description of each step.


30

Step Aim

State of the Art

Build the framework and the context of the project at

Cranfield University (lean manufacturing, kitting methods

etc.).

Tools: Literature Research

Best Practices from

Industry

Identification of the industrial best practices for the kitting

process.

Tools: Interviews at Cranfield University

Problem Analysis

Build a deep understanding about the generic steps of the

kitting process and the relevant areas involved.

Identify the main issues of the process to evaluate the

source of potential improvement.

Tools: Documentation, Interviews and Observations (based

on Questionnaires and Checklists)

Additional Tools: Pareto Analysis was used as a tool to

prioritise the problems identified and Fishbone Diagram for

a deeper analysis

Proposed Solutions

Propose an ideal and realistic implementation plan for the

issues identified.

Ideal solution: based on the two best practices industrial

case studies, literature research and problem analysis.

Realistic Solution: additional interviews were considered

vital to evaluate the feasibility of the proposed changes.

Tools: Interviews, Observations and Literature Research

Table 5- Methodology


31

State of the Art

A review of more than 50 papers was performed and it has been essential in order to

build the extensive context of the research. The literature was accessed with the

support of academic databases to investigate the concepts of lean manufacturing,

kitting process and lean kitting. However, the outcome has not been completely

exhaustive and some gaps in the literature were identified.

Best Practices from Industry

While the State of the Art represents a collection of data from the literature, this step

aimed to collect data from the industrial environment, which is not available in

literature. The identification of the best practices from literature for the kitting process

is considered a good starting point, and because the outcomes of the literature

review were not satisfactory, the need for deeper investigation about industrial best

practices arose. For this reason, this step was introduced and presented prior to the

problem analysis and additional industrial case studies were collected with the

collaboration of experts from Cranfield University.

Problem Analysis

Two sub categories representing the two aims listed in Table 5 are included in this

phase: data collection and problem identification.

The data collection involved spending time in an aerospace company used as a case

study. It included the study of the company documentation, interviews (structured or

less structured, including formal and informal meetings) and direct observations of

the work (shadowing) of the people involved in the case study. Checklists and

questionnaires were used as a basis for interviews and observations, in order to

rapidly capture the essence of people’s work and are attached in Appendix II.

The reason for the method used (combination of interviews and observation) is to

assure as much objectivity as possible and consider both the internal and the

external points of view.

The data collection allowed the broad understanding of the kitting process in terms of

the organisational areas involved, their logical relationship and how each of them


32

affects the others, so that it was possible to include all the relevant areas in the

analysis.

Also, it acted as the main source of understanding for the following step: the problem

identification. In this step the data collected were deeply analysed to identify the main

issues of the kitting process. For this reason, these two sub categories will be

described together in the Problem Analysis section.

The additional tools used in the Problem Analysis step were the Pareto Analysis and

Fishbone Diagrams. These were used for a problem prioritisation and a deeper

analysis of selected issues. Indeed, the more it is known about the problems, the

more it is likely to find a satisfactory solution that fits with the real feature of the

problem.

Proposed Solutions

The step coming after the Problem Analysis is the Proposed Solutions. This

represents the step that aimed to develop a solution plan for the issues identified

previously. Indeed, it is related to the objective of developing a generic methodology

that could be applied to address the issues identified with the case study in other

similar companies. The use of the company case study has been extremely useful

even in this phase because it was involved in the validation of the methodology.

The main ideal is to present an ideal state for the kitting process and then focus the

attention on the creation of a ready-to-use solution (realistic) that would help in the

elimination of the wastes. To do that, a fundamental step regards the identification of

how the AS IS kitting process differs from the ideal TO BE, going through the

identification and the understanding of possible constraints.

Each problem identified has been addressed and ideas generated for the

improvement. Then some ideas have been labelled as unfeasible or not

implementable in a short period of time, whereas others have been deeply

investigated and proved to be feasible with the collaboration of the people involved in

the area addressed by the change; additional interviews and observations have been

then used at this stage for this purpose. Even the realistic solutions have been


33

organised in terms of time, as some ideas are easily applicable in a short period of

time, while others would required more time, according to estimations.

Interviews and observations have been used throughout the project, with some parts

that have been more involved at an early stage and some others taken more into

consideration in the final evaluation of the proposed solution.

The case study has been a vital source of information in all the research phases and,

with the use of interviews and observations, the proposed methodology to address

the kitting issues has been validated (Validation Method).

To summarise and give an idea of the size and the extension of the analysis, the

diagram shown in Figure 21 illustrates in more details all the common steps of the kit

preparation that are under the responsibility of various organisational parts. Some of

them have been deeply considered and studied as considered more relevant

according to a prioritisation related to the objective of the project.

2


34

Figure 21 - Areas Involved in the Kit Preparation (Airbus D&S, 2014)


35

4.2 Industrial Case Study

The company used as the case study for the research was Airbus Defence and

Space (formerly Astrium) based in Stevenage (UK) (Figure 22), where roughly 1300

people are employed.

Airbus D&S (Figure 23) is an aerospace company primarily responsible for the

production of telecommunication and scientific satellites. Figure 24 shows an

example of telecommunication satellite.

Figure 22 - Air View of the Site in Stevenage Figure 23 - Airbus Defence and Space Logo

Figure 24 - Telecommunication Satellite (Airbus D&S, 2014)


36

A satellite can be decomposed in many parts, as it is shown in Figure 25. However,

only some of the following product areas (listed in Table 6) were addressed by the

research, including structure and propulsion (CPS).

Table 6-Satellite Components Legend

1 Antennas

2 Structure

3 Propulsion

4 Solar Arrays

5 Batteries

1

2

2

3

4

5

Figure 25 - Decomposition of a Satellite


37

The company is involved in many almost unique projects over the year, receiving

orders from national and international customers, so it operates according to

projects, in a low-volume/high-variety environment.

Kitting literally means organising items into boxes, but Airbus D&S associates a more

extensive meaning to it. In fact, kitting represents the whole process that stretches

from the production planning and scheduling to the shop floor where the operators

use the kit. Therefore, both managerial and operative areas contribute to the Airbus

D&S kitting process and many organisational levels are involved (i.e. production

controller, store etc.).

The process is considered critical by the company because each job performed at

Airbus D&S requires a different kit. Every kit is supplied to the front line by the

production control area using a plastic box of the required size, together with the

relevant documentation that supports the specific job (mainly RC, drawings, WI and

Appendices to complete). Each of them may vary in terms of complexity of the

paperwork and quantity as well as size of items included and the quality of the kit has

a great impact on the next steps: assembly and consequently the delivery to the final

customer.

What it is not supplied with the kit are different types of tools and the so-called

consumables (i.e. adhesive tapes, gloves, hats etc.), that are stored directly on the

shop floor or in other areas (i.e. store).

For this reason, the company is seeking to streamline their kitting process that

marshals parts, tooling, documentation, etc. ready to be used for assembly in the

numerous clean rooms on site and make the process flow. A clean room is namely

the area of the shop floor where the operations are physically carried out (each clean

room has a different aim and is in charge of specific product areas i.e. panels, CPS,

structure etc.).

For the specific industrial case study, the research aimed to find the best way to

apply the lean thinking to the kitting process, focusing the attention on a group of

products, called mechanical platforms, and more specifically on three main areas:

Panels (blanks and assembly), Combined Propulsion System (CPS) subassembly

and Structure assembly. The department involved in the project was the Assembly,


38

Integration and Test (AIT) and all organisational levels included in that area. Also, the

aim was also to provide an improvement plan that Airbus D&S may apply across the

whole AIT department not only at Stevenage.

Figure 26 summarises the whole methodology, including the use of the Airbus case

study.


39

Figure 26 – Research Methodology

CA

SE

ST

UD

Y

DA

TA

CO

LLE

CT

ION

Shop Floor Store Manuf.

Engineer

Prod.

Controller

Area

Manager Scheduling IT

State of the Art Lean Concepts

Kitting Lean Kitting

Research Gap

Study of Documentation Structure of Satellites

Goods Reception and Inspection Production Control Process

Processes and Procedures in Store

WI and SOP

Interviews Observations Relevant areas

Problem Identification Kit issues to be solved Kitting process wastes

Chances for improvement

Proposed Solutions

Ideal Realistic

Pareto Analysis Fishbone Diagram

Operational Managerial Support

Case Study Relevant Areas

Industrial Best Practices


40

5 Problem Analysis

This section aims to build a deep understanding of the kitting framework and the

main issues experienced in the kitting process, with the objective of developing the

key steps to follow in a generic kitting process analysis. Data Collection and Problem

Identification have been incorporated in this section, where the analysis is organised

according to organisational levels.

In general, what comes before the detailed analysis, to understand the focus of the

analysis, is the process mapping. Indeed, without the mapping the analysis does

not have basis to be supported. In fact, the identification of the relevant areas to

involve in the research was made possible by the kitting process mapping;

afterwards, data regarding problems and/or inefficiencies were collected in each area

of the process identified and involved. The different points of view were mainly used

to identify possible improvements that would benefit the whole process. The relevant

areas have been mainly identified through the documentation analysis. Later, the

analysis was conducted with the approach BOTTOM-UP, so moving upstream in the

kitting process because that was considered the best way to approach the issues.

Indeed, starting from shop floor is meaningful in terms of point of view. It has been

stated that the operator creates the real value, so finding a way to improve what

happens on the shop floor without being influenced by the managerial level is

considered a priority and so the decision about the approach followed. Each level of

the analysis, starting from the shop floor, includes the following three aspects:

Specific contribution/role in the kitting process (Source: Documentation,

Interviews and Observations);

Issues recognised from an internal point of view (Source: Interviews

Outcomes);

Issues recognised from an external point of view (Source: Observations

Outcomes).


41

5.1 Relevant Areas of the Kitting Process

Mapping has been identified as the first step and the specific information to create

the map may come from different sources. In the case study, the documentation

provided by the company allowed the understanding of how the relevant areas

involved in the kitting process are interrelated, which is essential for the

understanding of the process flow. Consequently, it is considered useful to show

which is the relationship between the areas that contribute to the kitting process and

that have been involved in the data collection step. Figure 27 shows the map of the

relevant areas with their interconnections.

The main links dedicated to the communication between the areas are represented in

red, whereas the colour repreenting the precedence logic that affects the process is

purple. Design is where the whole process starts. Therefore, the work of the

manufacturing engineer (ME) is mainly triggered by design; then the ME triggers the

PC and later the store is involved with the creation of the kit and the shop floor. The

SHOP FLOOR

DESIGN

MANUFACTURING

ENGINEER

PRODUCTION

CONTROLLER

STORE

SCHEDULING

Area Manager

Team Leaders

LAB

Figure 27 - Relevant Areas of the Kitting Process


42

scheduling operates in parallel and communicates with many other levels (especially

the PC and the shop floor, through the area manager and the team leader). An

intense exchange of information is set between the PC and the shop floor. The

analysis will cover all these aspects, excluding design. The size of the analysis

performed is illustrated in Table 7.

Size of the Analysis

Team Shop

Floor

Store Production

Controller

Manufacturing

Engineer

Scheduling

Timeframe 3 months

Kits followed

through

15

Interviews 20 3 10 6 3

Shifts Early/Daily/Late

-

-

-

-

Hours spent 50 3 20 10 5

Clean Rooms LEO (Panels), PERSEUS (CPS), ANDROMEDA (Structures)

Table 7 - Size of the Analysis

5.2 ANALYSIS at the SHOP FLOOR level

The operators working on the shop floor are those who physically assemble the

product. When the kit is delivered to the shop floor, all the upstream preparation

tasks are concluded, but there is still an additional Preparation phase before the kit is

ready to be used for the job. The kitting tasks that are considered part of this phase

performed on the shop floor are shown in Figure 28.

Receive the kit

and SOP

Pick the SOP

Read the RC

Check the kit

Look at the

drawings

Check the WI

Prepare the tools needed

Start the job

Figure 28 - Steps of the Kit Use


43

This sequence of activities results from documentation analysis and interviews. The

SOP is the acronym of Shop Order Pack that represents the pack of documentation

that the operator receives together with the kitted parts, organised in black plastic

boxes of several sizes. The SOP contains: routing card (RC), Work Instructions (WI),

drawings and appendices. It is also often called book, as it is presented as a

collection of documents. The analysis focused the attention on identifying wastes in

the preparation phase.

5.2.1 Results of Interviews

Internal point of view

Following the interviews to the operators in the areas covered by the research, the

main problems experienced with the kit have been clustered in the following classes

(Figure 29):

SOP Issues In this categories all the concerns related to the paperwork have been

addressed:

Some WI and perceived to be too generic and they are not always relevant to

the work or some of them may not be included;

Kitting process

SOP

Issues

Working Environment

Incomplete Kit

Figure 29 - Issues Identified with Interviews


44

WI may include a different terminology to indicate the same component/item

and this creates confusion;

WI may be difficult to understand and sometimes lack graphical

representations;

Very different WI for similar components, that does not simplify the read;

Drawings may be not updated or wrong and the operator may realise this

problems while already working;

Drawings are missing from the SOP, or those in the paperwork are not always

clear;

Lack of updates in the paperwork;

Appendices to be completed may lack important information;

Formal documents are not completed as they should be;

BOM is not clear and it requires cross-referencing with the labels of the items

(many BOMs in the same SOP and the operators do not understand the

difference between all of them).

Incomplete Kit Parts missing in the kit are a real source of concern for the operators

and these are the most common situations:

Parts are not in the kit and this is highlighted on the BOM;

Parts are marked and should be in there, but they are not;

Shortage reports are either not included in the SOP or not clear for the

operator.

Working Environment An untidy and disorganised working environment is likely to

negatively affect the way operators work:

Some parts do not have any spare stock on the shop floor, while others are

stored in abundance;

People spend too much time searching the kit and the relative SOP;

Consumables are not meeting the shop floor needs.

Even though this list represents the most common problems, different operators have

different and variable opinions about how the paperwork, the WI and the drawings

should be. This includes also the idea of the perfect way of delivering the kit.


45

NB: Some of these comments and opinions have been then proved to be true while

observing the operator on the shop floor. Indeed, the real focus of the observation was

the understanding of what really happens in between the kit is delivered to the shop

floor by the PC and the operator is ready to work on that job (Preparation phase). As

previously explained, this mainly involves the reading of the paperwork, WI and

organising the tools.

5.2.2 Results of Observations

External point of view

The steps described in Figure 28 represent the standard sequence, but this may

slightly change according to each individual operator, who may spend more or less

time on each of them. Generally all of them are performed prior to the use of the kit

on the shop floor, but the most experienced operators may sometimes skip the

reading of the WI, because of the familiarity with the task.

5.2.2.1 Example of Practical Case Studies

To explain the outcomes of the observations and describe what actually happens on

the shop floor, Table 8 has been created. It reports the clean room involved in the

analysis, the time spent by the operator to go through all the Preparation tasks

(Figure 28) and the main issue experienced. This only describes a sample of a few

observations performed and all of them consider what happened in the preparation

phase. What have not been taken into consideration to create this summary table are

those kits that have not been intentionally delivered to the shop floor because of

missing parts that would have prevented the operator from performing even the most

simple preparation tasks. The most severe issues may result in an increase of overall

production lead-time of weeks or even months.


46

Clean Room Time spent Main Issues

Perseus

1 h and 14 minutes

Mix not available/ stamps

on the document missing

44 minutes SOP not clear

17 minutes WI not clear

Leo

6 minutes -

5 days

One item awaiting inward

inspection (after delivery

from supplier)

Andromeda More than 3 weeks One item awaiting quality

inspection

Table 8 - Example of Case Studies

The time spent varies according to the complexity of the job, the familiarity of the

operator with the task and the amount of issues experienced, as well as the severity.

Also, the number of people involved in the task affects that time (one or more

operators, quality inspector etc.).

Generally, Leo and Andromeda clean rooms have fewer problems with the kit

compared to Perseus, because of the different criticality of the operations.

Nevertheless, issues affecting the flow are spread throughout the product areas and

only a small percentage of kit has no issues.


47

5.2.2.2 Wastes Identification

From the observations, the main sources of wastes were identified and categorised,

when possible, according to the Ohno’s wastes. Three main categories resulting from

the analysis are: overprocessing, waiting and movement.

OVERPROCESSING: The operator always double checks the kit once it has been

delivered to the shop floor, even though they are not supposed to. Indeed, the store

men have already done the check. This is a complete waste of time that varies

according to the complexity and the size of the kit.

WAITING:

The operators do not always complete the paperwork, which is compulsory, and

this delays the operators in charge of the step afterwards. Indeed, this causes a

knock-on effect of delays, as the operator, before starting the work, is required

to look for the person in charge of the previous step, to make sure the product is

safe and the previous operation has been successfully completed (See SOP

Issues);

It happens that the WI or the RC is not correct and this has a negative impact on

the operator. It also may happen that WI and appendices are missing from the

SOP. However, depending on the level of experience, it may take a

considerable amount of time to realise the problem and solve it. Moreover, other

operators may be involved in solving the problem, causing a waste of time not

only for one person, but also for ¾ people depending on the complexity of the

problem (See SOP Issues);

Incomplete kits lead to a waiting type of waste. However, it happens that the kit

can still be used for some preparation work. This is a source of concern for

almost all the operators. It may happen that the kit is ready to be used, but there

is an NCR that forces the operators to wait for the quality problem to be solved

by the engineers. In addition, an item may require a quality inspection from

specialised operator and, according to the workload, this operation may wait for

days. (See Incomplete Kit).


48

MOVEMENT:

The mixes that are necessary for the job are not available in the clean room or

delivered with the kit. In fact, they have to be requested by the operators and

collected from a laboratory based on site. The operator prepares a paper

request that is taken to the lab and then goes back to work waiting for the call to

go back to the lab and collect the mix. This causes unnecessary movements

(classified in Mix Problem). Nevertheless, this is not recognised as an issue by

the operators, as it is considered as a chance for a break or a stop on the way

to the bar. So, in this case is a change in people’s behaviour that is required;

Generally, the working area is not highly clean and tidy, especially in one of the

areas studied (CPS). The concept of 5S, which is one of the major tools used in

lean manufacturing described above, is not well introduced as part of the

everyday practice, even though there are signboards on the wall at the main

entrance of every clean room describing each S. This issue negatively affects

the shop floor because:

o People waste time looking for books or kits that do not have a specific

place on the racks of the shop floor. Indeed, it is common to see people

walking from one side of the site to the other looking for something.

Usually, several operators work on the same paperwork at the same time

and may be interested in the same drawing and this contributes to creating

confusion. However, the operators never try to maintain the order to

facilitate their and other people’s job;

o The kits delivered to the shop floor for the first time do not have an

allocated location on the racks. Moreover, the racks are often moved to

follow the projects, creating even more confusion;

o Not all the books have a label on the front cover and on the side, and this

leads to additional wasted time.

NB: What is not causing any issues is the position of the hand tools. In fact, in this

case the operators are extremely organised: each of them has a personal toolbox and

they are placed at a manageable distance from the working space.


49

To visualise the identification of the wastes, the following diagram (Figure 30) has been

created, according to three classes of wastes, recognised as the most common.

5.2.3 Pareto Analysis

After interviewing, observing the operators and identifying the main issues, it was

important to show the frequency of the problems, to evaluate the size of the impact on

the way people work. In order to identify which problems have a higher frequency rate

and which are less important the Pareto Analysis was used.

Figure 31 - Pareto Analysis

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

SOP Issues Incomplete Kit Mix Problem

Issues

Pareto Analysis

Relative Frequency

Cumulative Frequency

Overprocessing

Double-check kit

Waiting

Incomplete Kit

Items to be inspected

NCR to be solved

Paperwork issues

Documents not completed

Movement

Mix not ready

Work environment not organised

Figure 30 - Issues Identified with Observations


50

The data used as inputs for the analysis (Figure 31) came from the operators’

interviews and personal observations on the shop floor. The main issues analysed

previously has been introduced on the x-axis, while the two y-axes represent the

cumulative and relative frequency.

The time frame used for the analysis is approximately 2 months and the weight given

to the operator’s opinion and the personal observations was the same (50%), in order

to represent the actual state from two points of view: internal (operators) and external

(personal).

The categories of problems used for the analysis were those identified following the

interviews, because even the wastes addressed by the observations could be included

in those classes. However, the working environment issues were not included in the

analysis, as they always negatively impact the way people work and this problem is

recognised by both the employees and confirmed by direct observations on site.

Furthermore, the amount of time spent on double-checking the kit has not been

considered for the analysis, as that happens 100% of the times. Moreover, a category

of problems that has been identified by observations that was not recognised as an

issue by the operators has been introduced in the analysis with the label “Mix

Problem”. This represents the lack of specific tools delivered together with the kit and

requested at a later stage by the operators.

So, the main categories taken into account for the analysis were: SOP Issues,

Incomplete Kit and Mix Problem. It is clear from Figure 31 that the first two categories

represent a real problem for the operators and a further analysis was considered

necessary.

The formula used to calculate the numerical figures shown in Figure 31 is the

following:

𝑛𝑂𝑝𝐼𝑁𝑇𝐸𝑖 ∗1

2+ 𝑛𝑂𝑝𝑂𝐵𝑆𝑖 ∗

1

2

i= issue;

Equation 1 – Calculation of the Issues’ Frequency


51

nOpINTE= number of operators interviewed that recognised the considered issue to

be a problem affecting the kitting process;

nOpOBS= number of operators observed that were involved in the considered issue.

The formula has been calculated for every issue and used to populate the graph.

SOP issues 7*0,5 +10*0,5= 8,5

Incomplete Kit 5*0,5 + 8*0,5= 6,5

Mix Problem 2*0,5=1

The excel spreadsheet has driven the whole analysis and it is reported in Table 9.

Table 9 - Excel Spreadsheet

5.2.4 Further Analysis

Going to the root cause of the problems is one of the key principles of lean

manufacturing (Hubbard, 2010). For this reason, some of the issues were further

analysed using the so-called Fishbone diagram. Two main classes of problems,

according to the outcome of Pareto, have been deeper investigated: Incomplete Kit

and SOP Issues. The information used to populate the diagrams came from both

interviews and observations. However, the analysis was interrupted at the second

level of causes, as it was not possible to investigate deeper for all the areas, due to

some constraints: some areas, such as design or purchasing, have not been

included in the scope of the research and it was not possible to find a point of contact

to extend the analysis. Therefore, there are still opportunities for further research.


52

5.2.4.1 Incomplete Kit

The analysis mainly takes into consideration the problem of a kit released on the

shop floor with items missing inside. Indeed, regardless of the shortages, the PC may

decide to release it to the operators, based on personal judgment and experience to

allow some preparation work. The diagram shown in Figure 32 includes the potential

causes of an incomplete kit. It is organised according to the organisational levels that

are believed to be involved in the issue.

Alternatives: when the PC prepares the SOP, there are possible alternatives

for items that can be used suggested by SAP if there is a shortage for a

specific item. This means that if an item is not available, there may be another

one that can be used as a replacement. This message is often ignored by the

PC and brings to the lack of the original item in the kit;

Figure 32 – Fishbone Diagram- Incomplete Kit

INCOMPLETE

KIT

Purchasing

Design

PC

Forget send PR

Shop Floor

Lose items

BOM wrong

SAP

Manual Mistakes

Store

Lose items

Alternatives missed Vendor

Delays/Mistakes

Other Delays

Inspection Delays

Forget to kit/Check not

correct

System Problems


53

Forgetfulness: it is possible that the PC forgets to send the purchase

requisition (PR) to the purchase department and the order for a shortage is not

sent to the vendor;

Long LT: incoming parts have to be inspected and this may take a large

amount of time, delaying the whole process;

Suppliers: items may not be delivered by the supplier;

System is wrong: numbers on the systems may not match reality (it is not too

likely to happen);

Design problems: design may be late with the release of the job or may want

to change some specifications, resulting is severe delays for the whole

process.

BOM: the BOM can be wrong, probably because of design mistakes.

5.2.4.2 SOP Issues

This is another issue that was taken into consideration in the analysis to get to the root

causes. All the issues regarding WI, drawings and paperwork have been addressed in

the diagram shown in Figure 33, trying to identify the potential sources of the problem.

SOP issues are a real source of concern for the shop floor, with resulting delays, time

wasting and frustration.

Figure 33 – Fishbone Diagram-SOP Issues

SOP ISSUES

ME

Design

WI not correct

PC

Documents not

completed

Drawings not

clear/correct

ME

WI mixed up/ not

incorporating changes

Store

BOM incorrect/no

shortage list

Linked SOP delivered

separately/ WI missing

Operator


54

The possible causes have been classified according to the area of responsibility, and

the main focus was on categorising the list of issues presented as a result of the

interviews, to prepare the path for the deeper analysis of the root causes. Moreover,

this analysis was considered extremely useful to understand on which category it is

worthy to focus more attention with the proposed solutions.

After the analysis of the shop floor, the focus was on the other organisational levels.

5.3 ANALYSIS at the AREA MANAGER level

The area manager (AM) represents the main link between the scheduling team and

the team leaders on the shop floor.

The AM is supposed to receive the weekly scheduling that is then translated in a to-

do list of tasks for the week. They are also responsible for the weekly resource

scheduling. The AM can also push the team leaders to organise their team to focus

on a specific task, as they know, because of the scheduling, which jobs are more

critical and which can wait. Generally, the AM has a three-week visibility ahead, as

they received this piece of information together with the weekly scheduling.


The AM often complaints about the fact that the kit is not ready when needed, so

they cannot do their job and organise the weekly tasks of their resources. A late kit or

incomplete kits than cannot be used on the shop floor have the same impact on the

performance.

Furthermore, some of the consumables (low-value items such as tapes) in selected

clean rooms are organised in “kanban” and there are no real concerns, while other

consumables cannot be stored in the clean room because of their size and this

creates issues in terms of shortages.

Moreover, they often criticise the long response time required to receive an answer

from the engineers about Non Conformance Report (NCR), which forces the

unproductively operators to stop their job.


55


Not all the area managers are based on the shop floor, so their visibility in terms of

issues and time to react to a problem is completely different.

Furthermore, the kanban system used in the company is not the one that is explained

in the State Of The Art: indeed, the shelves with the items are checked once a week

and refilled if required. No cards or other proper kanban systems are used.

5.4 ANALISYS at the STORE level

The store is the place where the kit is physically assembled. The workload for the

store men (no more than 2) is reported on a spreadsheet that is compiled by the PC.

It says which kit has to be prepared, the date required and all the paperwork

information. What the PC delivers to the store, to trigger the preparation, is the

complete SOP.

The work of the operator starts with SAP, where the list of parts to be kitted can be

found, associated to the WO and the part number.

The parts to be kitted are then selected one at a time and the operator can see the

quantity required and the batches of the product which are available in the carousels

(namely the stock location). The logic used is FIFO, so the oldest batches are those

used first. The operators update the system with number of the items required and

pick the same component from different batches if only one is not sufficient in terms

of quantity available. This is done for all the components of the kit. The labels are

printed out and the operator than physically use the plastic bags, the labels and the

items withdrawn from the carousel to assemble the kit.

The bags are placed in the kit without a specific order. Moreover, the operators count

the items manually, but they can use a scale if needed (used mainly when the

quantity is large).

If the part number comes from different batches, they use different bags, to keep the

traceability, but then they don’t put them in a bigger bag to facilitate the shop floor.


56

When the kit is ready, the last thing to do is to print the BOM reporting the batch

number of each item that have been kitted and the comparison between the quantity

withdrawn and the requirements. The conclusive step is the update of a spreadsheet,

stating that the kit is ready and who has prepared it.

Two people are involved at this stage:

1 does the kit;

1 checks the kit (quantity and correct batch).


It does not seem to be any issues for the people working in the store.


The store is only a pick up point, so it does not deliver anywhere. People also

erroneously think that the store is located in the middle of the plant and when people

walk or take a break can stop there to collect what they need. This is the wrong

message to send; indeed it implies time wasted in walking.

Furthermore, people are human beings and they make mistakes and this does not

help the flow of the process. However, the positive aspect is that a new device

(comparator) has been introduced to help matching the label on the item and the item

in the carousel; this is a good example of poka-yoke and the use should be

encouraged.

There are computers on each carousel that may be used to be connected with SAP,

but are not used at the moment.

5.5 ANALYSIS at the PRODUCTION CONTROLLER level

The production controller (PC) is in charge of the SOP creation, collecting the WI and

the RC from the manufacturing engineering, and SAP updates in terms of items,

state of the order and project etc. Furthermore, the PC is the person that makes the

“Make or Buy” decision about the production of a component specifically related to


57

the project (commodity items are not in their area of interest). As part of their role, the

PC delivers the SOP to the store and once it is ready, he/she takes it to the shop

floor.

Kits may be delivered on the shop floor:

Complete: it may be used as soon as it gets to the shop floor or wait for a

week or more, depending on the workload of the operators. The PC

sometimes pushes for the kit to be ready or subassemblies to be prepared

even though these are not required from the shop floor, but only to keep

people busy. (WAITING issues)

Incomplete: the kit may be considered to be usable for some preparation work

even though there are some items missing. If there is a shortage the kit, the

PC may:

o Send a RFQ to the purchasing department;

o Transfer on SAP some items associated to another project to the

project that needs them;

o Look for alternatives (as explained in section 5.2.4.1).

The production controller is also in charge of sending the purchase requisition for a

specific item, which is a purchase request sent to the purchase department. This

then sends the quote received from the vendor back to the production controller that

decides what to do.

Which are the inputs for the PC workload? There are several sources pushing and

asking the PC to work on a specific piece of work: meetings or emails received from

the scheduling team or the project management and also according to the

information stored on SAP. However, each PC, according to the area of interest, acts

differently from the others, so it is not easy to generalise to describe the same job

related to different areas.


The main issue for the PC is related to the lack of communication between the areas

and the lack of power that they experience. Indeed, there is no real communication


58

and understanding of what it is happening upstream, especially with design and this

creates a state of confusion.


Organisational Issues: PCs of different areas have a different visibility ahead of time,

regarding the kits that will be released. Indeed, the PCs in the CPS area do not have

any visibility over the kit that will be kitted ahead, therefore they mainly do what they

are told to, whereas those in the panel area receive the scheduling for three weeks

ahead and they have more power about requesting the kits. However, there are other

problems in the panel area. Indeed, the PC spends time translating the high-level

scheduling generated by P6 (software used by the scheduling) into part numbers

used by SAP and this is a complete waste of time.

Communication Issues: there is not a rule associated to the communication between

the store and the PC. Indeed, sometimes the store man is asked to send a notice

when the kit is ready and sometimes they put the finished kit on the rack and the PC

goes to check whether the kit is ready or not. There is a spreadsheet (mentioned in

section 5.4) that the PC can use to check whether the kit is ready or not, but this is

rarely used.

Kit request: sometimes the PC request some tasks to be performed only to fill in

some spaces in the operators’ working time and to avoid wasting time, but this

creates WIP that have more value, increases the cost of the stock for the

subassemblies and created kits that are not required by the shop floor. This is far

from the JIT philosophy (do what it is needed when it is needed).

Kit delivery: the kit is delivered on the rack dedicated to a specific project, but

because the racks are moved sometimes it may be difficult to find the right one. In

addition, there is no logic used for each specific kit, just filling the spare places. In

fact, as part of the PC workload is based on SAP, what may happen, especially in

CPS, is that:


59

Kits are released too early, only because the design is ready (stated on SAP)

and the PC feel more safe about the idea of having the kit on the shop floor,

even though it might stay in there for months;

Kits are late because of problems with the design etc.

Extra Movement: taking into consideration the position of the PC in the areas

considered, the following analysis has been developed to show how much time every

day is spent on walking (Figure 34). The main problem is that this is not recognised

as an issue by the people working in the company, but it is one of the 7 wastes:

MOVEMENT.

Table 10 aims to translate in numbers the movements addressed in Figure 34,

reporting an estimation of the average figures for the time spent by the PC walking

(the three areas are considered in the analysis). At the end of the analysis,

estimations about the severe impact of this waste are stated.

Figure 34 - Steps of the PC Job

If problems arise on the shop floor, the PC is supposed

to go there to solve them (Additional walking)

PC Computer

Printer

Store

Shop Floor

Each movement is

repeated twice


60

Computer – Printer – Computer

Approx. 30/35 sec

May be repeated for the same

SOP more than once:

Drawings

Main Body of the SOP

Etc.

Computer – Store – Computer Approx. 4 minutes

Computer – Store – Shop floor –Computer

Approx. 7 minutes

NB: the check of the kit and the

SOP before delivering the shop

floor may take an additional 1/2

minutes

This time is reduced for Panels

because the PC is physically

based on the shop floor.

TOTAL Approx. 12 minutes per SOP

Table 10 - PC Walking Time Estimation

To give an estimated idea of the amount of time literally wasted walking every year,

some numerical figures are presented:

Approx. 12 minutes each SOP (Assumption: 1 SOP for 1 PC, no overlapping)

Average of 1100 SOP/ Project

Average of 4 Projects/ Year

Value of one hour work £50

TOTAL TIME WASTED every year:

52800 minutes= 880 hours* £50= £44000 wasted


61

5.6 ANALYSIS at the MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING level

The manufacturing engineer (ME) is considered the point of contact between the

shop floor and design. Indeed, the ME is in charge of creating the WI and the RC that

are included in the SOP. Their workload is organised according to the AIT project

manager that prioritise the work and he/she is mainly driven by the design needs and

times. The ME has no real visibility on the scheduling.

The process of creating the WI involves the decision of the type of WI to use. Indeed,

according to the complexity of the job, different solutions are used (Table 11):

Method

Explanation

Standard planning

Only the RC is delivered with the kit and

the WI are available on the shop floor

(used for standard tasks)

Work masters

Template to use that can be modified to

fit with the specific job (it is been

previously approved)

New WI

Write the WI from scratch, which is used

only in case of something that has never

been produced before

New WI based on an existing WI

Copy/paste from existing WI (this is the

most used option)

Table 11 - WI Creation

The ME usually checks if in the system there is a WI for a part number that may be

similar in terms of features and context of application even belonging to another

project. If so, they work to adapt the WI to the new part number. Additionally, the

engineer checks when the WI was used for the last time and checks all the eventual

changes that were annotated by pen before the closure of that project. This is a good

practice to take into account the comments coming from the shop floor, but most of

the times the paperwork does not reflect the real state.


62

A family tree can be used, when existing, to understand the relationship between the

part numbers.

It may happen that a WI is modified according to the changes required by the

operator on the shop floor, but this is not always a priority. This is related to the

complaint that the WI sometimes is wrong.

Why the WI may not be the correct one when first generated?

Theoretical VS practical knowledge;

No direct feedback received from the shop floor to improve it;

Different people with different opinions.


They are not allocated to a specific project so that they know exactly which WI is

required next, and they mainly prepare the WI for what they are allocated to. They

lack the bigger picture.

Furthermore, the operators have different ideas about how the WI should be and this

does not simplify the ME work, that will never be able to please the shop floor

completely.


A family tree may exist, but sometimes it is not made available to every ME. Indeed,

it is available for the CPS area, but it does not seem the same for panels. The lack of

this documentation seems to represent a big issue that can actually affect the

creation of the kits and the work on the shop floor. This refers to the fact that

sometimes kits and paperwork for a job are released at different times, while the

operator would like to have them all together to start working. This is a consequence

of the logic used for the creation of the WI.


63

5.7 ANALYSIS at the SCHEDULING level

Scheduling works to prepare the working plan in a multi-project environment. This

means that the scheduling team split the work according to product areas and not to

individual projects. What happens is that the scheduling for a specific project is

broken down into areas and assigned to a member of the scheduling team.

What the scheduler does is the check of available resources (machines, people etc.)

to create the weekly to-do list for the various product areas (panel blank, equipping,

assembling etc.), which is then delivered to the area manager, so that even each

team leader of the area is aware of the workload. Accordingly, the area manager and

the team leader create the shifts.

The scheduling is done on Primavera P6 (shown in Figure 35), which is a software

operating at a high level compared to SAP, based on description and not on part

numbers. However, P6 and SAP do not communicate one with each other.


They realise that the lack of communication with the other areas is affecting the

quality of the work of the whole company. This can be considered a good first step

toward the achievement of positive improvements.

Figure 35 - P6 Software (Oracle, 2014)


64


Communication Issues: the communication of the weekly scheduling works in a

completely different way in the various areas, even though in theory should be the

same.

Panel:

o Area manager: receive the scheduling and organise the work for the

week;

o PC: receive the scheduling for the week and the weeks ahead, so then

it is their responsibility to get the kit prepared for the shop floor when

needed.

CPS:

o Area manager: receive the weekly scheduling and talks to the team

leaders to organise the workload;

o PC: the process is exactly the same, but they do not use the scheduling

received, they work and react based on what SAP says.

Different Perspectives: the PC releases the kits based on SAP, but SAP is not talking

to P6, that knows what is urgent and what is not too critical. The PC is used to work

with the part numbers, while the scheduler can only offer the part description.

Example of LACK OF COMMUNICATION between organisational levels, related to

the lack of systems’ integration.

5.8 Additional Considerations

The following considerations can be considered a summary of the data collection and

problem identification. These are considered as the issues that are spread across the

organisation that has negative consequences on the kitting process as well and that

should be address in a prospective of a leaner process.

There is a lack of communication, especially between the shop floor and the

engineers. Indeed, the observation sheet that should be used by the shop

floor to comment about problems or aspects that may be improved is rarely


65

used and sometimes what the shop floor says goes lost. Contrary information

received by different levels confirms the lack of communication. The lack of

common understanding between the parts is the result of this situation (for

example, people on the shop floor do not understand what the documentation

means, while each symbol has a specific meaning);

There is a lack of trust amongst the parts involved in the process, especially

between the store and the shop floor and for this reason the operator does an

additional check on the kit that should not be of his/her concern;

Lack of integration between the systems creates many issues;

Lack of collaboration between design and production. Design and production

should start working together;

People often change their minds and different people would like to receive the

kit and the paperwork in a different way. This increases the complexity of

finding a solution that fits the majority of the people (Comment about the guys

of the shop floor from the engineers point of view);

Lack of the ability to change as things have always been done in the same

way;

People as human beings make mistakes and this are inevitable, but some

poka-yoke devices may be introduced to simplify the operator’s life.

The issues described above are graphically summarised in Figure 36. They have

been organised in three levels, according to personal judgment, placing at the basis

of the diagram the three major issues that are considered the starting point for all the

other issues identified.

Figure 36 - Common Issues

Lack of the

Ability to change

Lack of

Collaboration Variable Ideas

Lack of

Communication

Lack of

Integration Lack of Trust


66

5.9 Data Collection Constraints

The idea at the beginning of the research was to fully use the bottom-up approach. It

means that the collection of the data would have started on the shop floor moving

upstream in the process with the passing of time. However, the amount of work on

the shop floor was not regular and for periods of time there were no kits to evaluate

and analyse. For these reasons, the data collection has not been smooth as planned,

and there has been an overlapping between the several operational levels.

Nevertheless, this has not affected the quality of the data collected.

Moreover, initially the idea was to interview both experienced ad inexperienced

operator to evaluate the difference between these two categories, however the

majority of the operators have loads of experience, as the manpower turnover is

really low and what may change is only the familiarity with a certain type of job.

Another aspect to highlight is the concern related to opposite information received by

various people regarding the same topic during interviews. In fact, two sources were

often in contrast with each other, so a third part was involved to answer the question

asked with more objectivity. When that was not possible, that information was

excluded from the data collection.

Furthermore, it was difficult to generalise some of the data collected, as the several

departmental areas of the case study have different features, so it was necessary to

treat each of them separately, increasing the level of difficulty in terms of possible

solutions.


67

5.10 General Method

The Airbus D&S case study has been a valuable source for the data collection and

the whole problem analysis. Most of the issues and wastes identified with the

analysis had been labelled by the literature as possible drawbacks of the kitting

process, but there are some company-specific issues that did not exist in literature.

Therefore, this research has confirmed that the major drawbacks of the kitting

(section 2.2) really exist in practice, no matter the size or the environment of the

company. Therefore, it is expected that even other similar companies would have the

same source of concern regarding the kit preparation. On the other hand, there are

other problems that have been highlighted by this research for the first time, as

specifically related to the case study. So, these are expected to change taking into

consideration different types of environments and companies. To get to this

conclusion, the research was based on the identification of the relevant areas of the

kitting process to be included in the interview and observation plan. Tools such as

Pareto and Fishbone Diagrams were used to quantify and visualise the outcomes of

the problem analysis. As stated at the beginning of the problem analysis, following

the definition of the research objectives, the focus of the section was on the

development of key steps to follow for the generic kitting process analysis, which can

also be used by other companies to identify their AS IS state. These can be

explained as follows:

Identification of the best practice (if existing) from literature and the most

common problems that may affect the kitting process;

Process mapping to understand the relevant areas of the process;

Data collection (observation, interview) from all the relevant areas;

Comparison of the different points of view (if possible);

Prioritisation of the issues identified, using tools such as Pareto, to understand

which are the issues to be addressed first;

If possible, identification of the root causes, that would help the process of

proposing a solution plan;

Composition of the big picture of the process and the issues with the data

collected to make sure all the various aspects analysed are included.


68

NB: These steps will be then included in the overall final methodology for the solution

of the kitting process issues.

6 Proposed Solutions

This section aims to provide possible solutions to the problems analysed previously

and it is built above the best practices awareness. This will be done through the

development of a generic methodology to address those issues. The generic process

that has been followed to obtain the solution plan is shown in Figure 37. The three

Grey rectangles can be considered as inputs for the process, especially the state of

the art and the problem analysis outcomes. Then the process flows and both ideal

and realistic solutions can be considered as outputs. In the diagram they are

presented in parallel, however it is common practice to start with the ideal and end

with the realistic proposal. Lilac is the colour for the proposed solutions steps.

6.1 Kitting Requirements

Defining the requirements for the kitting process is considered the first step, as it

represents the basis for the proposal of an ideal and a realistic solution. Indeed, the

understanding of the end point (represented by the requirements) can be the key for

a valuable implementation plan. The scheme below (Figure 38) reports those

requirements, which have been stated considering the literature review and the

possible elimination of all the most common wastes that have been identified in the

problem analysis. These are not company specific, so they can be then applied to

Figure 37 - Logic Behind the Creation of the Proposed Solutions

Industrial Best Practices State of the Art Problem Analysis

Kitting Process Requirements

Constraint Definition

Ideal Solution Realistic Solution


69

each specific case. The requirements do not take into consideration the best

practices from industry for two main reasons:

The best practices identified in section 3 incorporate a radical solution that

would require the kitting process to be removed from the company, so it

cannot be considered a best practice to improve the current kitting process;

Additional studies are needed for the extensive definition of specific kitting

best practices.

According to the requirements and using the knowledge acquired through the study

of literature and best practices, it was possible to prepare the proposal for an ideal

state for the kitting process, followed by a more realistic approach to the problems

identified of the case study. The ideal solution aims to provide suggestions about the

Kit

• All the correct parts in the kit

• Parts logically organised inside the box

• Kit delivered when required by the shop floor to avoid waiting and overfull racks

• All the necessary tools available with the kit

Paperwork

• Assure the quality checks are respected

• Complete the required paperwork

• Organise the kit and the paperwork together

• Paperwork correctly labelled for quick identification/use of colours may help

WI and Drawings

• Documents with the current up-issue and correct the first time

• Deliver all the jobs and paperwork together to the shopfloor, to allow the flow

• Customised WI for each specific job

WorkingEnvironment

• Rack organised and close to the working space (easily accessible)

• Paperwork delivered on shelves organised with a specific logic

• Paperwork kept on shelves when not used

• Bulky boxes placed at the bottom of the rack

Store ME PC

• Production controller aware of the scheduling/close to shop floor

• Manufacturing engineer aware of the family tree/ more contact with shop floor

• Items in store touched once and correct the first time

Figure 38 - Kitting Process Requirements


70

best way to organise the work, including considerations for radical changes in a

future prospective. However, the aim is also to suggest some ideas that fit with the

industrial constraints and are feasible to be implemented in a Short/Medium term.

Therefore, prior to the creation of the ideal and realistic solution, the company

constraints have to be clearly defined. Both the ideal and the realistic solution are

considered essential steps in the methodology, because it is believed that both can

trigger reflection about the AS IS and TO BE state. Some of the above requirements

will be fulfilled with practical ideas in the realistic solution; others will only become

part of an ideal kitting process.

6.2 Constraints

The industrial best practices that have been presented in section 3 allowed and

triggered reflection about what can or could be achieved by companies. What is

important to highlight is the fact that there are some constraints that need to be

addressed to obtain valuable results. These may vary considerably according to each

specific working environment and also change over time. The definition of the

constraints is essential, as they define the boundaries of an ideal solution, limiting the

implementation of ideas in the real world. This step cannot be skipped and may take

a considerable amount of time in a company, according to the level of general

knowledge and understanding spread across the organisation. To clarify the concept

of Constraints Definition, the following diagram (Figure 39) shows the key constraints

for Airbus D&S.

Kanban

Lo

w-V

alu

e I

tem

s

Cellu

lar

Layou

t

Tra

ceabili

ty

Qu

alit

y

Airbus is responsible for the traceability of all the components that are installed in the spacecraft, due to the complexity of product and the customer requirements. This is a number one priority. A “kanban” system on the shop floor would not allow complete traceability. Indeed, the operators will be fully responsible for those components and mistakes due to the association component-spacecraft may cause serious problems.

Some of the items that may be considered low value in all companies may not considered the same in Airbus. Even simple items can become high-value components for several specifications. The company operates in a very regulated working environment and the quality area is involved in all the decisions regarding the materials management. Only the items with a low probability of failure are allowed on the shop floor.

To be able to introduce a real kanban system, the company should reorganise the way it works. Indeed, kanban is felt more appropriate for well-defined material flows, but the company might want to designate only certain items as kanban items.

The change in the layout can be considered a constraint at first, as it requires a reorganisation of the whole enterprise, but this analysis may be transformed in a future opportunity for improvements.

Quality is another priority for the company, so inspection is a critical task that cannot be removed.

Figure 39 - Airbus D&S Key Constraints


71

6.3 Reflections

These reflections follow the definition of the best practices, the requirements and the

constraints and give an overview of the big picture of the case company, also

identifying possible priorities for the future.

A highly regulated environment is a big constraint for changes. However,

improvements can and have to be always taken into consideration in a business

moving forward. The best practices presented prove that radical changes can be

introduced in a low-volume/high-variety environment in a reasonable timeframe.

What the case study company and all the other similar companies can evaluate in a

future time is the opportunity of external suppliers creating the kit, delivering what is

required and when is required (JIT principle). This practice could save time in the

Preparation phase on the shop floor especially for the electrical items, whose

preparation phase prior to assembly can take up to 2 weeks, depending on the size

of the job. This change is expected to bring a reorganisation in the operator’s

workload and responsibilities, increasing the productive time. This may also bring

savings in terms of time spent in extra movement by the production controller. In this

case, the relationship with the supplier and the ability to schedule the workload plays

an important role and this is a good starting point for reflection.

Another aspect that deserves consideration regards the low-value/low-risk items that

may be stored on the shop floor. Traceability, possible loss of control and SAP issues

are all sources of concern, but additional studies on the candidates to store on the

shop floor is recommended, in order to assure the best working condition for the

employees. Indeed, if the problem of control over the items is a managerial

responsibility, the issue of waiting for the items on the shop floor causes a loss in the

amount of working hours because of the wait.

Linked to this problem, there is the people aspect. Workers are essential, as they are

closer to the customer in a bottom-up approach. In an ideal world, operators should

be involved in the planning phases of the manufacturing processes. Indeed,

communication and collaboration between different areas is central to success as it

helps sharing ideas and prevent problems from happening. This represents the ideal

state and literature supports this point of view. Design, manufacturing managers and


72

shop floor are required to cooperate to Design for manufacturing (DFM) and

Design for Assembly (DFA). The goal is to design a product that is easily and

economically manufactured. The importance of designing for manufacturing is

underlined by the fact that about 70% of manufacturing costs of a product (cost of

materials, processing, and assembly) are determined by design decisions, with

production decisions (such as process planning or machine tool selection)

responsible for only 20% (Boothroyd and Dewhurst, 1989).

The use of the so-called Concurrent Engineering (CE) is also connected to DFM

and DFA, as it aims to facilitate the operator’s work, to experience fewer problems

that slow down the process. In fact, it is a method of designing and developing

products, in which the different stages run simultaneously, rather than consecutively.

It decreases product development time and also the time to market, leading to

improved productivity and reduced costs. A process involving CE already exists in

the company, but it is probably not set up properly, as there are still many problems

coming from the approach over-the-wall (Figure 40) (when each part acts as a silos

and then “throw” the outcomes to the other side without considering the potential

consequences.

Systems’ integration can also be the key to success. Information systems have been

created to facilitate and simplify the way people communicate and organise the

process, but if the existing systems are not integrated, this is likely to cause more

problems than those solved. This is represented by the fact that P6 and SAP are not

communicating with each other, which might be addressed in a future time, to ensure

a good understanding between the areas and the same communication language.

Figure 40 - Over-the-wall Approach (Entrepreneurness, 2010)


73

It is important to remember that priorities can change over time, and so the

constraints.

6.4 Ideal Solution

6.4.1 Ideal Changes

After the reflection on ideal future conditions and priorities, the identification of the

constraints and the possible idea of removing of the kitting process as part of the

best practices, some ideal changes that include many of the aspects already quoted

are proposed and described below. This section aims to provide an ideal solution that

gives another meaning to the lean kitting concept, stating that a lean kitting process

is a process where all the wastes identifies are removed (instead of removing the

whole process). In fact, this can be described as another possible interpretation of

the lean kitting concept and it is presented to contribute to the interpretation of the

lean kitting concept, whose definition has not been clarified yet. Some of these ideas

will never be implemented according to the constraints already mentioned, but may

be considered in other environments; in addition, ideas may be evaluated for further

studies and application.

1. The mix that is prepared in the lab does not add any value to the kitting

process. Indeed, it acts only like a store, where operators deliver the request,

wait and collect the item after a period of time. No delivery is done to the shop

floor because of the manpower constraint. Two solutions can be considered

ideal: have the mix prepared by the operators themselves or delivered by the

PC with the kit. The former is ideal in a ST/MT but may be evaluated in a long-

term point of view, whereas the latter is not applicable, because of the

perishability of the mix.

Creating the mix on the shop floor involves the existence of chemical

competencies and machines. The operator in the lab uses software that tells

the exact quantity of materials required for the mix, so the competences

required do not seem a constraint and may be feasible to be acquired. The

total amount of mixes created in the lab is roughly 20 and many of them

involve only two materials. There is only one person working in the lab every


74

shift and the workload is dictated by the requests coming from the shop floor.

To evaluate this solution, an additional future study is required to identify:

o The type and quantity of mix used in each clean room;

o The investment required to purchase machines needed in each clean

room and competencies required by the operator to prepare the mix

[decide who is going to prepare it] VS Cost savings associated to the

time for the transportation avoided.

The option involving the PC in delivering the mix together with the kit has the

prerequisite related to the request sent by the PC to the lab before the kit is

released on the shop floor. This cannot really be done in practice, because the

shelf life of the mix is really short (20-30 minutes). It is important to highlight

the fact that delivering the tool with the kit implies that the operator start

working almost immediately when receiving the kit, otherwise the mix can lose

the original consistency;

2. The number of items stored on the shop floor should be increased, but,

because of the constraint described above, the decision process is extremely

complex; the production controllers are still trying to find suitable items to

place on the shop floor;

3. The team leaders are responsible for the check of the consumables on the

shop floor and they then send an email to the store asking for the refill.

Sometimes another person is delegated to looks after the “kanban” in the

area. However, the store is only a pick up point and never delivers. The best

idea would be to have the store, whose personnel is less expensive, looking

after the consumables and the “kanban” and delivering the required amount of

items on a regular basis; it would free the time of the operators and the team

leaders. This seems to be unfeasible because of manpower constraints;

4. The operators always consider the WI an issue, but they have different

opinions regarding how they would like to receive them. As the team leaders

are able to collect ideas and complaints of the operators, meetings between

the ME and the relevant team leaders prior to the release of every WI could

facilitate the WI clearness and please the operators. However, the required

amount of time spent on talking and comparing ideas for every WI makes this

suggestion far from reality, also because there are about 1100 SOP in every

project;


75

5. A more active collaboration between manufacturing and design would speed

up the whole process. So the idea of including team leaders in the design of

the product seems reasonable. Why team leaders? Because they have

experience on the shop floor and they can act as the representatives of the

other operators. But because time is vital and costs money, this is not

practicable, as the team leader would spend almost the whole day dealing

with problems in the design department, instead of productively working on the

shop floor. Even increasing the number of team leaders is not applicable,

because it means increasing the number of teams, spending more money;

6. The preparation of the kit is done manually and for this reason a fast speed

rate and effective mistake prevention systems are more difficult to be

integrated in the system. The ideal solution would take into consideration an

automatic picking machine, where the carousel is able to search, count and

label the items, placing them in the right box. However this is not realistic for

the working environment of the company and also in terms of investment

required. Moreover, as explained in the case studies from industry, companies

should consider the idea of removing the store;

7. From the point of view of electronic resources in the store, there are

computers on the carousels that are not currently used. The idea is to have

logical connection between SAP and the carousel, that automatically gives the

instruction to find the correct item and allows a certain amount of time for the

operator to collect it before moving to the consecutive part. This may not be

completely feasible because of the layout of the store and the number of

carousels (5 in total), in addition to the stress caused to the operator.

Moreover, to have the computers on each carousel talking to the store’s

computers there are some prerequisites. Indeed:

o Carousel’s computers should be upgraded;

o SAP should be installed on those computers.

Furthermore, apart from the initial cost that this may cause (about thousands

of pounds especially for the upgrade), the expected benefits do not seem to

make the investment worth. Indeed, the store man is still involved in picking

the item and the situation becomes more complicated when there is more than

one person working on the same carousel (common practice). So, in this case

the implementation does not seem a good idea;


76

8. The integration between information systems (more specifically between P6

and SAP) is an essential step for improvement. This is not happening at the

moment because of the logic established in the MRP (Material Resource

Planning). Because of a lack of firmed planning, there are issues related to

indexes changing at every run of the MRP (every night and a big run on

Sunday night) that does not allow a stable connection between the systems.

To be able to connect the two systems, a change in the way the planning is

done is necessary. This is not impossible, but it may require additional future

studies and at the moment it is not a priority for the company.

Table 12 described in section 6.4.2 summarised all the changes proposed in this

section.


77

6.4.2 Summary of the Ideal Changes

Area Involved Change Unfeasibility Reason

Shop floor More consumables on

the shop floor

No Short Term feasibility

but Additional Future

Studies

Lab

Mix delivered by the PC Shelf life too short

Mix created on the shop

floor

No Short Term feasibility

but Additional Future

Studies

Store

Delivery to the clean

rooms Manpower constraints

Automatic picking

system Budget constraints

Connection SAP/

Carousel Not enough benefits

ME Customised WI Time constraints

Manufacturing/Design Team leaders involved

with design in every job Time constraints

Manufacturing/Scheduling

Integration SAP/P6 Current MPR Working

logic does not allow the

connection but Additional

Future Studies

Table 12 - Ideal Changes


78

6.5 Realistic Solution

What has been identified with the ideal solution and also with the industrial best

practices is a starting point for reflection about what cannot be done because of

existing constraints, but also potential changes (even radical i.e. kitting removal) for

the future. However, apart from considering what may happen in the future, it is

important to evaluate and try to solve all the problems that can be addressed

immediately, considering both a Short Term and Medium Term implementation to

create a realistic picture. Both implementation plans include consideration in terms of

Cost/Benefit Analysis.

Assumptions for the Cost/Benefits Analysis

The value of one-hour work is £50;

240 working days/year, 48 weeks and 8 hours/day;

75 is the average number of operators in the three areas covered by the

research;

4 is the average number of projects every year (each has 1100 SOP).

6.5.1 Short Term (ST) Implementation Plan

In a ST realistic solution the kit and the paperwork are kept in the same format and

the idea is to improve the current state, eliminating the most visible wastes that

prevent the kitting process from running smoothly. The driving force is the focus on

the operators’ needs in order to present the kit in the best possible way for them.

Indeed, delivering the kit with the correct amount of parts and paperwork when it is

needed simplifies the job of the operator and reduces the amount of time spent on

searching and fetching parts, with a consequent reduction of wastes.

The lean philosophy aims to eliminate stock and waiting times to allow the flow.

Consequently, the task should be done correctly the first time. For this reason, it is

essential that all the areas do their job effectively. When the kit is released to the

shop floor, it should be immediately picked by the operators to start working.


79

The suggested improvements are described with the logic bottom-up, starting from

the shop floor and moving upstream in the process. The ST ranges from days to a

few weeks.

6.5.1.1 Suggested Improvements

6.5.1.1.1 Shop Floor

The changes suggested have been organised into categories and will be presented

as follows: visual management, mix, visual order and paperwork. These changes,

once implemented, will have a great impact on the shop floor (this is the reason why

they will be explained in this section), but it is important to highlight that they also

involve changes and the collaboration of the other organisational levels. So, all the

changes proposed involve and require the commitment of the whole company.

Visual Management

Currently, the shop floor is affected by a state of confusion regarding the kits and a

general disorder. To facilitate and simplify the work, a visual management system

(explained in section 2.1.2) can be the solution. The idea is to introduce a board

indicating which kits are on the shop floor and consequently which is the status of

each job, in order to help the general understanding and visibility of the organisation.

This addresses the problem of uncertainty about what it is on the shop floor and what

it is not, especially if kits are delivered when the team leader is not around. To gain

benefits from the implementation, this would involve the collaboration of the PC and

the team leaders.

A simple example of a board, to explain the concept, is shown in Figure 41. Each

colour has a specific meaning: RED represents the upcoming workload in terms of kit

to de delivered. Delivering the kit on the shop floor will cause the change the state

from RED to YELLOW. Both RED and YELLOW represent one of the most

dangerous states in terms of waste: WAITING. The team leader will be then in

charge updating it to GREEN when the kit is picked for work.


80

The simple example can be then translated in reality. Currently, there are three bar

codes labelled on each kit that store information about the project number, the WO

and the part number. However, these are not used, but they can be the input to run

the visual management system.

The idea is to introduce scanners on the shop floor to read the bar code. Only one

code or a combination of codes is scanned and then, with the use of an application, a

link between the kit and an existing spreadsheet containing the other relevant

information (shown in Table 13) is established. The data scanned is sent to the

computer that already stores the spreadsheet in the system. The spreadsheet keeps

track of the kits whose documentation has been printed by the PC when preparing

the SOP, so it is automatically updated. There is no need to prepare an additional

one.

Once a job has been closed, a date should be included in the list and the job

removed from the list, without modifying the original spreadsheet in the system.

The drawbacks of the existing spreadsheet are the following:

Part Number 1

Part Number 2

Part Number 3

Kit being used

Kit delivered/waiting

Kit not delivered

Figure 41 - Simple Example of Visual Management

Table 13 - Original Excel Spreadsheet


81

The horizon of visibility that the spreadsheet allows on the shop floor: the

document states the date when the PC prints the SOP, which is then delivered

to the store for kitting. This may happen in a variable amount of time, but

approximately a few days before the kit is delivered to the shop floor.

Therefore, the spreadsheet has the information about which kit will be

delivered (RED) only a few days before the event. A broader view would

require an additional spreadsheet compiled by the PC according to the

schedule and what has been released by design. It might be feasible with a

few man-hours, but at the same time is not likely to represent the reality.

The homogeneity of the data: there are some rows in the spreadsheet that are

not aligned with the linked field and this represents a problem when

programming the application. However, this is a solvable problem and there

are engineers working on this improvement that will be implemented before

the end of July.

Extension of the spreadsheet: the existing spreadsheet stores the information

from 2008 regarding all kinds of kit, without any distinctions. This is not what is

needed to allow a simple spreadsheet projected in the different clean rooms.

An idea to solve this issue is the introduction of filters in terms of time and

area. Indeed, each area can be uniquely identified with the PC field (each of

responsible for a specific product area) and the older data can be removed or

hidden (keep only data in a time frame of approx. a month)

To summarise, the colours change according to the state of the kit. When the kit is

used, the associated state changes and so the colour (Table 14). The default colour

is RED, according to the kit whose documentation has been printed, but not delivered

on the shop floor. Only the scan of the bar code on the kit will update the

spreadsheet. The first time is the PC than scans and it gets YELLOW; the second

time is the team leader. It can be projected on the screen at the entrance of the

clean rooms that are already placed.

How is the spreadsheet organised and look in reality?

Table 14 - Modified Spreadsheet


82

For the implementation of this solution, as previously mentioned, an application is

required. Two options were evaluated:

Purchase the application;

In-house programming.

Because it was not possible to find a suitable package on the market that would allow

exactly the functionalities required, it was decided to chose the option of the in-house

programming and for this reason IT requirements have been prepared and shown in

Table 15.

IT Requirements

Who prepares it? The spreadsheet already exists and it is

stored in the system

When is it updated? Every time the documentation (SOP) for

a kit is released

Which data?

Project name and number, WO, Part

number, PC and date/time. 3 colours

(Red default, yellow and green following

the scan)

How will it be displayed? Shop floor at the entrance, projected on

the existing screen

When are the colours updated? Kit delivered to the shop floor (PC)

Kit picked for work (Team leader)

Table 15 – IT Requirements-Visual Management

Total investment required and financial benefits for the visual management systems

are described in Table 16.


83

Visual Management: Cost / Benefit

Investment Required Financial Benefit

Scanner: According to the number of

team leaders and the size of the clean

rooms, approx. 2 scanners in each

clean room, cost: £100 or less/each =

£200 for each clean room, so for the 3

clean rooms considered= £600

Time saved searching

Approx. 20 minutes/week per operator

spent in searching and understanding

whether the kit is on the shop floor.

Every year: 20/60 *48 = 16 hours per

each operator. Considering almost 75

operators in the three clean rooms, the

annual time saved can be up to= 16*75=

1200 hours saved every year

Financial Savings: £50 * 1200h=

£60000

Programming: Approx. 1 week for one

person to write the code (more/less time

depending on the filters needed) 8 hours

/ day, £50 per hour, 1 employee =

£2000

TOT: £2600 TOT: £60000/year

Table 16- Visual Management: Cost/Benefit

Mix

Another problem that can be solved is the extra movement that is now caused by the

paper request for each specific mix created in the lab. This is considered a waste, as

the operator interrupts their productive work to request and collect the tool. It

happened during the analysis that almost 1 hour was required to have the mix ready,

as the lab was busy. Moreover, the operator spent about 10 minutes in total walking

from/to the shop floor twice and the rest of the time waiting. There are several

possible solutions for this issue:

To facilitate the communication and speed up the request, the phone could be

used, so that the operators communicate with the lab requesting a specific

mix. However, for traceability reasons, additional paper documentation is

required (maybe sent by fax or email) to keep track of the WO, project number


84

etc, and being able to print the label. Therefore, it does not make too much

sense to implement this solution.

Instead of using paper, the computer may be used to establish the

communication with the lab. Emails may be the fastest way of communicating

between the shop floor and the lab, but the mailbox of the operator in the lab

should be always open and connected to the system, otherwise the response

may not be as fast as it should be. This is something that may be quickly

implemented. However, there is a constraint in terms of people, as not all of

them want or have access to the computer.

Another method that can be used to deal with the mix request involves the use

of an application that creates a window on the screen of the shop floor

computer, where the operators can write the “order” for the lab, introducing

information regarding:

o Type of mix required;

o Project number/name;

o Date/ time needed;

o Area requesting the mix (i.e. CPS).

This would allow sending a fast request to the lab without physically walking

there. The same issue for the implementation of this solution may be related to

the lack of computers on the shop floor, but this is the same issue that affects

the email system.

Considerations about the use of computers and re use of existing resources are

explained in Appendix III.

The IT requirements that would allow the realisation of this idea are shown in Table

17.


85

IT Requirements

What? Create a window to be compiled by the

operator on the shop floor (Figure 41)

Who uses it? Operators send the request on the shop

floor and the lab receives the request

What does the lab sees?

Three possible types of messages:

Pop us window (fastest and

reduce errors) (Chosen Method

Figure 42)

Window to manually check

requests (it requires the operator in

the lab to constantly check if there

are open requests)

Text list of requests (not effective)

Table 17 – IT Requirements-Mix

Figure 42 shows what the operator is required to compile on the shop floor. On the

other hand, Figure 43 shows what would appear as a receipt to the lab.

Figure 42 – Window for the Mix Request- Shop Floor


86

This represents the option of the pop-up window that appears on the screen on the

lab and it is auto-refreshing.

Total investment required and financial benefits for the mix are described in Table 18.

Mix: Cost / Benefit


(Pop-up Window Option)

Programming: this depends on the

option chosen for message sent to the

lab. Indeed the first option is the most

complicated in terms of writing the code.

Approx. 25 hours needed = £1250

Training session and Implementation:

People would require a training session

for the explanation of the new system,

and at the same time the system can be

physically installed. Approx. 8 hours in

total= £400

Time saved walking

Approx.10 minutes saved for every

operator and every mix moving from/to

lab (Each mix associated to only one

operator). Assuming that on operator on

average may go to the lab 5 times (1 mix

each time) per week: 10/60 *5 *48= 40

hours a year spent for every mix.

Assuming that 1/3 of the operator request

mixes to the lab: 40* 75/3 = 1000 hours

saved every year.

Financial Savings: £50*1000h=£50000

TOT: £ 1650 TOT: £50000/year

Table 18 - MIX: Cost/Benefit

Figure 43 - Window for the Mix Request-Lab


87

Visual Order

In a clean working environment the kit should be delivered on the associated shelves

organised by project and type of work if possible (thermal, mechanical etc.). Both the

shelf (stating the type of the kit) and the box should be clearly labelled as shown in

Figure 44. Different colours facilitate the selection of the kits, considering that the

largest boxes should be placed at the bottom of the rack to increase the flexibility.

To have coloured boxes there are two options:

Purchase some new boxes, keeping the black one with a specific meaning

(Best option as it increases the positive impact) (it will be discussed in the

Store section);

Attach a visible label to the existing black box that allows the distinction (poor

resolution of the problem).

Furthermore it would be a good idea to collect all the kits of the same projects

together, to avoid confusion and misunderstanding, because even though the current

operators may know what is placed where, this is likely to cause problems with a

change in the work force. For example, some specific kits are currently separated

from rest of the kits because of the position of a specific working space. However,

Bulky

KIT

KIT

PROJECT XY

BULKY

BLACK or ORANGE

Thermal

Mechanical

Figure 44 - Re-Organisation of the Boxes


88

this is not the best configuration. A change in the position of the whole rack may be

considered, to find a location that is almost equidistant to the several stations

involved in the same project. The production controller should be the one responsible

for the reorganisation of the boxes on the rack, with the the help of the team leader

and the operators that should contribute to keep the environent clean and tidy.

A key point of the visual order is the concept of 5S. This concept is fully explained in

section 2.1.2 and it is also mentioned on the shop floor, even though it could be

performed better. There are some features on the 5S that have already been

introduced on the shop floor (i.e. pictures showing the content of lockers), but the

general outcome can definitely be improved. The organisation should make sure that

everything that is placed on the shop floor is useful and used; otherwise it is a waste

of space and flexibility. Moreover, the boxes and the paperwork used is never placed

again in the same place, the operators may lose the SOP, wasting time searching

etc. This problem could be solved making the operator aware of the importance of

5S. The shop floor clean up is one of the key tasks included in the 5S (Tinoco, 2004)

and creates a specific place for everything as well, but this cannot be achieved

without the collaboration of the operators. The 5S practice should be applied urgently

and will help keeping the environment clean and safe. For example, it is common to

come across tools that have not been used for a period of time and will never be

used again, that are still kept on the shop floor amongst the other tools. This is

harmful for the organisation.

What may be required is additional training addressing the team leaders to improve

the awareness and new impressive posters to replace those already existing. Why

the team leaders? Because it is important from a lean point of view to increase the

awareness and the responsibilities of the front line, as the operators are essential for

the organisation. It is expected that giving more importance to the team leaders will

have a positive consequence on the operators on the shop floor as well (Drew at al.,

2011). The management is involved in the lean journey, but because in a TPS vision

all value-added activities start on the shop floor, the job of managers is to support the

team members (Convis, president of Toyota, Kentucky).

These posters shown in Figure 45 are only an example, but many can be used inside

and at the entrance of every clean room.


89

Total investment required and financial benefits for the visual order are described in

Table 19.

Visual Order: Cost / Benefit


Reorganise boxes on the rack: Approx.

2 man hours for each clean room=

£50*6= £300

Time saved searching

Estimated approx. 30 min saved every

week for each operator, assuming 48

weeks in a year = 24 h/ year per operator.

For the total number of operators: 24*

75=1800 hours every year saved.

Financial Savings: £50*1800=£90000

Posters: 2 in each clean room (1 before

the entrance and 1 at the entrance for

each clean room)= £15 each = £90

TOT: £390 TOT: £90000/year

Figure 45 - 5S Posters

Table 19 - Visual Order: Cost/Benefit


90

Paperwork

SOP: in terms of paperwork, the SOP delivered with the kit should stay with the kit. It

is not necessary to purchase new racks or change the configuration of the physical

kit, but the SOP must be stored in the rack besides the kit and never being

separated. This is an important task given to the operator, as they are those picking

and moving the kit/paperwork. However, the label on the cover page and on the side

of the SOP should always be placed properly and also clearly state the colours of the

project and the type of kit, in addition to the existing colour of the project. A possible

suggestion is shown in Figure 46.

Furthermore, the PC could generate a clear shortage list to be placed in the SOP,

stating clearly what is missing in the kit, to avoid double-checking the kit on the shop

floor. Currently, there is a shortage list in the SOP, but this is not clear for the

employees, so at the end is not useful. Moreover, because the BOM creates a lot of

confusion, improvements should aim to increase the clarity. Indeed, the blank BOM

produced before the kitting is left in the SOP as a point of reference even after the

updated BOM with the batch numbers is produced. This confuses people on the shop

floor. The suggestion is to keep only the BOM completed by the store that contains

information regarding the kitted items, commodities etc. and remove the blank one

before delivering the SOP to the shop floor.

Resource scheduling: the up-to-date resource scheduling for the human resources

should be displayed on the shop floor for anyone to access and area manager is

responsible for this. This will help the operators first and as well as other people

interested, who will be aware of who is working on the shop floor and is in charge of

what project. If this is not available, it may be difficult to understand who is

responsible for what and may create a waste of time if someone is looking for a

specific operator.

Green: Project XY

Black: Mechanical Kit

Figure 46 - SOP Label


91

Total investment required and financial benefits for the paperwork are described in

Table 20.

Paperwork: Cost / Benefit

Investment Required Benefit

Irrelevant

All the proposed changes aim to simplify

the work of the operators and increase

the level of awareness of the operators.

Indeed, reducing the level of confusion

on the shop floor, increasing the level of

understanding of the operator are

essential steps for a decrease in the time

wasted and possible mistakes.

Table 20 - Paperwork: Cost/Benefit

6.5.1.1.2 Store

The store has five carousels and the kit preparation area is likely to remain the same

because of manpower costs and space constraints, even though it would be better to

have the kit prepared closed to the assembly area, to save time in the delivery

(transport waste). Nevertheless, the space in the store is not a constraint and this

gives flexibility in the preparation. Though, a few changes can speed up the process

enormously. It happens that there are two plastic bags of the same items belonging

to different batches for traceability; however, they are not placed in a bigger plastic

that would still keep them divided, but together (see Figure 47). The implementation

of this simple idea will clearly facilitates the use of the kit, keeping the traceability

(Hanson, 2012), without involving high costs (existing bigger plastic bags could be

used).

G0000001

BAG 1

BATCH 01

BAG 2

BATCH 02

Figure 47 - Additional Bags


92

This is related to the organisation of a single item, but what about the overall order

within the kit?

The current kit is prepared without logic to place the items, but a segmented box

could save the time of the operators (Dudley, 2005). The segments should be

removal to allow even more flexibility. There are a few ways according to which the

kit can be organised:

BOM item number (simple example shown in Figure 48);

Type of part (nuts, bolts, washers etc.).

Each operator would be happy to have the kit organised differently, however what is

essential is to define a common logic. The main investment would involve the

purchase of new coloured boxes with removable segments that are supposed to be

used according to the needs of the specific kit. Old black boxes can still be used with

the new segments purchased.

The purchase of new coloured segmented boxed involves also the shop floor,

indeed the final aim is to facilitate the shop floor.

To facilitate the communication between the PC and the store, an automatic

message could be sent to the PC once the kit is ready, to speed up the process and

avoid the waiting time of the kit. This may help the understanding and avoid

communication issues. It is also extremely important that the PC check the

spreadsheet that reports whether the kit is ready or not.

Figure 48 - Segmented Boxes

It 01-15 It 20-35 It 40-55

Segment

Range of items


93

Total investment required and financial benefits for the store are described in Table

21.

ST Store Changes: Cost / Benefit


New coloured boxes and removable

segments: In a project there are about

1100 boxes to be used, but not all of

them are required to be used together

at the same time. Every year there are

about 3/4 projects, so in total 4400

boxes. In the worst case all of them will

be purchased brand new, but from the

same vendor, so a discount on the

quantity it is expected: £5 on average

different sizes. For about 1100 boxes

purchased: £1100*£5= £5500 (reuse of

some old boxes is expected)

Time saved in checking the kit

Approx. 5 minutes saved on checking

and opening every kit, for an individual

operator, so considering the total number

of SOP in a project (1100)= 5*1100=

5500 min/60= 92 hours for project.

Considering 4 projects on average every

year, the annual time saved is: 92 *4=

368 hours per year saved.

Financial Savings: £ 50*368h= £18400

TOT: £ 5500 TOT: £18400/year

Table 21 – ST Store Changes: Cost/ Benefit

6.5.1.1.3 Production Controller

Walking distances are considered a problem, so the PC should put together several

SOP to request the kits, when going to the store, to reduce time wasted. This is not

always possible as it is related to the workload of the PC. However, to be closer to

the problems and address them immediately, the PC may be relocated on the shop

floor. This already happens in the panel area, so this may work and facilitate the

operations in other areas as well. This would avoid the need for extra walking

between the shop floor and the mezzanine floor and a more direct contact between

the areas. Moreover, the operators appreciate the management presence on the

shop floor, but only if they see that we are there to help them doing their jobs

(Convis, president of Toyota, Kentucky). Furthermore, the PC should be encouraged


94

to use the spreadsheet created by the store to evaluate which kits are ready, to

reduce the need of walking to the store. Total investment required and financial

benefits for the PC changes are described in Table 22.

ST PC Relocation: Cost / Benefit


Relocation: Clean the area and find a

suitable place. Then reorganise the

physical resources to allow the PC to

operate close to the clean room area,

that would take a few man hours: about

16 hours work (only CPS that needs

this) £50*16= £800

Time saved walking

About 1/3 of the time spent in movement

(refer to the analysis Table 10) can be

considered saved for each PC, so

approx. 4 minutes for each SOP and PC.

4/60*1100=73h saved for each project.

Considering 4 projects on average every

year: 73*4=292h per year saved.

Financial Savings: £50*292h=£14600

TOT: £800 TOT: £14600/year

Table 22 – ST PC Relocation: Cost/Benefit

Suggestion for the ME: the family tree showing the relationship between the part

numbers is available when it has been released by design. It is important that

whether the ME feels the need for the family tree, it is made available on the system.

A summary of all the changes described in this section has been prepared and

illustrated in Table 24 and the total savings are calculated with the following formula:

𝐴𝑣𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑂𝑝 ∗ 𝑆𝑎𝑣𝑂𝑝 + 𝐴𝑣𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑗 ∗ 𝑆𝑎𝑣𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑗

AvNumOp: average number of operators working in the three clean rooms

(Andromeda, Leo and Perseus) (75) / SavOP: estimated savings for each operator (if

applicable) (Table 18) / AvNumProj: average number of project every year (3,5) /

SavProj: estimated savings for each project (if applicable) (Table 23)

Equation 2- Savings Formula


95

6.5.1.2 Impact of Changes

Area Involved Change Cost Benefit

Shop Floor

Mix Digital request/training

Investment: £1650

Time saved by the

operators (avoid waiting).

Faster process. 1000 hours

saved every year.

Visual

Management

Programming

Scanner

Investment: £2600

Facilitates the

understanding of the tasks

that are currently performed

on the shop floor, reducing

the confusion. Highlight

possible problems related

to the kits, based on visual

messages (too many red or

yellow cards).

1200 hours saved every

year.

Visual Order

(Boxes)

Reorder the new boxes

in the same rack

Investment: £300

Improve the visibility of the

kit on the shop floor/ Re

organise and clean the

shop floor to avoid (ideally)

and at least reduce the

searching time/ Reduce the

probability of making

mistakes and losing items.

Improve the awareness of

the operators about the

concept of 5s, so that the

idea ok keeping the

environment clean can

become standard practice.

Time saved searching the

kit 1800 hours saved every

year.

Visual Order

(5S)

Poster

(Approx. £90).


96

Shop Floor

Paperwork

SOP

Irrelevant

Increase the responsibility

of the operators.

Contributes to a clean

working environment, with

reduction of mistakes and

time spent searching.

Resource Scheduling

Irrelevant

Increase the visibility and

clarity on the shop floor.

Store

New

Segmented/

Coloured

Boxes

Investment: £5500

Kit clear and organised,

less time spent checking

the kit.

368 hours per years saved.

Additional

Bags

Irrelevant

Kit clear and organised.

PC Relocation

Reorganisation of the

working place

Investment: £800

Act promptly when

problems arise. Save time

walking from/to shop floor.

292 hours per year saved.

TOTAL Investment

(£)

£10940 -

Savings

(hours/year)

- 4660

Savings

(£/year)

- £233000

Table 23 - ST Suggested Changes


97

6.5.2 Medium Term (MT) Implementation Plan

With the short-term proposed solution, the aim was to establish a cleaner working

environment and a clearer organisation of the shop floor. The main target set was to

educate the operators to eliminate the most visible wastes directly on the front line.

Nevertheless, changes upstream in the process are necessary to improve the kitting

process and these will bring a change in the shop floor as a consequence. Some

changes have already been suggested and other ideas will be proposed in this

section. The main idea for the medium term is to create a digital system that allows a

connection between the kit and the computer on the shop floor, to reduce paperwork

and the problems connected. This is supposed to be implemented before the

introduction in the company of the new electronic system called IPS (INTEGRATED

PRODUCTION SYSTEM) that will bring a change in the way the WI are written and

delivered to the shop floor, in addition to a change in the way the whole process is

controlled. The digital system proposed by the research is considered an opportunity

to add complementary functionalities to the new electronic system. The timeframe of

the MT considered in this context goes from roughly 1 month to 6 months. The

changes are described with the bottom-up approach, considering the organisational

levels. What has been stated for the ST regarding the commitment of the whole

company and the collaboration of all the organisational levels in every change is still

valid.

6.5.2.1 Suggested Improvements

6.5.2.1.1 Shop floor

Collaboration with Design: ideally, as previously discussed, the communication

and the engagement of the team leaders in the design is vital (Design for

Manufacturing). It has been stated that this cannot be done for every single job, but

the recommendation regards a possible study about the more critical job that caused

or are likely to cause the major number of issues on the shop floor. This study can be

considered as a good starting point for the decision about which job to be supported

by the shop floor. Indeed, the collaboration could be strictly focused on those jobs to

prevent possible mistakes from happening.


98

SOP: the paperwork is a source of concern, but a change in the way the WI is written

will be introduced with the implementation of the previously mentioned electronic

system (IPS). However, to facilitate the shift from paper to digital while finalising the

introduction of that system and address many of the issues associated to paperwork,

it is considered beneficial to provide the WI and the related appendices (App.)

digitally to the shop floor, so that the employee can access the information directly on

the computer. The whole digital process, including the changes already suggested in

the short term, is described in Figure 49.

Process flow

Aspects to consider for the implementation of the digital system:

Training: operators are not used to work digitally, and this is an aspect that should

not be underestimated. Indeed, a change management programme is required when

introducing a change in the system that affects the way people work.

Creation of the application: there is the need for internal programming to write the

code for the application to would link the kit to the system to find the correct WI (that

corresponds to that specific part number of the WO). It is expected to require less

than a week of work (40 hours).

Figure 49 - Digital Process Flow

Compile App. digitally

Print Bar Code on Kit

Scan Bar Code

Access WI and App. on the

computer

Update Spreadsheet


99

Accessibility of the documents: the WI is created with a .doc template, but this is not

the best way to deliver the WI, as it does not stop unauthorised people from

modifying them. Therefore, .PDF may be used as the format to keep the WI safe

from modifications.

Documents electronically compiled: the appendices are created to allow the

completion of essential technical data. However, a digital signature may replace the

physical stamp, to keep the same traceability of the person in charge.

Total investment required and financial benefits for the MT shop floor changes are

described in Table 24.

MT Digital System: Cost / Benefit


Programming: Approx. 1 week of

work= £50* 40= £2000

Training session and Implementation:

Estimated a working day (8 hours):

approx. £400 for the organisation

Computers: Evaluate the need for

additional computers. For the moment

with the relocation of resources the shop

floor can be covered (Appendix III)

Paper: Printed paper (assuming

£0.10/page, there are on average 100

pages in a SOP, so it costs about £10 to

print the A4 pages and A3 drawings. This

figure is to be multiplied by the number of

SOP produced: £10*1100= £11000

saved per each project. Considering 4

projects on average every year, the

annual savings are: £11000*4=

£44000/year saved.

Extra Movement: Time saved for the

delivery of the SOP to the store and the

way back and to the printer, Approx. 5

minutes for each SOP = 5/60*1100= 92

hours/project. Considering 4 projects on

average every year: 92*4= 368h/y saved

Financial Savings: £50* 368h= £18400

TOT: £2400 TOT: £62400/year

Table 24 - MT Digital System: Cost/Benefit


100

Consumables: finding a way to place consumables on the shop floor is not easy

because of the strict constraints of the company. However, not all the areas are using

the same “kanban” method to facilitate the replenishment from the store. Moreover,

there are “kanban” shelves that are currently not used in one of the clean rooms. This

happens because people working in the area are reluctant to the idea of introducing

“kanban” and they always tend to have more stock on the shop floor. Furthermore,

the operators complain about the fact that the material manager does no understand

the need for the material on the shop floor. To solve part of these issues, regular

meetings between the shop floor and the material manager should be organised to

have a more frequent exchange of ideas and improve the current state.

6.5.2.1.2 Store and Production Controller

The introduction of the label comparators is a good poka-yoke solution to prevent

mistakes from happening and the operators should be encouraged to use them.

Moreover, the store men are conscious of the fact that the manager records the use

of the comparator, so this is an incentive for the use. This is something that should

continue over time.

Another aspect to stress is the communication. Currently, the PC delivers the SOP to

the store and that triggers the preparation of the kit. The concept of digital

communication brings significant changes in the way the paperwork is sent amongst

the relevant teams: digitally. Therefore, only the BOM may be necessary to be sent

to the store, to allow the preparation of the kit.

What is really important on the PC side is that the kit is requested when actually

needed and this requires the close collaboration with the scheduling and the project

managers. Meetings (as previously suggested), shared spreadsheet, scheduling

visibility and regular communication upstream (ME, design team, materials) will

definitely help the process understanding and reducing the amount of time wasted.

Even though an increase in the frequency of meeting has been also suggested for

the short term, the whole change is more behavioural than just organisational.

Indeed, there are many people involved, some of them may be more reluctant than

others and the whole process would require time to get to the steady state.


101

6.5.2.1.3 Area Manager

It is a good idea to provide a desk on the shop floor for the area manager as well

following the proposal that has been made for the PC in the ST plan. This would

allow a faster communication and speed up the problem-solving process. This

solution is already in place in some areas, but not in all of them (such as the CPS,

which should be the first considered).

Total investment required and financial benefits for the area manager changes are

described in Table 25.

MT Area Manager Relocation: Cost / Benefit


Relocation: The investment required

has been calculated in section 6.5.2.1.3,

but in this case only half of the

investment is assumed applicable, as

there is only one area manager

compared to at least 2 production

controllers: Cost: £400 (considering the

area the extremely needs it: CPS).

Time spent walking

Considering that the area manager visits

the shop floor on average 5 times per

day and it takes about 6 minutes to go

and come back to the desk and wear the

required equipment, a relocation would

save almost 30 minutes per day. In total,

every year the time that can be saved,

only for CPS is: 0,5*240= 120 hours per

year saved.

Financial Savings: £50*120=£6000

TOT: £400 TOT: £6000/year

Table 25 - MT Area Manager Relocation: Cost/ Benefit


102

6.5.2.1.4 Manufacturing Engineer

Communication is an issue within the company, so increasing the exchange of

opinions between the shop floor and the engineering level is a good starting point to

bring engineers and operators to a common level of understanding. It has already

been explained that this is considered a MT action not because of the physical task,

but because of the behavioural change required.

The operator often complaints about the lack of documented changes in the WI, but

at the same time the existing sheet “ Incidents and Observations” in the SOP is rarely

filled in. The lack of feedback is not going to be addressed with a shift to a digital

documentation. Therefore, the operators should be encouraged to report problems

and issues upstream, to facilitate the common understanding and work together to

find a trade off. Regular meetings may be organised between team leaders, ME and

area managers to keep all the areas updated. In fact, the team leaders allow a good

connection between the store and the engineers and discussion about how a WI

should be written before the actual creation would be a great achievement. In the

ideal solution a continuous exchange of ideas is suggested, but in a more realistic

environment more engagement may be required when dealing with the most critical

jobs, which may create more issues on the shop floor.

6.5.2.1.5 Scheduling

It is difficult to generalise about the problems related to the scheduling, as for

example the CPS and the Panel areas work in a complete different way as explained

in section 5.7. A good idea would be to adopt in the CPS the same method used by

the panels. Considering more meetings between the PC, area manager and the

scheduling team to increase the communication and the understanding may be the

first step to solve part of the issues. Nevertheless, one of the main concerns that still

keep the areas separated from each other is the lack of communication between P6

and SAP. The potential connection is a field where future studies can find a proper

solution.


103

6.5.2.1.6 Management

What may help the atmosphere of the whole working environment is the introduction

of a “Box for ideas”. The idea is to encourage all the employees to give feedback, as

people are the main source of new ideas. This could be organised placing boxes in

the common areas or using on the intranet of the company. It could help overcoming

the frustration of the employees and it is based on the fact that the employees can

generate the most brilliant ideas. These should be seriously taken into consideration.

It can facilitate the relationships inside the company, but it will be completely useless

or counterproductive if people realise that nothing is going to change. It is correct to

consider this step as an approach for continuous improvement that will benefit the

company enormously.


104

6.5.2.2 Impact of Changes

Area Involved Change Cost Benefit

Shop Floor Digital System

Relocation

Computers

Programming

Training Session

Investment: £2400

Faster communication

and part of the paperwork

issues solved.

Printed-paper £44000

saved every year.

Time of the PC walking

368 hours saved every

year.

Store and PC

Use spreadsheet

Send automatic

message when kit

ready

Irrelevant

Increased communication

and awareness and void

time wasted walking.

Area Manager Relocation Investment: £400

Improved communication.

Time saved walking 120

hours/year.

ME Exchange of ideas Irrelevant Improved communication.

Scheduling

Additional

Meetings

Irrelevant

Increase in the

communication and

understanding. Better

planning process.

Management Box for ideas Irrelevant Improved communication.

TOTAL Investment £2800 -

Savings

(hours/year)

488

Savings (£/year) - £68400

Table 26 - MT Suggested Changes


105

6.6 General Method

The objective stated prior to the beginning of the research was related to the creation

of an overall methodology to find a solution for the most common kitting issues, that

companies like Airbus D&S may experience. Indeed, other companies may have

issues in common with the case study or completely different problems, but the

methodology created can help each individual case study finding the right solution for

each specific issue.

The steps that have been included in the overall methodology regarding the creation

of a generic solution plan, in addition to the steps developed for the process analysis

(section 5.10), are:

Identification of the industrial best practices for the specific process, if any;

Definition and understanding of the requirements for the process resulting

from the literature research and the identification of the problems that are

likely to happen in the whole kitting process, derived from the problem

analysis (include the best practices in the requirements, if possible);

Evaluation of possible constraints (if any) that would not allow the application

of the best practices or the requirements; define if these constraints will still

exist in a future period of time;

Evaluation of the ideal state of the process, considering also a future state

related to the implementation of radical changes and modifications in the

business model;

Identification of the framework for the so-called realistic solution. It means

understanding what can be done in practice to improve the actual state of the

process, based on a GAP ANALYSIS (AS IS vs. TO BE) following the

requirements defined. If possible, organise the implementation plan according

to a feasible timeframe (i.e. Short term and Medium Term). Involve the people

responsible of the area addressed by the change to understand the needs, the

impact of the proposed change and more important evaluate the feasibility of

the idea.


106

NB: a programme of change management should always be organised when some

changes are expected to take place, to prepare the employees and give them the

right “tools” to manage the change.

7 Discussion

Kitting is a process used by different types of companies and it is described in

literature as one of the existing method to deliver the necessary items to the

assembly area. It has been highlighted that there are many pros and cons associated

to that process. On the positive side, the kitting can save time in handling the items

and assure a higher level of quality for the assembly process, giving flexibility to the

company. On the other side, some drawbacks can affect the process, slowing down

the shop floor if items in the kit are missing or defective components are introduced

in the physical box etc. Also, there are many organisational levels involved in the

process and this increases the level of complexity to be managed. Lean

manufacturing can be the key to allow the process flow and assure that the possible

wastes identified are removed from the process.

In this context, the concept of lean kitting, which is central to this research, was

developed. This research contributed to the discussion about lean kitting presenting

two contrary points of view of lean kitting. The former regards the two industrial case

studies that completely removed the kitting process and the store, while the latter is

supported by the description of specific requirements and an ideal lean kitting

process were all the wastes identified have been removed. The literature does not

clearly label what a lean kitting process is and it may be argued that one solution is

leaner that another. The debate about the real meaning of lean kitting can still be

considered open and for this reason, there is still space for additional research on

this topic.

Nevertheless, the company case study used in the research context has been

extremely helpful as it allowed the understanding of the process, the study of the

issues in the process and the validation of the ideas generated for the solution.

What has been extremely value adding regards the sources of information and the

approach taken. Indeed, all the relevant areas have been included in the research for


107

potential wastes, starting at the bottom of the process with the operators and then

moving forward to the managerial level (bottom-up approach).

The main issues experienced by the case study confirmed that the predominant

drawbacks of the process recognised by the literature and described in the State of

the Art really exist. Therefore, it is believed that even other companies, especially

working in the same environment as Airbus D&S (low-volume/high-variety), can find

themselves in the same situation. However, there are other issues, so-called

company specific that cannot be found in literature as specifically linked to the

working environment considered, which have been highlighted for the first time by

this research (i.e. the mix problem).

Generally, missing items in the kit, paperwork not clear, cumulative process delays

and lack of communication between the areas are the problems experienced. The

main question, which drove the problem identification, was “Is this really necessary?”

When the answer was no, it meant that something could have been done better. It is

not important to blame one part, but what is important is the identification of the

problem source. In fact, it is helpful in the way it allows the understanding of the big

picture and the identification of the most effective and efficient solution for the issues.

Though, it is not the specific solution for the problem that matters. Indeed, what it is

more valuable is the whole methodology behind, which drives the process analysis

and the consequent identification of the right solution. It reflects the steps that have

been followed with the case study and includes the key steps developed for the

generic process analysis (section 5.10) and problem solution (section 6.6). This can

be considered the most valuable rese arch outcome, as it can really help other

companies working in different environments dealing with their kitting processes.

The initial creation of the framework for the ideal kitting process, which triggered the

more realistic solution plan based on industrial constraints, has been an essential

step. Indeed, it is important to understand what the TO BE state may look in the

future because this helps broadening the horizon of the company and gives an

incentive to look forward. However, it is also necessary to give a realistic answer to

the existing needs and address those problems that are negatively affecting the

working place and the process in general. In this framework, some ideas have been


108

recognised as reasonably easy and fast to apply, while others would require more

time to fit a real working environment.

For instance, visual management, shop floor cleanliness and increase in the

communication have been considered priorities to address the existing problems,

according to literature researches and the participation of the case study to the

research project. Simple changes, such as the introduction of colours or light to

increase the visibility and the awareness on the shop floor can make the difference in

a workplace where there are many people sharing the same space. Moreover, IT has

been recognised as a valuable tool to translates ideas into reality, but it can also be

an obstacle if not designed correctly. Indeed, electronic systems that are not

integrated can become a source of waste and inefficiencies. All the ideas that have

been suggested are associated to an investment required and a tangible/intangible

benefit, which have been estimated in to allow a direct comparison. As a result, it is

noticeable that even with a limited investment required, major savings can be

achieved (even thousands of pounds every year). Savings have been expressed

mainly in terms of time and translated when possible in financial terms.

Regardless of the proposed solution, what a generic company must not lack are the

commitment and the communication. At every organisational level there should be

people working to reach a specific objectives included in the bigger picture, which is

the company objective. The isolation is not a positive attitude and it is important to

avoid the idea of throwing the piece of work over the wall. This is summarised by the

concepts design for manufacturing and concurrent engineering. Recognising the

existence of the lack of communication is the first step toward the problem solution

and this is exactly what it is happening in the case company. As many of the issues

are related to the lack of communication between design and manufacturing, the

management is realising how important is the engagement of these areas at an

earlier stage. However, this requires not only an organisational change, but also a

change in the company’s business model and that the level of commitment of all the

areas is extremely high. The proposed implementation plan has taken this issue into

consideration, conscious of the fact that concurrent engineering is not only a nice

expression, but also a philosophy that can highly help companies.


109

The commitment of the management is essential, and so those of the operators. The

most common statement throughout the company is: “It has always been like this” or

“Changes do no stay”. This describes the feeling of the employees, but it does not

have to be used as an excuse to avoid future changes. Change management is the

key for the change in every case and the size of the programme may vary a lot

according to the change plan and the size of the organisation.

The main key findings of this research are summarised in the Table 27 and 28 and

are organised according to the academic research and the Airbus D&S case study.

Table 27 - Key Findings- Academic Research

Airbus D&S Case Study

The company is now aware of their main

issues

The company understands that there are

many issues that have never been

solved because of people inactivity

Design and manufacturing should work

closely together and the commitment of

the top management is essential

The shop floor cleanness should

become a priority for the company,

applying the proposed ideas (i.e. visual

management etc.)

Academic Research

The debate about the lean kitting

concept is still open

The best practices identified are a

starting point for reflection about future

radical changes in similar companies

The main issues identified reflect the

drawbacks described in literature, but

there are other company-specific

issues that cannot be found in literature

The methodology created can help

other companies to identify and

address their kitting issues

Table 28 - Key Findings - Case Study


110

8 Conclusions and Recommendations

This research focused the attention on the gap created by the literature about the

low-volume/high-variety environment and proposed a methodology to identify and

address the main issues of the kitting process. It contributed to the understanding of

the kitting framework and the ideal state of the process, considering the application of

the lean concepts, which have always been applied to an opposite type of

environment. The research involved the use of a company case study to gain deeper

understanding of the process and assure the availability of valuable and meaningful

data.

8.1 Final Methodology

All the objectives that had been defined for the research have been achieved.

Nevertheless, the biggest achievement of the research is the creation of a generic

methodology for the analysis and improvement of the kitting process. It was

developed through the use of a case study (Airbus D&S), but it is also applicable in

other working environments, and other companies can benefit from this.

The methodology created to address the issues of the kitting process is built above

the study of State of the Art and the identification of potential industrial best practices

to create an ideal guideline to follow for the kitting process. Indeed, the literature

review may not be exhaustive to build the big picture. Mapping the process in order

to understand how it is performed in the specific environment is the first essential

step. In fact, it allows the identification of the relevant areas to take into consideration

for the analysis. After that, the step of the multi-level data collection (and subsequent

prioritisation of the problem) with a bottom-up approach and the problem

identifications (together with the previous knowledge gathered) allows the definition

of the requirements for the generic kitting process. The purpose of this is the creation

of an additional guideline for the proposed solutions. As the methodology aims to

include both an ideal and a realistic solution, the consequent evaluation of the

company-specific constraint is important to be aware of what can or cannot be done.

It helps in tracing the line and defining the boundaries between the two proposed

solution plans. It is recommended to organise the realistic solutions according to a

time frame, as it simplifies the improvement plan. Last but not least comes the


111

identification of future work that can be done in the company, as an incentive to

always move forward. The whole methodology has been validated through the use of

interviews, conversations with the management of the case study, observations and

literature analysis.

The diagram shown in Figure 50 represents the overall final methodology.

Figure 50 - Overall Final Methodology

State of the Art/Identifica

tion of Industrial

Best Practices

Process mapping/ Relevant

Areas Identification

Multi level data

collection/ Issues

Prioritisation

Requirements

Definition

Constraints

Evaluation

Realistic/Ideal

Solutions

Future Steps


112

8.2 Project Value

This research has created value for both the academic and the case company side.

Indeed, it handled a research problem, using a real industrial company as part of the

research methodology, as this was considered the best choice to collect data and

validate the methodology developed.

On the academic side, the research contributed to the debate the and interpretation

of the lean kitting concept, presenting two contrasting views: the first related to the

idea that the kitting process is considered a waste and the second that shows an

ideal state for the process without all the waste identifies. The former is supported by

two industrial case studies used as best practices, while the latter is based on the

definition of kitting requirements, coming from literature and the case study problem

analysis. Furthermore, the research successfully contributed to the understanding of

the kitting process framework, especially in terms of relevant areas involved and the

common relationship between them. Moreover, an essential step that fulfils the

objectives set for the project is the creation of the methodology fully explained in

section 8.1, which aims to evaluate and solve all the potential wastes.

From the case study point of view, the research gave the company an objective

overview of the problems/wastes which are slowing the whole process down and

which areas may be more responsible for the inefficiencies. Moreover, a realistic

implementation plan organised according to different timeframes has been created to

suggest ways of improving the existing issues. This contributed to generating

knowledge and understanding in the company that may then decide to implement all

or part of the ideas generated. Moreover, the ideal solution created can be

considered as good starting point for reflections about future radical changes that

would completely change the way the company works.

Based on the achievements of the research, there are some recommendations for

future studies on both the academic side and the case study that are presented in the

following section.


113

8.3 Suggestion For Further Analysis

8.3.1 Academic Research

There is still space for additional academic research, as previously mentioned,

especially in three main areas: industrial best practices, lean kitting concept and root

causes.

Industrial best practices: the two case studies have been presented and labelled

as best practices, because of what lean manufacturing thinks about the general

kitting process. It has been meaningful to present them because the two companies

are operating in the specific type of environment where the literature does not pay

attention to the best practices. What I would suggest is to focus the attention on

further researches about best practices, taking into consideration, if possible, other

industrial case studies that would allow a deeper analysis and comparison with the

cases presented above. Indeed, what is missing in literature is the description of the

best practices for the kitting process that would allow the proper definition of the

kitting requirements. Indeed the elimination of kitting is an ultimate solution that does

not advice about how to improve the current state of the process. This is the starting

point for the research of the best practices, paying specific attention to the kitting

process in a low-volume/high-variety environment. This would be of help to provide

ideal guidelines for companies to follow. Furthermore, it would be good to have

additional industrial case studies for the high-volume/low-variety environment to

complement those that can be found in literature, to evaluate even more deeply the

similarities and the differences in the generic kitting process.

Lean kitting: the research, as previously mentioned, contributed to increasing the

understanding around the meaning of lean kitting, and a significant step has been

represented by the presentation of the two case studies that removed the kitting

process. Also the proposal of an ideal state for the kit where all the issues had been

removed from the process has been significant.

Researchers could argue that one option is leaner than the other (the kitting removal

for instance). This states the need for further research to investigate the real meaning

of lean kitting. The identification of additional case studies from industry, which has

been mentioned before, is the key point for the further understanding regarding the


114

lean kitting process; indeed it would be possible to evaluate whether eliminating the

kit is a good practice or whether there are some drawbacks that have not been

considered or properly highlighted in the two case studies.

Therefore, the next step would be the investigation and the creation of a unique

definition of lean kitting, so that misunderstanding and further discussions can be

avoided. This aims to create the common knowledge of this topic that is partially

missing at this point in time only with the case studies currently available for

consultation. This is the direction to move forward in the research.

Root Causes: creating the Fishbone Diagram was an essential step for the

research. However, it was not possible to progress further and get to the root cause

of each problem because there were some areas that were not included in the scope

of the research. For this reason, it has been highlighted that there is still space for a

deep research about the root causes of the issues previously identified. The

suggestion is to broad the analysis that has been done in this research, removing the

boundaries that stopped the research initially and move forward.

8.3.2 Industrial Case Study

Additional recommendations can follow this research on the waste identification and

proposed solution. Indeed it was possible to highlight the areas that requires

additional studies, by talking to the relevant areas involved, which is thought to be

beneficial for the future of Airbus D&S. All the following topics have been discussed

and highlighted in the main body of the research; some of them have been

introduced in the ideal solution.

The main areas to be addressed are:

Collaboration shop floor/ME: a closer collaboration could be established for the

most critical jobs, as previously mentioned. This requires a study regarding the most

critical jobs, to identify the most suitable.

Consumables: this is considered a critical topic by the operators, team leaders and

the production controller, as there are many quality constraints and opposite needs


115

involved in this area. The suggestion is to keep looking for new items to be

introduced on the shop floor, to facilitate the operators and reduce the amount of

items to be kitted, reducing the probability of making mistakes.

Design: as design has not been considered part of the research scope, it would be

beneficial to compare the ideas generated with the existing constraints on that side,

to be able to address the whole picture.

Mix: the idea of removing the lab has been introduced as well as the need for the

analysis of the possible production of the mix on the shop floor.

Outsourcing: according to what has been presented in the ideal state of the kitting

and the industrial best practices, the idea for a potential outsourcing of the process or

at least of the most critical jobs should be taken into consideration. This is the

starting point for additional studies.

SAP/P6: the ideal state includes having the information systems communication with

each other. However, this is not happening. Since there will be another electronic

system introduced shortly (IPS) that will talk to both SAP and P6, the suggestion is to

evaluate how all the systems talk to each other first (Figure 51).

IPS

SAP

P6

Possible Link

Figure 51 - Potential Connection P6/SAP


116

9 References

Alcorta, L. (2011), The Global Financial Crisis and the Developing World: Impact

on and Implications for the Manufacturing Sector, United Nations Industrial

Development Organization.

Anonymous (1997), Parts kitting trays optimize assembly process, Modern

Material Handling, vol. 52 no. 11 pp. 63.

Applied Industrial Technologies (2014), Kitting Can Optimize Inventory

Management and Performance, available at: www.applied.com. last accessed July

2014.

Baudin, M. (2004), Lean Logistics: The Nuts and Bolts of delivering Materials and

Goods, Productivity Press, NY.

Bicheno, J. and Holweg, M. (2009), The Lean Toolbox. 4th ed. Buckingham,

England: Picsie Books.

Boothroyd G. and Dewhurst P., Inc. (1989) Marcell Dekker, Inc. (1994), Product

Design for Manufacture and Assembly.

Bozer, A. and McGinnis, F. (1992), Kitting versus line stocking: A conceptual

framework and a descriptive model, International Journal of Production Economics,

vol. 28 pp. 1-19.

Brynzer,H. and Johansson, M. (1995), Design and performance of kitting and

order picking systems, Int. J. Production Economics, vol. 41 pp. 115-125.

Cardiff University, available at: http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/lean/about/index.html last

accessed July 2014.

Corakci, M. (2008), An Evaluation of Kitting Systems in Lean Production,

University of Boras, School of Engineering.

Chapman, A. (2005), Change Management, available at

http://www.businessballs.com/changemanagement.htm. Last accessed July 2014.

http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/lean/about/index.html


117

Christmansson,M. et al. (2002), A case study of a principally new way of materials

kitting-an evaluation of time consumption and physical workload, International

Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, vol. 30 pp. 49-65.

Convis, G. (2014), Role of Management in a Lean Manufacturing

Environment available at:

http://www.sae.org/manufacturing/lean/column/leanjul01.htm. last accessed July

2014.

Dorsett, D. (2012) available at: http://www.goleansixsigma.com/how-to-easily-

apply-5s-to-your-work-station/ last accessed July 2014.

Drew et al. (2004), Journey to Lean, 1st ed. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Dudley, N. (2005), The Application of Lean Manufacturing Principles in a High Mix

Low Volume Environment, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Entrepreneurness (2010), available at:

http://entrepreneurness.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/basics-of-product-design.html last

accessed July 2014.

Fong-Yuen, D. and Puvitharan, B. (1990), Kitting in Just-in-time production,

Production and Inventory Management Journal, vol. 31 no. 4 pp. 25.

Hanson, R. (2012), In-plant materials supply: Supporting the choice between

kitting and continuous supply. Thesis For The Degree Of Doctor Of Philosophy,

Department of Technology Management and Economics, CHALMERS UNIVERSITY

OF TECHNOLOGY.

Hanson, R. et al. (2012). Assembly station design: a quantitative comparison of

the effects of kitting and continuous supply, Journal of Manufacturing Technology

Management, vol. 23 no. 3 pp. 315-327.

Hanson, R. and Mebdo, L. (2010), Kitting and time efficiency in manual assembly,

International Journal of Production Research, vol. 8 no. 2 pp. 1-22.

Henderson, R. et al. (1993), Kitting elimination supports just-in-time

principles. Industrial Engineering, vol. 25 no. 3 pp. 46.

http://entrepreneurness.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/basics-of-product-design.html


118

Hua, W. and Johnson, D.J. (2010), “Research Issues on factors influencing the

choice of kitting versus line stocking”, International Journal of Production Research,

vol. 48 no. 3 pp. 779-800.

Hubbard, B. (2010), Root Cause Analysis (Overview), available at:

http://bobsleanlearning.wordpress.com/2010/09/16/root-cause-analysis-overview/

last accessed July 2014.

Johansson E. and Johansson M.I. (2006), Materials Supply Systems Design in

Product Development Projects, International Journal of Operation and Product

Management, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 371-393.

Kilic, H.S. et al. (2012), Design of kitting systems in lean-based assembly lines,

Assembly Automation, vol. 32 no. 3 pp. 226-234.

Kotter, J. (2002), The heart of change, New York: Harvard Business School

Publishing.

Larman, C. and Vodde, B. (2009), LEAN PRIMER, version 1.5 available at:

www.leanprimer.com.

Lean Enterprise Institute (1997), “Toyota’s New Material-Handling System Shows

TPS’s Flexibility” available at:

http://leaninstituut.nl/publications/1106/ToyotaNewMaterialHandlingSystem.pdf last

accessed July 2014

Leanisrael (2012), available at: http://blog.leanisrael.co.il/2012/08/muda-mura-

muri.html last accessed July 2014.

Liker, J. K. (2004), The Toyota way: 14 management principles from the world's

greatest manufacturer, New York: McGraw-Hill.

LeanCor (2014), available at: http://www.leancor.com/blog/my-lean-journey-

continuous-home-improvement/ last accessed July 2014.

McLaughlin, P. (2014), Cranfield University, Oral Reference.

http://leaninstituut.nl/publications/1106/ToyotaNewMaterialHandlingSystem.pdf

http://blog.leanisrael.co.il/2012/08/muda-mura-muri.html

http://blog.leanisrael.co.il/2012/08/muda-mura-muri.html

http://www.leancor.com/blog/my-lean-journey-continuous-home-improvement/

http://www.leancor.com/blog/my-lean-journey-continuous-home-improvement/


119

MID (2014), available at:

http://www.midwestintermodaldistribution.com/services/kitting/ last accessed July

2014.

NHS, Connecting for health (2000), available at:

http://www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/systemsandservices/icd/informspec/careerpla

n/phi/personal/learningweb/leadership/change last accessed July 2014.

Norval, A. (2011), Back to Basics available at:

http://blog.leansystems.org/2011_11_01_archive.html last accessed July 2014.

Ohno, T. (1988), Toyota production system: Beyond large-scale production.

Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press.

Prateek (2011), available at: http://prateekshukla.blogspot.co.uk/ last accessed

July 2014.

Ramachandran, S. and Delen, D. (2005), Performance analysis of a kitting

process in stochastic assembly systems, Computers & Operations Research, vol. 32

pp. 449–463.

Sanders, D. and Tewkesbury, G.E. (2009), “An expert system for automatic

design-for-assembly”, Assembly Automation, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 378-88.

Santillo, L.C. (2008-09), Lean Production. Corso di Gestione della Produzione

Industriale, available at: http://143.225.72.117/unina/didattica/appunti_lean.pdf last

accessed July 2014.

Scherer, Contenitore in Plastica Newbox available at:

http://www.scherer.it/it/prodotti/contenitori-in-plastica-equipment/newbox.12.html last

accessed August 2014.

Socepi, Pettini Divisori, available at: http://www.socepi.it/Home/tabid/39/p/Pettini-

divisori-linea-DELTA-MEC/ProductID/237/CategoryID/108/Default.aspx last

accessed August 2014.

Quizlet LLC (2014), available at: http://quizlet.com/2100663/lom-3320-processes-

and-facilities-flash-cards/ last accessed July 2014.

http://www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/systemsandservices/icd/informspec/careerplan/phi/personal/learningweb/leadership/change

http://www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/systemsandservices/icd/informspec/careerplan/phi/personal/learningweb/leadership/change

http://blog.leansystems.org/2011_11_01_archive.html

http://prateekshukla.blogspot.co.uk/

http://143.225.72.117/unina/didattica/appunti_lean.pdf

http://www.scherer.it/it/prodotti/contenitori-in-plastica-equipment/newbox.12.html



http://www.socepi.it/Home/tabid/39/p/Pettini-divisori-linea-DELTA-MEC/ProductID/237/CategoryID/108/Default.aspx




120

Tapping, D., Luyster, T., and Shuker, T. (2002), Value stream management: Eight

steps toplanning, mapping, and sustaining lean improvements. New York, NY:

Productivity Press.

Tinoco, C. (2004), Implementation Of Lean Manufacturing, The Graduate College

University of Wisconsin-Stout, available at:

http://www2.uwstout.edu/content/lib/thesis/2004/2004tinocoj.pdf last accessed July

2014.

Yu, J., Yin, Y. and Sheng, X. (2003), “Modelling strategies for reconfigurable

assembly systems”, Assembly Automation, vol.23 no.3 pp. 266-72.

Williamson, G. (2009), Case Study–Implementing visual management. Available:

http://w3.unisa.edu.au/. Last accessed July 2014.

Womack, J. and Jones, D. (1996), Lean thinking: Banish waste and create wealth

in your corporation. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Womack and Jones (1996), The Machine that Changed the World: The Story of

Lean Production. MIT Press.

Vujosevic, R. (2008), Lean Kitting: A Case Study, The University of Texas at

Austin Department of Mechanical Engineering.

http://www2.uwstout.edu/content/lib/thesis/2004/2004tinocoj.pdf


121

10 APPENDIX I – STATE OF THE ART

This glossary is thought to be useful in order to understand some words that have not

been explained or fully explained in the text.

Glossary of Terms

Andon: A system that alerts people (from floor members to management) of an

abnormal situation (production line down, behind schedule). It is usually a light or an

electronic board.

FIFO (First In, First Out): Products are consumed in the order they were produced or

received. The first product in the building is the first product to be used.

Fluctuation Stock: A set amount of stock that is introduced or removed as required

to maintain level production volumes.

Heijunka (Load Smoothing Production): A system designed to balance production

requirements through kanban control to ensure the same number of pieces are

produced each day and/or shift. Fluctuation stocks are then used to absorb the

variation.

Jidoka: A machines ability to detect abnormalities and stop the process. Operators

have the same authority.

Just in time: This term refers to the production or conveyance of parts or material

only when they are needed and in the quantity required.

Kanban: An instruction for production or conveyance. The most common form of a

kanban is a hand-sized signboard.

Kaizen (Continuous Improvement): One of the key terms in the lean vocabulary, this

refers to the need to continuously improve upon current processes. Continuous

Improvement does not stop until all waste is eliminated.

Non-Value-Added: Any work within the company that does not add value to the end

product. Much of the office work within an organization, although necessary, would

be considered non-value added.


122

Poka Yoke: This Japanese term refers to mistake proofing devices. These devices

are often built into or interlocked with machinery to prevent missing an operation.

Pull System: Each process pulls product from a previous process. The pull of

product is the signal for the preceeding process to replenish the parts that were

pulled. This is also referred to as a replenishment system.

Standard-in-process stock: The amount of product kept between

operations/stations/processes in order to maintain proper process flow.

Standardized Work: A carefully documented and balanced work process that must

be adhered to by each operator to ensure consistency.

TPS (Toyota Production System): A production system developed by Toyota to

facilitate small lot production in an economically feasible manner. It focuses on

continuous improvement of processes, elimination of waste, level production and

quality built into the process (among other principles). It is the basis for lean

manufacturing.

Value-Added: A common term in the lean vocabulary referring to any necessary

work that adds value to a product. Most production work would be considered value-

added work as it contributes directly to the finished product.

Visual Control: This term refers to management by sight. 5S is a type of visual

control - a place for everything and everything in it's place.


123

11 Appendix II - PROBLEM ANALYSIS

STANDARD FORM FOR THE OBSERVATIONS

JOB START TIME JOB END TIME

JOB NAME/ PART

NUMBER

AREA

JOB POSITION

PEOPLE INVOLVED

MAIN VISIBLE ISSUES

CONSEQUENCES ON

THE JOB

V

WASTE CATEGORY

UNPRODUCTIVE

ACTIONS

LEVEL OF EXPERIENCE


124

EXAMPLE OF QUESTIONNAIRE

HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN WORKING for ASTRIUM?

HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN WORKING IN THIS AREA?

WHICH ARE THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF YOUR JOB?

WHICH IS YOUR ROLE IN THE KITTING PROCESS?

WHICH ARE THE MAIN ISSUES YOU PERSONALLY HAVE WITH THE KIT?

CAN YOU DESCRIBE A TIME WHEN THAT ISSUE HAPPENED? (Time, people

involved, what happened, how it was solved etc.)


125

WAS THE WORKING ENVIRONMENT DIFFERENT IN THE PAST?

DO YOU HAVE SUGGESTION TO IMPROVE THE PROCESS?

HOW OFTEN DO YOU EXPERIENCE THIS ISSUE?

WHICH ARE THE CONSEQUENCES ON YOUR WORK?

WHICH IS IN YOUR OPINION THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM?


126

12 Appendix III - PROPOSED SOLUTIONS

Computers

Considerations related to the computers in the various clean rooms analysed and the

central store:

LEO (PANELS)

Currently, there are about 15 computers in the clean room, placed at the sides of the

room and some of them are dedicated to a specific task (for example, laser machine

or the Cartesian robot used to flatten the surface of the panel).

PERSEUS (CPS)

In this clean room there are 9 computers allocated in the free space on the sides of

the area. From observations, it seems that these computers are far more used

compared to the panel area’s computers.

STORE

In the central store there are 5 computers. However, there are only 2 people working

with the kit, so there are 3 computers that are potentially unused and may be moved

and replaced in different areas if needed.

The main question is: Are the resources enough to cover the current need? Are the

current resources well balanced and distributed amongst the facility?

In the proposed solution, a suggestion regarding the digital use of WI as well as the

digital request for the mix is proposed.

The feasibility of these ideas is connected to the availability of resources on the shop

floor. It may be easier to relocate a few unused resources than purchasing additional

computers. Indeed, the store has an over capacity, while the Perseus has not

enough resources.

The purchase of computers or the relocation of existing resources is not a constraints

that can stop from the realisation, however the space and the position of the

computers on the shop floor may be a constraint to evaluate.


127