Lean Portfolio - A.Mckew (FINAL)

LERC/OEE Lean Accreditation Scheme

Level 1c Evidence Portfolio

© OEE 2012

2

LERC/OEE Lean Accreditation Scheme Level 1c Evidence Portfolio

ANDREW MCKEWTHOMAS COOK AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING LTD

12TH JUNE 2014

© OEE 2012

Recommended Portfolio Contents

3

Recommended Composition of the Candidate’s Evidence Portfolio The candidate is recommended to submit evidence against a minimum of six Lean tools and techniques, drawn from the following groupings: At least one from : Demand analysis, forecasting and capacity planning At least one from: Scoping, activity sampling, opportunity spotting, waste

identification At least one from: Implementing flow, work organisation, pull, TAKT time

analysis, layout and work design At least one from: Process mapping and analysis, value stream mapping,

value analysis (VA/NVA), process standardisation (standard operations, user guides & one best way)

No more than two from: Visual management; QCD, performance measurement and management, customer-focused KPIs, interval control, skills assessment and accreditation systems, 5S

Optionally, one or more from:

Team based problem solving, lean quality control

1c PortfolioBackground

4

© OEE 2012

5

Background and Experience

Please summarise your experience of implementing Lean tools and techniques in service organisations

(Duration, organisations, positions held)

I commenced a Lean 6 sigma 10 day training course on 12th November 2013. The result of this training assisted my job role of the Material Supply Chain Senior Stores Supervisor in a project to improve stock accuracy and significantly reducing waste in material transactions within my department as well as adopting / implementing the 5s principles within the work place to great affect

Please list any relevant qualifications that you already hold City & Guilds 1 & 2 in Motor Vehicle Craft StudiesField Supply Duties (Air Fuelling)Train the trainer “In lifting and Manual Handling”Managing Safely (Institute Of Occupational Safety & Health)Facilitation Skills Training Course – Olympic TrainingLean Management – Green BeltBaines & Simmons Regulations Essentials AwarenessManagers Human Factors & Maintenance Error Management Training Course

Have you previously applied for Lean Accreditation, through oee or any other body?

If so, what was the outcome?

No I have not!

Please provide some background information to help us understand your experience

© OEE 2012

6

Understanding Lean ThinkingIn your own words, -define “Lean”-and describe how you would implement Lean effectively and sustainably into an organisation.

(Hint & tip- Your answer should start to fill the box below, if your struggling think about how you buy people into lean - How has your thinking moved on from LCS 1b?

Lean is to maximize customer value while reducing waste by creating more value for customers with fewer resources. Bringing togetherpeople from all business areas involved in the processes to map the process and identify areas to improve, using factual data and running workshops to assign actions for improvement to better the process flow.

Implementing lean methodology to change behaviours and to maximise the benefits by implementing the 5s housekeeping standards to improve the workplace in terms of flow to streamline processes and maximise productivity. This then becomes a way of life that is sustainable and can be easily maintained and constantly improved. By reducing waste we increase our profitability and improve performance. This can be achieved by engaging the workforce at daily huddle sessions to ensure leadership and create a responsible team to understand the needs of the business and communicate the wider business need. Smaller Lean training sessions across the workforce can be useful to help embed the lean culture

1c PortfolioProject Work

7

© OEE 2012

8

Portfolio Summary

Comments

Material Supply Chain processes are impacting upon resource utilisation ( manpower and materials) in the hangar, stores and line station areas, leading to an increase in cost to the business.

Where are the likely problems?

Reliability of GSE/Tooling; Inaccurate Bill of Material (BOM) information; Stores Location stock accuracy; Speed of return of unused items from hangar; Lack of structured Vendor Management system; Stores staff shift patterns- alignment with actual business need?; Training for contract and hangar staff – Lack of awareness of booking out/material request processes; No clear approval process for shortage items – leading to over ordering; Effectiveness of the collect and delivery process from stores to the hangar; No kitting process in place; Management of line spares; Slow moving and obsolete stock management – How this is managed across multiple stock locations; Cancellation of demand and associated Purchase Orders;

What are the consequences of not fixing the problem?

Increase in cost of material inventory and resource levels due to over-ordering and the associated costs due to non value added activities within Production and Supply Chain

In this section please give a brief high level summary of the area were you worked in - This piece is to set the scene for the person reading your portfolio. What was the business need? How were the stakeholders? What was the business driver behind why your lean work required.Will it be obvious to the reader what you have done? Think about the “story” - what was the problem?, how did you diagnose the problem and get to the root cause? What was my solution? What benefits did it provide to the organisation? - Have the benefits of the work you have done applying lean tools covered the costs of investment in yourself by the organisation?

Supply Chain Project Charter▪ Scope (Incl. functions, products, processes, FTE numbers, regions)

▪ Measures of Success / Key Performance Indicators

▪ Resource Plan

▪ Barriers to Success

▪In Scope:Direct Hangar and Line Material Supply Chain to include…

Engineering planningProductionEngine kittingVendor managementQuality Assurance

In-DirectFinance

▪ Project Objective

• Reduce the number of Non-Rotable components returned to Stores (RTS)• Increase Stock Accuracy levels in stores and Increase delivery accuracy of

hangar component rounds through:• Implementation of 5S principles• Analysis of current process and root cause analysis using structured

problem solving• Develop optimum balance of stores held items Vs. Vending

machine/consignment items• Optimise the flow of spares and tooling in and out of the stores area• Vendor Selection and management for POI and kitting process.• Inventory management (efficient stock holding)

▪Out of Scope:

▪GMO

Sub-factor Description/Issue

AMOS Implementation Effort to deliver AMOS may prevent delivery of required improvements

Resource availability

Role Name

Sponsors Paul Horstink

Programme Owner Mike Sigley

Project Leader & Team Members

Andrew McKew (Lead) , Joanne Royston

▪ Project Assumptions

• Project Leader & Team Members available for 50% of working week• Data is available when required

• Reduce incidence of and consequential cost of delayed on-time delivery due to Material supply

▪ Areas of Focus

KPI Baseline Target

Non-Rotable items RTS Transactional Saving – Base & Line

25% 30% reduction £19,352

RTS Purchases Saving Base & Line

4% 30% reduction £295,303

Stores Stock accuracy 87% > 95% £69,090

© OEE 2012

10

Problem Statement – Supply Chain

Summary:‘’ How can we reduce the cost impact to the business by having Supply Chain processes that deliver the right item, in the right quantity at the right time’’

What is the problem? Material Supply Chain processes are impacting upon resource utilisation ( manpower and materials) in the hangar, stores and line station areas, leading to an increase in cost to the business.

Where are the likely problems?

•Reliability of GSE/Tooling•Inaccurate Bill of Material (BOM) information•Stores Location stock accuracy•Speed of return of unused items from hangar•Lack of structured Vendor Management system•Stores staff shift patterns- alignment with actual business need?•Training for contract and hangar staff – Lack of awareness of booking out/material request processes•No clear approval process for shortage items – leading to over ordering•Effectiveness of the collect and delivery process from stores to the hangar•No kitting process in place

Where are the likely problems? (cont’d)

•Management of line spares •Slow moving and obsolete stock management – How this is managed across multiple stock locations•Cancellation of demand and associated Purchase Orders

To what extent is it a problem?

•Stores stock accuracy is 87%

What are the consequences of not fixing the problem?Increase in cost of material inventory and resource levels due to over-ordering and the associated costs due to non value added activities within Production and Supply Chain.

© OEE 2012

11

Outcome Statement

Summary: “We will know we have been successful when...”

Specific: Does the statement specifically address the problem? Measurable: Does the statement indicate how the problem will be measured and baselined? Does it indicate the targets for improvement? Achievable: Does the statement indicate the goal? Is the goal achievable? Is the project completion date realistic?

Relevant: Does the statement relate to an organisation objective? Timely: Does the statement indicate the date of completion?

The RTS rates for Non-Rotable items from both

base and Line are at the agreed target levels

We have high levels of stock accuracy

We have increased customer satisfaction

with our serviceWe will have accurate BOM’s that drive

effective use of our MRP process

Hangar staff do not have to search for the parts to do the

job

We have a positive impact upon Hangar

staff productivity

© OEE 2012

12

Overview of Portfolio

Tool or Technique Evidenced Team/Department/Area Implemented Types of Evidence Submitted

5S Main Supply Area photographs

Activity Sampling / Opportunity Spotting Main Supply Area & Aircraft Maintenance Hangar

Data

Layout and Work Design

Please list on this page the contents of your Portfolio (insert new lines as required)

© OEE 2012

13

Tool or Technique SubmissionPlease describe your experience in detail, focusing on the business problem, the solution you implemented and the business benefits delivered - Please remember the person reviewing your Portfolio may not know your business. You may need to add additional pages if you have a number of tools used. (Although some of the information may be duplicated from one page to the next)Tool or Technique 5S

Business Area and Client Contact Name* Material Supply Chain (Stores)Mike Sigley – Head Of Material Supply

Please describe the business problem that you encountered Lack of flow of spares through the stores department was resulting in poor stock accuracy and a frustrated and disengaged workforce. This affected our internal customer in engineering with poor control of aircraft parts causing confusion and delays to our on time performance for the aircrafts return to service after a check.The stores flow of materials and processes lacked direction leading to increased confusion and wasted man hours.

Please describe the solution that you implemented Using the 5s methodology the stores area was rearranged and improvements made to the layout and general tidiness.The stores floor plan was colour coded and with responsibility for the coloured zones divided amongst the stores staff to ensure ownership and engagement of the team. Barriers and signage ensured we also improved the flow of work around the department, helping us to reduce waste.

Please describe the business benefits that you delivered

An engaged team who are happy with the direction they now have. The flow of materials has reduced loss of parts and decreased transaction rates and raised the stock accuracy. X%Increased customer confidence

Supporting evidence provided Photographic Evidence below

© OEE 2012

5s PRINCIPLES APPLIED

14

© OEE 2012

5s VISUAL MANAGEMENT

15

5S roster established to ensure sustainability of 5S project

Visual standards used throughout the department to support 5S standardisation

© OEE 2012

5s – HUDDLE BOARD

16

© OEE 2012

17

Tool or Technique Submission

Please describe your experience in detail, focusing on the business problem, the solution you implemented and the business benefits delivered. (some of the info may be duplicated across the tools)Tool or Technique Activity Sampling / Opportunity Spotting

Business Area and Client Contact Name* Stores Tooling Issues and returns from Stores By EngineersMike Sigley

Please describe the business problem that you encountered Engineers spend a significant amount of time collecting and returning tooling from the main stores area.Observations showed a clear problem with the waiting and queuing times of the engineers and it was felt that it had a negative affect on the On Time Performance of the delivery of aircraft, however, this was all observational and not quantified.

Please describe the solution that you implemented Activity recording logs were given to tool store personnel and they were asked to record various data during there time on shift. All shifts patterns during the day shift and the night shift participated to ensure we would collect accurate data.Staff also timed the average queue time and length as well as the average distance travelled by engineers to collect and return tools from around the hangar.


The outcome of the activity sampling supported business cases and a change in the layout of the hangar which delivered benefits around 1015 hours per year released back to production. Delivering a reduction in engineers walking time by 50% when needing to collect tools

Supporting evidence provided Activity capture, analysis and outcome slides attached below

© OEE 2012

Stores Tool Counter – Activity Capture Sheets

18

© OEE 2012

Activity sampling analysis enabled us to understand some of the reasons for visits as well as the value, or non value of the visit

19

© OEE 2012

VA & NVA analysis provided insight that reduced the NVA visits by the engineers

20

© OEE 2012

Scoping Observation – travelling distances and timings

21

• Based upon 50 observations [1] , the average time for an engineer to walk from a bay to stores, queue and walk back is 5.6 minutes (336 seconds)

• Based upon 155 observations of Engineers at tool store window the average transaction time is 2.61 minutes (156 seconds)

• Therefore, total average elapsed time is 8.2 minutes (492 seconds)

• Based upon 12 months historical demand and the requirement for 80% of requests, this accounts for total average elapsed time off the job of:

• 8.2 minutes X 21,750 transactions = 2972 hours (178,350 mins)

• 2.61 minutes x 21,750 transactions = 942 hours (56,550 mins)

• 80% of the collections accounted for 26 tools/chemicals

© OEE 2012

22


Please describe your experience in detail, focusing on the business problem, the solution you implemented and the business benefits delivered. (some of the info may be duplicated across the tools)Tool or Technique Layout and Work Design

Business Area and Client Contact Name* Engineering Hangar Materials Support for Aircraft on check

Please describe the business problem that you encountered Poor layout and process flow of aircraft parts holding area within the hangar facility resulted in lost parts and customer frustration. This impacted the stores department with increased orders and impacted the on time performance of production

Please describe the solution that you implemented After several rapid improvement events involving the material supply chain and engineering and planning departments the bay layout was changed to improve the flow and visibility of the aircraft material. The demand process and return to stores process was simplified with phased loading introduced and a new written procedure introduced along with a dedicated materials storekeeper to build the relationship with the customer.The introduction of point of access tool vending machines housing the top 28 tools equating to 50% of the tooling transactions reduced engineers queue times and storeman issue and return transactions whilst maintaining tool accuracy and safety procedures / accountability


Improved stock accuracy and spares visibility. Customer confidence was increased and the new process and layout was mirrored across 3 other bays in the hangar resulting in an improvement in flow and a decrease in spares ordering. The first check resulted in nil loss of parts and the aircraft departed on time

Supporting evidence provided Flow chart of new processes and photographic evidence below

© OEE 2012

GEMBA OBSERVATION – WALKING DISTANCE

23

© OEE 2012

Engineer elapsed time from aircraft to stores (return) was calculated so we could estimate cost of current process

24

• Based upon 50 observations [1] , the average time for an engineer to walk from a bay to stores, queue and walk back is 5.6 minutes (336 seconds)*• Based upon 155 observations of Engineers at tool store window [2] the average transaction time is 2.61 minutes (156 seconds)

• Therefore, total average elapsed time is 8.2 minutes (492 seconds)

• Based upon 12 months historical demand [3] for the top 26 tools, this accounts for total average elapsed time off the job of:

• 8.2 minutes X 21,750 transactions = 2972 hours (178,350 mins)• 2.61 minutes x 21,750 transactions = 942 hours (56,550 mins)

• Based upon Engineers average cost to TCAE of £28.77/hr, then direct labour cost of £85,504 is attributable to collection/return of top 26 tools• Based upon Stores average cost to TCAE of £25.53/hr, then direct labour cost of £24,154 is attributable to dealing with collection/returns of top 26 tools

Total direct labour cost of £109,658

© OEE 2012

25

GEMBA OBSERVATION – WALKING DISTANCE & SUMMARY OF BENEFIT

© OEE 2012

BAY LAYOUT IMPROVEMENT –WORK ORGANISATION

26

NEW SPARES HOLDING AREA TASK CARD COLLECTION POINT

TASK CARD DROP OFF POINT

© OEE 2012

27

Tool or Technique SubmissionPlease describe your experience in detail, focusing on the business problem, the solution you implemented and the business benefits delivered - Please remember the person reviewing your Portfolio may not know your business. You may need to add additional pages if you have a number of tools used. (Although some of the information may be duplicated from one page to the next)Tool or Technique Process mapping

Business Area and Client Contact Name* Material Supply Chain (Stores)Mike Sigley is my boss and the Lean Project Manager and one of the stakeholders

Please describe the business problem that you encountered The problem statement arose as follows:Material Supply Chain processes are impacting upon resource utilisation in the hangar, stores and line station areas, leading to an increase in cost to the business:RTS (return to Stores Transactions / Activity – Far too many unnecessary transactions leading to wasted man hours and poor stock accuracy due to error rate further enhanced by inaccurate bills of materialsPoor Stock Accuracy – leading to engineers lack of confidence in supply chain and increased costs to the business enhanced by a poor flowTooling Requests – Engineers queue times high for collection & return of tooling necessary to carry out their given tasks impacting OTP and increased labour costs.

Please describe the solution that you implemented Using the DMAIC problem solving structure we quickly established and identified along with the stakeholders approval that a reduction in return to stores activity for tooling and material would improve our overall stock accuracy and engage the work force as well as reducing costs to the business and increase OTP (On Time Performance) Once the problem statement was created I then followed the DMAIC structure to identify the root cause of the problem, analysing the information and implementing the required changes to deliver the successful outcome


The benefits delivered are a 1015 hours per year released back to production seeing a 34% improvement and a reduction in engineers walking time by 50% and an increase in stock accuracy to 95%

Supporting evidence provided Business Case attached for Point of Issue Solution and benefits realistaion slides attached

© OEE 2012

DEFINED STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES (ST-DI-0005) NEW BAY STOREKEEPERS ROLE & RESPONSIBILITIES

28

© OEE 2012

29

DEFINED STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES (ST-DI-0005) NEW BAY STOREKEEPERS ROLE & RESPONSIBILITIES

© OEE 2012

Work Standardisation – user guide process maps for new forward supply stores

30

NON-ROUTINE PROCESS SPARES DELIVERY PROCESS

RETURNS TO STORES

© OEE 2012

31

Tool or Technique SubmissionPlease describe your experience in detail, focusing on the business problem, the solution you implemented and the business benefits delivered. (some of the info may be duplicated across the tools)Tool or Technique Demand Analysis

Business Area and Client Contact Name* Bill Of Materials ReviewAndrew Mckew / Mike Sigley

Please describe the business problem that you encountered A great deal of planned materials driven from the planning department were constantly being issued and returned without being utilised.In some cases this was 100% of the time.This was also found to be a contributory factors in poor stock accuracy due to the volume of transactionsThe data had to be reviewed with planning to identify the offending parts.Discussions then had to take place with the customer to agree a solution to cut the transactions and to increase stock accuracy

Please describe the solution that you implemented After consultation with the customer it was agreed that the Bill Of Materials for C’Checks would only be picked and issued where the usage was 60% or

more..To achieve this analysis of the Bills of Materials from planning and the usage data was reviewed and the likelihood of the part consumption was discussed with the engineering customer to then set and apply the 60/40 rule when picking parts for all aircraft check types


Increased stock accuracy, Visibility of stock and reduction in transactions reducing time wasted issuing and crediting stock.

Supporting evidence provided BOM reviews and Task Card data

© OEE 2012

BILL OF MATERIALS – TASK CARD DATA

32

© OEE 2012

BILL OF MATERIALS – TASK CARD LIKELIHOOD

33

© OEE 2012

34


Please describe your experience in detail, focusing on the business problem, the solution you implemented and the business benefits delivered. (some of the info may be duplicated across the tools)Tool or Technique Team Based Problem Solving

Business Area and Client Contact Name* Materials Supply ChainAndrew Mckew / Mike Sigley

Please describe the business problem that you encountered Material Supply Chain processes are impacting upon resource utilisation ( manpower and materials) in the hangar, stores and line station areas, leading to an increase in cost to the business.

Please describe the solution that you implemented Engaging with the customer and interfacing departments across several workshops over a period of time action plans were created and persons nominated to run with their nominated actions.Weekly meetings to monitor progress with RAG status were arranged to close out the actionsVoice of the customer surveys were carried out and recorded and discussed at the workshops.Gant charts were used to monitor with task leads nominated to report to the stakeholders on a weekly basis


Group focus was delivered across the project to enable correct lines of communication and feedback required to move the project forward at an acceptable pace.The benefits delivered was an agreed solution by all involved in the process across the workshop and to the wider audience of all involved. This engaged the customer and the supporting departments which eventually resulted in a rapid improvement event to trial the changes that were agreed..The success of the rapid improvement event resulted in all the aircraft bays in the main hangar mirroring the rapid improvement event bay setting a standard that everyone was now familiar with no matter what the aircraft check type was.This continues to date

Supporting evidence provided Gant Charts, Action Plans and Voice of the customer Q & A’s

© OEE 2012

35

© OEE 2012

FISHBONE

36

© OEE 2012

PROCESS MAPPING & FISHBONE WORKSHOPS

37

© OEE 2012

38

BOM (BILL OF MATERIAL) REVIEWIn this section you may include additional evidence that you believe will support your submission.-Try to compress photographs if possible-Remember the person assessing the portfolio may not know your organisation in detail so you may need to provide some context

© OEE 2012

39

PRELOAD DEMAND PROFILE (2 YEARS DATA)In this section you may include additional evidence that you believe will support your submission.-Try to compress photographs if possible-Remember the person assessing the portfolio may not know your organisation in detail so you may need to provide some context

© OEE 2012

GEMBA OBSERVATION – PICK & ISSUE OF PARTS

40

© OEE 2012

41

Portfolio Summary

The benefits realisation of the introduction of the new tooling POI (Point Of Issue) vending solution has shown significant savings in labour costs given back to production.The reduction in transaction rates for the issue and return of tooling and the issue and return of aircraft parts has decreased significantly helping to reduce error rates and improve stock accuracy..This was alongside the introduction of a new ERP computer system which threw more challenges into the project that we overcame.

The 5s Principles that we now audit and report each week has also vastly improved the flow of material within the stores department giving the work force more focus.The target was 80% and this is now regularly surpassed each week.The huddle board has been a great success and has engaged the whole stores team and is regularly visited by senior managers and executives alike which emphasises the departments achievements to date!

The Rapid Improvement Event carried out in the hangar between supply chain and engineering has improved the flow of parts to aid the on time performance of the Hangar checks.New processes from the event have increased better spares visibility and control

In this section you may make any additional comments that you believe will support your submissionWorth rechecking your portfolio. Will it be obvious to the reader what you have done? Think about the “story” - what was the problem?, how did you diagnose the problem and get to the root cause? What was my solution? What benefits did it provide to the organisation? - Have the benefits of the work you have done applying lean tools covered the costs of investment in yourself by the organisation?

© OEE 2012

42

Statement of Authorship

In submitting this portfolio, I certify that the contents, and all supporting evidence, represent either:My own work, orWork I carried out jointly with another Lean team member, who has been suitably credited in the relevant sections of this document, or

Work completed by members of a client team or department, working under my direct guidance and coaching

None of the evidence submitted represents the work of others except as described aboveBy making this submission I give my consent to an OEE assessor contacting other members of my

team, and any of the client contacts named, to verify that the work described is my own work and was completed to the standards I have described

I understand that, should this declaration prove (now or in the future) to be untrue, the relevant part of this evidence portfolio will become invalid. Should the evidence portfolio be weakened as a result, OEE reserve the right to revoke Lean accreditation should the revised submission no longer provide a suitably strong case.

Documents

Lean Portfolio - A.Mckew (FINAL)