IME 481 - Achieving

the future state

4th lecture for VSM

Joseph C. Chen, P.E. & Ph.D.

Materials from Learning to See, Rother & Shook, 2000

Achieving the future state

Value Steam mapping
pp g is onlyy a tool. The value
stream mapping is nearly worthless if there
is no achievement into any stage of the
future map.

1. Breaking implementation into steps

2. The Value-stream p
plan
3. Value-stream improvement in
Management jobs

1
The plan
 Future state map
 Any detailed process-level maps or layouts
that are necessary
 A yearly value-stream plan

Breaking implementation into steps

 The pacemaker loop encompasses the flow

of materials and information between your
customer and your pacemaker process
 Additional loops – upstream of the
pacemaker loop there are materials flow and
information-flow loops
p between p pulls.

2
 An example of Value-stream Loops
Production 90/60/30 day
Forecasts
Control Daily order
customer
Michigan
Steel Co.

Supplier Loop

1x
daily

Stamping
Weld + Assy.
L
L
R Shipping
R
Takt = 60 sec
Loop C/T = 55 sec.
C/O = 0 Pacemaker Loop
Uptime = 100%
2 shifts

Loop 1: Pacemaker loop

Objective:
 Develop continuous flow from weld through assembly (cell)
 kaizen work elements to reduce total cycle time to 165
seconds or less
 eliminate weld-fixture changeover time
 improve uptime on welder #2 to 100%
 develop pull system with finished-goods supermarket
(eliminate schedule)
 develop material-handler routes between the supermarkets
and the cell
Goals:
 only 2 days of finished goods inventory in supermarket
 no inventory between workstations
 operate the cell with 3 people (at current demand rate)

3
Loop 2: Stamping loop
Objective:
 establish p
pullll ssystem
stem with
ith stamped
stamped-parts
parts supermarket
s permarket
(eliminate stamping schedule)
 reduce stamping batch sizes to 300 (LH) and 160
(RH)
 reduce stamping changeover time to less than 10
minutes
Goals:
 only I day of stamped-bracket inventory in
supermarket
 batch sizes of 300 & 160 pieces between changeovers

Loop 3: Coil-supplier loop

Objective:
 develop pull system with steel-coil supermarket
 introduce daily coil delivery
Goals:
 only 1.5 days of coil inventory in supermarket

4
 Use Option A to complete the future map
Production
Control customer
Michigan
Steel Co.

Loop #3: Daily order

Supplier
coil
loop
20
Daily coil 20
Milk run 20
Batch 1x
OXOX daily
60 20
Stamping
Weld + Assy.
20
coils Loop
p #2: L
L
R
Stamping loop Shipping
R
1.5
days Loop #1:
Takt = 60 sec
C/T = 55 sec.
At the press
Pacemaker loop
C/O = 0
Uptime = 100%
2 shifts

(Make sure leave room for process/lead time chart)

The value-stream plan

You need to create one more sheet: a yearly
value-stream plan shows:
 Exactly what you plan to do by when, step-by-
step
 Measurable goals
 Clear checkpoints with real deadlines and named
reviewer(s)
First question:
In what order should we implement? Or
Where do we start?

5
Tip to pick a starting point
 Where the process is well-understood by
your people
 Where the likehood of success is high (to
build momentum)
 Where you can predict big bang for the buck

A pattern for improving a loop

 Develop a continuously flow that operates
based on takt time
 Establish a pull system to control production
 Introducing leveling
 Practice kaizen to continually eliminate
waste reduce batch size,
waste, size shrink
supermarkets, and extend the range of
continuous flow

6
 signatures
Date: Jan. 27, 2005
Plant union Engineer
Facility Manager: Roger Adams Yearly Value-stream Plan Manager
V.S. Manager Joe Chen
V.S. Value-stream Goal 2005 Monthly schedule Person in Related Reviewing
loop objectives (measurabl charge individuals Schedule
e) & dept.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 1 1 Who? Date
0 1 2
1 Conti.
Conti Flow Zero WIP
Kaizen to 165 s. 165 time
Eliminate weld C/O 30s C/O
Uptime weld #2 100%
Finish good pull 2 days
Materials routs FG+pull

2 Stamping pull 1 day inv.

Pull
Stamping
changeover Batch size
300/160
C/O , 10
min.

3. Pull for coils with Daily

daily delivery delivery &
< 1.5 days
of coil at
press

Product family

Date: Jan. 27, 2005 signatures

Facility Manager: Roger Adams Value-stream Review Plant union Engineer
Manager
V.S. Manager Joe Chen

Plant-level V.S. Obj. + Mea. Progress Evaluation Remaining problems Points/ideas

objective Loop Goals condition for future

Product family
= success = Limited success = unsuccessful

7
Who’s responsibility?
 Question: Who is responsible for the cost,
quality, and on-time delivery of this product
from start to finish?
 Answer: Well, materials handling is
responsible for moving parts, the stamping
dept.
p is responsible
p for meeting
g his schedule,
the welding Dept. manager meeting his/her
schedule…..
 In short, no one is responsible.