CHAPTER I

LEAN MANUFACTURING
1.1 THE HISTORY OF LEAN

After World War I Japanese manufactures were faced with the dilemma of vast shortages of material, financial, and human resources. The problems that Japanese manufacturers were faced with differed from those of their Western counterparts. These conditions resulted in the birth of the "lean" manufacturing concept. Toyota Motor Company, led by its president Toyoda recognized that American automakers of that era were out-producing their Japanese counterparts; in the mid-1940's American companies were outperforming their Japanese counterparts by a factor of ten. In order to make a move toward improvement early Japanese leaders such as Toyoda Kichiro, Shigeo Shingo, and Taichi Ohno devised a new, disciplined, process-oriented system, which is known today as the "Toyota Production System," or "Lean Manufacturing." Taichi Ohno, who was given the task of developing a system that would enhance productivity at Toyota is generally considered to be the primary force behind this system. Ohno drew upon some ideas from the West, and particularly from Henry Ford's book "Today and Tomorrow." Ford's moving assembly line of continuously flowing material formed the basis for the Toyota Production System. After some experimentation, the Toyota Production System was developed and refined between 1945 and 1970, and is still growing today all over the world. The basic underlying idea of this system is to minimize the consumption of resources that add no value to a product. In order to compete in today's fiercely competitive market, US manufacturers have come to realize that the traditional mass production concept has to be adapted to the new ideas of lean manufacturing. A study that was done at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology of the movement from mass production toward lean manufacturing, as explained in the book ''The Machine That Changed the World" by Womack and Jones (1996), awoke the US manufacturers from their sleep. The study underscored the great success

of Toyota at NUMMI (New United Motor Manufacturing Inc.) and brought out the huge gap that existed between the Japanese and Western automotive industry. The ideas came to be adopted in the US because the Japanese companies developed, produced and distributed products with half or less human effort, capital investment, floor space, tools, materials, time, and overall expense. The road to transition American manufacturers into lean organizations has taken many decades of development. The origins of lean can be traced back to Kiichiro Toyodas vision of just-in-time part delivery in the 1930s. The system of lean production was implemented by Eiji Toyoda and Taiichi Ohno at the Toyota Motor Company in Japan in the 1950s. However, it wasnt until books such as Japanese Manufacturing Techniques by Schonberger (1982) and Zero Inventories by Hall (1983) were published that the concept of lean manufacturing was considered to be applicable to organizations outside the Japanese automobile industry. When Womack et al. (1990) published The Machine that Changed the World, a new era in the approach to manufacturing systems design was launched. In the mid- 1980s, in response to several governments concerns about the health of their automobile industries, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology created the International Motor Vehicle Program (IMVP). It was one of IMVPs researchers, John Krafcik, who first used the term lean production to describe the production system that used significantly fewer resources compared with the widely accepted system of mass production.

The fundamental of lean production is to identify and eliminate wastes, all work of an enterprise can classified into three parts, the first is value-added work includes essential activities that add value to a project in a way the customer is willing to pay for. The second is incidental work includes the auxiliary activities that dont necessarily add value, but must be done to support value-added work. The third is non value-added work or waste includes non-essential activities that add time, effort, cost, but no value, which we are familiar in production site that has not implemented lean production including superfluous inventory, unnecessary transportation, waiting, excess processing, wasted motion and products with defects.

Lean has proven to be an effective management philosophy for improving businesses in a competitive market by eliminating waste and improving operations. An impact of implementing lean projects is the rapid reduction in inventory levels, which gives management the false impression that profits are decreasing while workers on the shop floor observe improvements in operations and increased floor space.

Many major businesses in the United States have been trying to adopt lean manufacturing principles in order to stay competitive in a global market that is characterized by increased competition and customer expectations. Many businesses have found lean philosophy to be the potential solution over other improvement methodologies and approaches for businesses trying to focus on waste elimination and producing products that meet customer expectations in terms of quality and on-time delivery. Although the lean approach is promising, the progress of adopting it by manufacturing companies has been progressing slowly in the US and Europe, according to Lian and Landeghem (2007), because traditional manufacturers, from both operational and financial perspectives, question the effectiveness of lean transformation. From the operational point of view, traditional manufacturers are reluctant to implement lean ideas because they cannot quantify and project the benefits that they can gain by implementing it. As Detty and Yingling (2000) state: The decision to implement lean manufacturing, as just described, is a difficult one because of the substantial differences between traditional and lean manufacturing systems in employee management, plant layout, material and information flow systems, and production scheduling/control methods. These differences make it difficult for organizations that have historically relied on traditional manufacturing methods to predict the magnitude of the benefits to be achieved by implementing lean principles in their unique circumstances. As a result, the decision whether or not to adopt lean manufacturing techniques often must be based on a combination of faith in the lean manufacturing philosophy, the reported experiences of others who have previously adopted these principles, and general rules of thumb on anticipated benefits. For many management teams, such faith-based justification is insufficient to convince them to adopt lean concepts.

From the financial point of view, one of the wastes that lean implementation eliminates quickly when applied is excess inventory. Lower inventory levels negatively affect the bottom line of the financial statement and a misleading impression is taken that lean is not improving the business and should be stopped. As a result of mis-interpreting lean operationally and financially, some managers stand against any progress taken for lean implementation and improvement initiatives. 2.1 The definition of VSM Value stream mapping is a technique or tool with a pencil and paper that helps people to see and understand the flow of material and information as a product makes its way through the value stream. The elements of VSM include customer loop, production control, supplier loop, manufacturing loop, information flow and lead time data bar with critical path that make us have a full view of the whole supply chain from customers requirements to suppliers delivery. 2.2 Why do VSM First Value stream mapping helps us understand where we are (Current State), where we want to go (Future State) and map a route to get there (Implementation Plan), which can create a high-level look at total efficiency, not the independent efficiencies of individual works or departments, visually show three flows - material flow, product flow and information flow to identify improvement opportunities, and help identify applicable lean improvement tools and plan for deployment. The practices of enterprises have successfully implemented lean production prove that VSM can eliminate 50% waste process/steps, shorten cycle time by 30%, reduce variation from 30% to 5% and improve product quality greatly. So we should implement lean production first from VSM.

1.2

LEAN MANUFACTURING PRINCIPLES

Lean Manufacturing focuses on eliminating waste while delivering quality products at the lowest cost to the manufacturer and consumer. Lean methods typically lead to significant environmental benefits. Lean manufacturing is a management philosophy focusing on reduction of the 7 wastes (Over-production, Waiting time, Transportation, Over-processing, Inventory, Motion and Scrap) in manufactured products. By eliminating waste, quality is improved, production time is reduced, and cost is reduced. Lean "tools" include constant process analysis (kaizen), "pull" production (by means of kanban), and mistake-proofing (poke yoke). One crucial insight is that most costs are assigned when a product is designed. Often an engineer will specify familiar, safe materials and processes rather than inexpensive, efficient ones. This reduces project risk, that is, the cost to the engineer, while increasing financial risks, and decreasing profits. Good organizations develop and review checklists to review product designs. The Five lean manufacturing principles given by Burton and Boeder (2003) are as under: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Accurately specific values from the customer's perspective for both products and services. Identify the value stream for products and services and remove non-value-adding waste along the value stream. Make the product and services flow without interruption across the value stream. Authorize production of products and services based on pull by customer. Strive the perfection by constantly removing laters of waste. Thus, lean is basically all about getting the right things, to the right place, at the right time, in the right quantity while minimizing waste and being flexible and open to change.

 Value: Define value from the standpoint of the customer. However, in reality, the final customer is the only one who can specify the value of a specific product or service by paying a price for it.

Value stream: View your product delivery system as a continuous flow ofprocesses that add value to the product.

Flow: The product should constantly be moving through the value stream towards the customer at the pace of demand.

Pull: Product should be pulled through the value stream at the customers demand rather than being pushed on to the customer

Perfection: The never-ending pursuit of eliminating waste in the system such that the products can flow seamlessly through the value stream at the rate of demand.

OVERVIEW OF LEAN MANUFACTURING According to Womack and Jones (2003), who are internationally renowned management analysts, there are five basic principles a company or organization should follow in order to embrace the lean thinking characteristics. The major goal of those principles is to reduce cost by eliminating waste. Waste consists of all activities that do not add value from the customers point of view. Reducing cost is also emphasized by Narasimhan, Parthasarathy, and Narayan (2007). The Womack and Jones principles are: 1. Specifying value by determining what the customer values in a product or services. 2. Defining the value stream for a specific product or product family along a value stream and eliminating non-value-added activities (NVA) as perceived by the customer so that the product or service is delivered to the customer in the most efficient way.

3. Getting the product or service to flow by creating continuous flow for the valueadded activities (VA), and replacing batch and queue with single-piece flow. 4. Creating a pull mechanism from the customer by making what the customer wants and when they want it by establishing takt time, and regulating inventories. 5. Striving for perfection through continuous lean journey.

There are seven types of waste (muda in Japanese) that lean focuses on reducing, if not eliminating (Narasimhan et al., 2007; MCS Media, 2006; El-Haik & Al-Aomar, 2006). They are: overproduction, waiting time, transportation, over-processing, inventory, motion and scrap. Figure 1 shows those sources of waste graphically. As a result of waste reduction, improvements emerge in reduction of operating cost, productivity, quality and on-time delivery of products (Narasimhan et al., 2007)

Sources of waste in any production system Narasimhan et al., (2007); MCS Media (2006);and El-Haik and Al-Aomar (2006) describe each source of waste as :

 Defects: making mistakes in the production process that results in generating reworked or scrapped products Inventory: the buildup of excessive inventory in the form of raw material, workin-process, and finished items Motion: unnecessary movements of workers or machines before, after, or during processing Over-processing: unnecessary and non-value added usage or processing of equipment, tools, and materials Over-production: producing more than required quantities of products Transportation: unnecessary and excessive movement of materials or parts within the production line, the warehouse, or the storage area Waiting: parts or materials waiting in queues for being processed

5. Creating Flow: Introducing Pull System Controls What Is Pull? Most target improvements retain the traditional push system. This is especially true of upstream, shared, resources. The lean future state is based on pulling work through the system, at the required rate, rather than pushing. The first question to ask about this future state is, How does anyone know what to produce? In a push system,everyone has a schedule, a work list, or some other kind of information that tells what and how many. In the simplest versionof a push system, the requirement is simply to carry out a standard operation on whatever is first in the WIP queue. The pullsystem is really not that different. Instead of working constantly on what is in the upstream queue, or following a schedule,the operator fills containers that arrive from the downstream operation, or produces a quantity equal to the number of

workorders (called pull or kanban cards) that arrive from a downstream operation. If the operation is separated from the downstream operations by a supermarket (a storage area with only limited space for particular items), then as these operations take parts from the storage spots, the upstream operation fills the empty spots. If there is a lack of balance in the system, then one or more upstream operations will be idle at times. By remembering that the objective of the system is to produce what the customer needs, and not to absorb overhead or simply keep operators and machines busy, this should not present a significant problem (although most supervisors will feel uncomfortable for a while). Of course, good planning will help to minimizesuch idleness, as idleness is, after all, waste. The next question to ask is, How does the whole system know what to produce? A pull system may extend all the way to the customer, so that the customer issues cards or containers that serve to authorize production. But somewhere (since at some point the chaos of the marketplace meets the production system) there is a need to take a forecast or a set of customer orders, and decide how to schedule the required work. In many pull systems, this point of contact is simply shipping. Each day, orders arrive - perhaps in a batch, or throughout the course of the day - and when the appropriate shipment size is reached or a shipping window closes, the shipment is sent to the customer. As soon as this happens, a signal (be it a set of containers, a card, or an electronic signal) is sent upstream, authorizing replacement of what was shipped. This leads to a cascade effect, with each operation signaling the immediate upstream operation to produce a given amount of product. In a cell, the authorization to produce will be an empty spot for WIP at all machines except for the last one, which will get a card, signal, or container. Eventually, the process of pulling reaches a machine or storage area that is shared with other value streams. At this point, the ability to supply parts needs to be at least equal to the inverse of the combined takt times of the downstream processes (i.e. if a process serves three value streams each with a takt time of one minute, then the shared resource must have a cycle time of no more than 20 seconds times the standard pull quantity, and sufficient time for changeover and other scheduled downtime). If the system lacks adequate balance, then the bottleneck operation may be the point of scheduling, pulling from upstream and pushing downstream (actually, flowing, since there is by definition more capacity than required). If there are no shared resources downstream, this will work well, with continuous flow through to shipping. When there are shared resources

between the bottleneck and shipping, then there will some other point downstream of the bottleneck where continuous flow becomes possible, and this pacemaker operation is then the logical point to schedule the entire process. An additional complication might exist when demand varies over time. This means that the calculated rate of flow, or the takt of the system, needs to vary. There are a number of solutions to this that can be used to make the pull system work, and they are generally familiar. They include putting more inventory between operations or in finished goods, using overtime to complete the days requirements, adding operators to cells, using additional pieces of equipment at operations that are at capacity, and so forth. Since the situation is not expected to be permanent, these changes must be implemented in a flexible manner. Below, the concept of load levelling is also discussed. Some Advantages of Pull over Push Of course, converting traditional manufacturing to demand-based manufacturing is not quite as simple as pulling instead of pushing. While a push system bases production authorization on a calculation of what will be needed in the future, if everything goes according to plan, pull authorizes production only when material is actually needed (with a calculation of when this material should be made, which assumes that the producing operation will function as planned). Neither system deliberately tries to create too much inventory. But whereas a push system frequently creates too much, and in some places too little, a pull system is most likely to produce too little (or equivalently, too late) when it fails. As indicated above, balance and reliability are important to a successful pull system. As well, shared resources must be able to serve all value streams at the required rate. As we have seen, this requires substantially faster setups. Consider the steps that need to be taken to convert a system from push to pull, and simultaneously to reduce the cost of production (since pull by itself is not necessarily a lower-cost mode of production). In trying to pull, it will quickly become apparent that predictability and reliability are key factors in meeting demand. It is, of course, just as important for push systems to be reliable, if they are to be cost effective. However, it is because of the larger amounts of inventory usually contained in push systems that reliability receives less attention. Given sufficient inventory, and a tendency to ignore the costs of inventory, the sporadic

replenishment of inventory appears to be adequate in push systems. As soon as inventory is only produced to replace what has already been consumed, reliability becomes much more important, since there will be constant shortages under a system that produces sporadically and unpredictably. With a high degree of reliability, it is possible to calculate lead times, and hence the number of productionauthorizations (kanbans) that the system requires to function acceptably. Predictability will not, by itself, reduce costs sufficiently to justify instituting a pull system (because a predictable push system holds the same level of inventory, and may even function more smoothly). The next requirement for a pull system is balance. This means that each step in the process takes the same time to complete a unit of production. When we say the same time, there is some room for variation if the system produces a family of parts. The accepted guideline for variation is a 30% spread from the shortest to the longest. A family of products is produced by a group of production centers when there is insufficient business for just one product. In a pull system, product design and sales will try to achieve, as close as possible, a much narrower variation in time than the outside limit of 30%. Here a significant distinction between the push approach and the pull approach is evident. Push measures utilization, whereas pull measures flow. This explains the two control systems very different approaches to what is wasteful, and ultimately the lower cost of pull systems. The final requirement of cost reduction through pull is stability. While the market may be chaotic, it is possible to impose a large amount of order through leveling the production requirements. This leads to a highly stable load on the system, and furthermore, a repeatable pattern of demand. A pull system becomes highly responsive when it is capable of short runs. This is achieved through quick setup, productive maintenance, multi-skilled operators, and so forth. In this way, all products will be available at all times, and whatever the customer uses will be replaced in quick order. On the other side of the equation, there will be an attempt to impose some sort of order on the chaos of the market through rewarding steady demand (rather than looking for larger orders than the market really needs through volume discounts, which the push system strives for).

Assuming that everything works exactly as planned, there ought not to be any significant difference, from the point of view of inventory levels, between pull and push. In fact, if the planning horizon is short enough, push would appear to turn into a roundabout pull system. But this assumption is rarely correct. The reason push systems tend to create excess inventory is that the penalty for failure is not immediately apparent. Few managers complain of too much inventory; too little, on the other hand, is cause for serious concern, because shipments will be late, and customers dissatisfied. So why does anyone want to move to a pull system? The clear cost advantages outlined above are one reason. There is also an advantage in quality level, because the system simply will not work without flawless quality (since scrap will throw off the timing of the pull signal). Therefore, assuming that a pull system can be set up that delivers unfailingly on time, there is a clear competitive advantage. So one of the key advantages of pull is that it forces a producer to constantly strive for perfection. A producer using a push system is only forced to improve if it stands to lose significant business due to high cost and low quality. One of the ironies of push systems is that they are also poor at on time delivery, despite an excess of inventory because the inventory on hand is often not what the customer wants.

1.3 GLOBAL COMPITITIVENESS AND LEAN MANUFACTURING

International competition and customer demands are forcing radical changes to occur in manufacturing. As a result, companies worldwide that are realizing the importance of being part of the global market are searching for operational methods to increase their competitive power through the use of innovative production systems. Traditional manufacturing paradigms are being challenged and new manufacturing principles are being developed. Terms such as: lean manufacturing, world-class manufacturing, and agile manufacturing have emerged. Firms have given increased

emphasis to delivering products, that are needed by customers, faster than their competition, and meeting or exceeding "best-in-class" quality requirements. As more manufacturers struggle with global markets, competition from low-cost countries and faltering home economies, the attention of many manufacturers has turned to adopt lean philosophy to get benefits of eliminating non-value-added waste across value stream, which positively impacts profitability and creates value for customers, which in turn leads to competitive advantage. A majority of organization are either in the process of applying lean thinking or considering making the leap to embracing the lean thinking. What is it about this infatuation with lean thinking that has such a powerful influence on organization? In short the benefits of eliminating non-value-added waste across value stream are significant as it positively impacts profitability and creates value for customers, which in turn leads to competitive advantage.. Financial performance for an organization can be impacted from both a cost perspective and a growth perspective. The ability to create double-digit growth in sales has showed for most organizations in todays economy. Thus the emphasis has shifted to improving gross margins through cost reduction. There is such a large untapped amount of cost reduction that can be generated by eliminating waste across value streams. It is not uncommon to have ratios of 5 to 30% value added contents in value stream components. That means there is the opportunity to eliminate 70 to 95% of waste in the value stream. Various benefits of lean as given by Burton and Boeder (2003) are illustrated below: Elements Capacity Inventory Cycle time Lead time Product development time Space First-pass yield Service Benefits 10 to 20% gains in capacity by optimizing bottlenecks Reduction of 30 to 40 % in inventory Throughput time reduced by 50 to 75% Reduction of 50% in order fulfillment Reduction of 35 to 50% in development time 35 to 50% gain space reduction 5 to 15% increase in first-pass yield Delivery performance of 99% Table 1.1 Lean Benefits

1.4

LEAN MANUFACTURING TOOLS AND TECHNIQUIES

Various key Lean tools and techniques are discussed one by one below and shown in diagram below. Key lean tools are: Kaizen 5S Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) Cellular Manufacturing / One-Piece Flow Systems Just-In-Time (JIT) Production Systems/ Kanban Production Smoothing Standardization of Work Six Sigma Single minute exchange of die (SMED) Value Stream Mapping

These are shown in figure below:

Fig 1.1 Key Lean Tools

The Structure of VSM Based Lean Production System

1.1.4 Kaizen

Kaizen or rapid improvement processes are often considered to be the building block of all lean production methods. Kaizen focuses on eliminating waste in the targeted systems and processes of an organization, improving productivity, and achieving sustained continual improvement. This philosophy implies that small, incremental changes routinely applied and sustained over a long period result in significant improvements. The kaizen strategy aims to involve workers from multiple functions and levels in the organization in working together to address a problem or improve a particular process. The team uses analytical techniques, such as Value Stream Mapping, to quickly identify opportunities to eliminate waste in a targeted process. The team works to rapidly implement chosen improvements (often within 72 hours of initiating the kaizen event), typically focusing on ways that do not involve large capital outlays. Periodic follow-up events aim to ensure that the improvements from the kaizen blitz are sustained over time. Kaizen can be used as an implementation tool for most of the other lean methods.

1.4.2 5S
5S is a system to reduce waste and optimize productivity through maintaining an orderly workplace and using visual cues to achieve more consistent operational results. The SS pillars, Sort (Seiri), Set in Order (Seiton), Shine (Seiso), Standardize (Seiketsu), and Sustain (Shitsuke), provide a method for organizing, cleaning, developing, and sustaining a productive work environment. In the daily work of a company, routines that maintain organization and orderliness are essential to a smooth and efficient flow of activities. This lean method encourages workers to improve their working conditions and facilitates their efforts to reduce waste, unplanned downtime, and in-process inventory. SS provides the foundation on which other lean methods, such as total productive maintenance, cellular manufacturing, just-in-time production, and Six Sigma, can be introduced.

1.4.3 Total Productive Maintenance (TPM)

It seeks to engage all levels and functions in an organization in maximizing the overall effectiveness of production equipment. Whereas traditional preventive

maintenance programs are centered in the maintenance departments, TPM seeks to involve workers in all departments and levels, from the plant-floor to senior executives, in ensuring the effective operation of equipment. Autonomous maintenance, a key aspect of TPM, trains and focuses workers to take care of the equipment and machines with which they work. TPM addresses the entire production system life cycle and builds a solid, plant-floor based system to prevent accidents, defects, and breakdowns. TPM focuses on preventing breakdowns (preventive maintenance), "mistake-proofing" equipment (or poka-yoke) to prevent breakdowns or to make maintenance easier (corrective maintenance), designing and installing equipment that needs little or no maintenance (maintenance prevention), and quickly repairing equipment after breakdowns occur (breakdown maintenance). TPM's goal is the total elimination of all losses, including breakdowns, equipment setup and adjustment losses, idling and minor stoppages, reduced speed, defects and rework, spills and process upset conditions, and startup and yield losses.

1.4.4 Cellular Manufacturing/One-Piece Flow Systems

In this work units arranged in a sequence that supports a smooth flow of materials and components through the production process with minimal transport or delay. Rather than processing multiple parts before sending them on to the next machine or process step (as is the case in batch-and-queue, or large-lot production), cellular manufacturing aims to move products through the manufacturing process one-piece at a time, at a rate determined by customers' needs. Cellular manufacturing can also provide companies with the flexibility to vary product type or features on the production line in response to specific customer demands. To make the cellular design work, an organization must often replace large, high volume production machines with small, flexible, "right-sized" machines to fit well in the process "cell.". Equipment often must be modified to stop and signal when a cycle is complete or when problems occur, using a technique called autonomation (or jidoka). This -transformation often shifts worker responsibilities from watching a single machine, to managing multiple machines in production cell. While plant-floor workers may need to feed or unload pieces at the beginning or end of the process sequence, they are generally freed to focus on implementing TPM and process improvements.

1.4.5 Just-in-time (JIT) Production Systems / Kanban

JIT and cellular manufacturing are closely related, as a cellular production layout is typically a prerequisite for achieving just-in-time production. JIT leverages the cellular manufacturing layout to significantly reduce inventory and work-in-process (WIP). JIT enables a company to produce the products its customers want, when they want them, in the amount they want. JIT techniques work to level production, spreading production evenly over time to foster a smooth flow between processes. Varying the mix of products produced on a single line, often referred to as shish-kebab production, provides an effective means for producing the desired production mix in a smooth manner. JIT frequently relies on the use of physical inventory control cues (or kanban) to signal the need to move or produce new raw materials or components from the previous process. A limited number of reusable containers are often used as kanban, assuring that only what is needed gets produced. Many companies implementing lean production systems are also requiring suppliers to deliver components using JIT. The company signals its suppliers, using computers or delivery of empty containers, to supply more of a particular component when they are needed. The end result is typically a significant reduction in waste associated with unnecessary inventory, WIP, and overproduction

Some of the benefits of JIT are: reduced. It eliminates unnecessary work-in-process, which results in reduction of inventory costs. Since units are produced only when they are needed, quality problem can be detected early. Since inventory is reduced, the waste of storage space will be Preventing excess production can uncover hidden problems.

1.4.6

Production Smoothing
In a lean manufacturing system it is important to move to a higher degree of

process control in order to strive to reduce waste. Another tool to accomplish this is production smoothing. Heijunka, the Japanese word for production smoothing, is where the manufacturers try to keep the production level as constant as possible from day to day Heijunka is a concept adapted from the Toyota production system, where in order to decrease production cost it was necessary to build no more cars and parts than the number that could be sold. To accomplish this, the production schedule should be smooth so as to effectively produce the right quantity of parts and efficiently utilize manpower. If the production level is not constant this leads to waste (such as work-inprocess inventory) at the workplace.

1.4.7

Standardization of Work
A very important principle of waste elimination is the standardization of

worker actions. Standardized work basically ensures that each job is organized and is carried out in the most effective manner. No mater, who is doing the job, the same level of quality should be achieved. At Toyota every worker follows the same processing steps al the time. This includes the time needed to finish a job, the order of steps to follow for each job, and the parts on hand. By doing this one ensures that line balancing is achieved, unwarranted work-in-process inventory is minimized and non-value added activities are reduced. A tool that is used to standardize work is called "takt" time. Takt (German for rhythm or beat) time refers to how often a part should be produced in a product family based on the actual customer demand. The target is to produce at a pace not higher than the takt time (Mid-America Manufacturing Technology Center pres release, 2000). Takt time is calculated based on the following formula:

Takt Time (TT) Available work time per day = Customer demand per day

1.4.8 Six Sigma

It is a system and collection of statistical methods for systemically analyzing processes to reduce process variation, first developed by Motorola in the 1990s. The term sigma is a Greek alphabet letter used to describe variability. A sigma quality level serves as an indicator of how often defects are likely to occur. A Six Sigma quality level equates to approximately 3.4 defects per million opportunities, representing high quality and minimal process variability. Six Sigma's toolbox of statistical process control and analytical techniques are being used by some companies who have implemented lean production systems to further drive productivity and quality improvements. It is important to note that not all companies using Six Sigma methods are implementing lean manufacturing systems or using other lean methods. Six Sigma has evolved among some companies to include methods for implementing and maintaining performance of process improvements.

1.4.9 Other Waste Reduction Techniques

Some of the other waste reductions tools include zero defects, setup reduction, and line balancing. The goal of zero defects is to ensure that products are fault-free al the way, through continuous improvement of the manufacturing process. Human beings almost invariably will make errors. When errors are made and are not caught then defective parts will appear at the end of the process. However, if the errors can be prevented before they happen then defective parts can be avoided. One of the tools that the zero-defect principle uses is poka-yoke. Poka-yoke, which was developed by Shingo, is an autonomous defect control system that is put on a machine that inspects al parts to make sure that there are zero defects. The goal of poka-yoke is to observe the defective parts at the source, detect the cause of the defect, and to avoid moving the defective part to the next workstation. Ohno at Toyota developed SMED in 1950. Ohno's idea was to develop a system that could exchange dies in a more speedy way. By the late 1950's Ohno was able to reduce the time that was required to change dies from a day to three minutes. The basic idea of SMED is to reduce the set up time on a machine. There are two types of setups: internal and external. Internal setup activities are those that can be carried out only while the machine is stopped while external setup activities are those that can be done while the machine is running. The idea is to move as many activities as possible from internal to external. After all activities are identified

then the next step is to try to simplify these activities (e.g., standardize setup, use fewer bolts). By reducing the setup time many benefits can be realized. First, diechange specialists are not needed. Inventory can be reduced by producing small batches and more variety of product mix can be run. Line balancing is considered a great weapon against waste, especially the wasted time of workers. The idea is to make every workstation produce the right volume of work that is sent to upstream workstations without any stop. This will guarantee that each workstation is working in a synchronized manner, neither faster nor slower than other workstations.

1.4.10 Value Stream Mapping

The Value Stream Mapping method (VSM) is a visualization tool oriented to the Toyota version of Lean Manufacturing (Toyota Production System). It helps to understand and streamline work processes using the tools and techniques of Lean Manufacturing. The goal of VSM is to identify, demonstrate and decrease waste in the process. Waste being any activity that does not add value to the final product, often used to demonstrate and decrease the amount of `waste' in a manufacturing system. VSM can thus serve as a starting point to help management, engineers, production associates, schedulers, suppliers, and customers recognize waste and identify its causes. The beauty of value-stream mapping is found in its usefulness and simplicity. VSM helps answer the question: How do we continuously improve in a capable, sustainable manner? VSM is a map that outlines the current and future state of a production system, allowing users to understand where they are and what wasteful acts need to be eliminated. The user then applies lean manufacturing principals to transition into the future state.

Thus VSM provides a company with a "blueprint" for strategic planning to deploy the principles of lean thinking for their transformation into a lean enterprise and it becomes first step for starting lean thinking. In next chapter we discuss this tool in detail.

CHAPTER 2

VALUE STREAM MAPPING

2.1

HISTORY OF VALUE STREAM MAPPING

The mapping of work processes began with the early industrial engineers from

about 1890 until about 1920. During this period, Frederick Taylor developed standardized work and time study. Gilberth was the originator of the first process mapping system originally known as "process charting". Gilberth viewed all work as a process and developed the symbols and conventions that have most widely used ever since as described by Lee and Snyder (2006). In the 1930's and 1940's, Ralph M. Barnes codified the principles and method of time study and motion economy. During the same period, Allan H. Mogensen incorporated most of this early work into a system he called "Work Simplification". Work simplification emphasized the use of Gilberth's charting technique and popularized Gilberth's method. During the 1950's and 1960's, Toyota realized that to really refine production methods it was essential to respect the knowledge and expertise of its work force and use these skills to help develop and refine the end to end process so to produce a vehicle that the man in street could afford and was reliable too. Shigeo Shingo used these techniques at Toyota Production System (TPS) began to migrate to the west about 1980 and became known as "Lean Manufacturing after James P. Womack and Daniel T. Jones wrote their book "The Machine That Changed The World". This led to beginning of the Lean Manufacturing Era in industries. In 1990's Mike who had long searched for a means to tie together lean concepts and techniques, which seemed more disparate than they should be, as he worked on many plant floor implementation efforts. He realized mapping had potential far beyond its usage, formalized the tool, and built training -method around it that has proved extraordinarily successful. John who worked with Toyota has known about the tool for over 10 years. Both Mike and John developed the tool and popularized this amazing tool Value Stream Mapping (VSM) with book "learning to see". Now days VSM found its uses in offices, hospitals, construction, aerospace industry, and as environment tool kit.

Globalization is making most of the organizations, sectors more intensely competitive. Many organizations are struggling to improve their operating performance in response to market demands for lower costs, higher-quality products and services, shorter lead times, and higher returns on investment in infrastructure and resources. The case study was carried out to address above issues in iron making of an integrated steel plant and to find out uncover hidden values to increase the productivity. To eliminate the waste and identify the non value added processes from the lean manufacturing perspective, the value Stream mapping is carried out to optimize the process and to increase the productivity.

VSM is the process of visually mapping the flow of information and material as they are preparing a future state map with better methods and performance. It helps to visualize the station cycle times, inventory at each stage, manpower and information flow across the supply chain. VSM enables a company to see the entire process in both its current and desired future state, which develop the road map that prioritizes the projects or tasks to bridge the gap between the current state and the future state.

The value stream mapping is used to analyze & map in order to reduce the waste in processes, enable flow, and to make the process for better efficiency. The purpose of value stream mapping is to highlight sources of waste and eliminate them by implementing the future-state value stream that can become a reality. The goal is to build a chain of production where the individual processes are linked to their customer(s) either by continuous flow or pull, and each process gets as close as possible to producing only what its customer(s) need when they need it.

A value stream map is an end-to-end collection of processes/activities that creates value for the customer. A value stream usually includes people, tools and technologies, physical facilities, communication channels and policies and procedures. A value stream is all the actions (both value added and non-value added) currently required to bring a product through the main flows essential to every product: (a) the production flow from raw material into the hands of the customer, and (b) the design flow from concept to launch. Standard terminology, symbols, and improvement methods allows

VSM to be used as a communication tool for both internal communication and sharing techniques and results with the larger lean community.

2.2 ACTIVITIES IN VALUE STREAM MAPPING

Before giving the definition of VSM it is important to understand what Value and Value Stream is. Focus on value in the context of what the customer/end-user is prepared to pay for. To carry out this activity the company needs to understand what the customer requires in terms of features and performance, and how much they are willing to pay for the product. The outcome of this activity is a clear understanding of what products the customer requires. These requirements may not be feasible immediately, but it provides a true representation of customer need. The value stream is the entire creation process for a product. The value stream starts at concept and ends at delivery to the customer. Every stage the product goes through should add value to the product, but often this is not the case. Mapping of the value stream aids the identification of value adding and non-value adding (i.e. waste) activities; some examples are listed below.

Value Adding Activities

Machining, Processing, Painting, Assembling

Non value adding I Waste Activities

Scrapping, Sorting, Storing, Counting, Moving As per Mike and John (1996) VSM is a "pencil-and-paper tool that helps users see and understand the flow of material and information as products make their way through the value stream".

The Value Stream Mapping method (VSM) is a visualization tool oriented to the Toyota version of Lean Manufacturing (Toyota Production System). It helps to understand and streamline work processes using the tools and techniques of Lean Manufacturing. The goal of VSM is to identify, demonstrate and decrease waste in the process. Waste being any activity that does not add value to the final product, often used to demonstrate and decrease the amount of `waste' in a manufacturing system. VSM can thus serve as a starting point to help management, engineers, production associates, schedulers, suppliers, and customers recognize waste and identify its causes. The value stream includes the value-adding and non value-adding activities that are required to bring a product from raw material through delivery to the customer. In other words, VSM is an outline of a products manufacturing life cycle that identifies each step throughout the production process. Powerful yet simple, no other tool can outline and distinguish the true value of a product as VSM can. The beauty of valuestream mapping is found in its usefulness and simplicity. VSM helps answer the question: How do we continuously improve in a capable, sustainable manner? VSM is a map that outlines the current and future state of a production system, allowing users to understand where they are and what wasteful acts need to be eliminated. The user then applies lean manufacturing principals to transition into the future state. The current state of the value stream map is drawn to clearly visualize the all types of waste in value stream, waste throughout the stream must be identified and eliminated to shorten lead-time and improve the value-added percentage - in other words, to transform the production system from a batch and push into a one-piece flow and pull. The only way to identify the waste is to understand the seven elements given by Hines & Rich (1996) that do not contribute to the value of the product: overproduction, inventory, transportation, waiting, motion, inappropriate-processing, and correction (re-work). All seven elements can be identified (if they exist) on the current-state map. A list and discussion of these is given as under:

1.Overproduction. 2. Waiting.

3. Transport. 4. Inappropriate processing. 5. Unnecessary inventory. 6. Unnecessary motion. 7. Defects.

1.

Overproduction is regarded as the most serious waste as it discourages a smooth flow of goods or services and is likely to inhibit quality and productivity. Such overproduction also tends to lead to excessive lead and storage times. As a result defects may not be detected early, products may deteriorate and artificial pressures on work rate may be generated. In addition, overproduction leads to excessive work-in-progress stocks which result in the physical dislocation of operations with consequent poorer communication. This state of affairs is often encouraged by bonus systems that encourage the push of unwanted goods. The pull or kanban system was employed by Toyota as away of overcoming this problem.

2.

When time is being used ineffectively, then the Waste of waiting occurs. In factory setting, this waste occur whenever goods were not moving or being worked on. This waste affects both goods and workers, each spending time waiting. The ideal state should be no waiting time with a consequent faster flow of goods. Waiting time for workers may be used for training, maintenance or kaizen activities and should not result in overproduction.

3.

The third waste, Transport, involves goods being moved about. Taken to an extreme, any movement in the factory could be viewed as waste and so transport minimization rather than total removal is usually sought. In addition, double handling and excessive movements are likely to cause damage and deterioration with the distance of communication between processes proportional to the time it takes to feed back reports of poor quality and to take corrective action.

4.

Inappropriate processing occurs in situations where overly complex solutions are found to simple procedures such as using a large inflexible machine instead of several small flexible ones. The over-complexity generally discourages

ownership and encourages the employees to overproduce to recover the large investment in the complex machines. Such an approach encourages poor layout, leading to excessive transport and poor communication. The ideal, therefore, is to have the smallest possible machine, capable of producing the required quality, located next to preceding and subsequent operations. Inappropriate processing occurs also when machines are used without sufficient safeguards, such as poke-yoke or jidoka devices, so that poor quality goods are able to be made. 5. Unnecessary inventory tends to increase lead time, preventing rapid identification of problems and increasing space, thereby discouraging communication. Thus, problems are hidden by inventory. To correct these problems, they first have to be found. This can be achieved only by reducing inventory. In addition, unnecessary inventories create significant storage costs and, hence, lower the competitiveness of the organization or value stream wherein they exist. 6. Unnecessary movements involve the ergonomics of production where operators have to stretch, bend and pick up when these actions could be avoided. Such waste is tiring for the employees and is likely to lead to poor productivity and, often, to quality problems. 7. The bottom-line waste is that of Defects as these are direct costs. The Toyota philosophy is that defects should be regarded as opportunities to improve rather than something to be traded off against what is ultimately poor management. Thus defects are seized on for immediate kaizen activity. In summary the principles from the history of lean Manufacturing are to reduce waste (highlight by VSM) through the application of a number of process improvement tools.

Considerations for Waste Elimination

Value stream mapping is a process designed to reduce lead time, to make product flow, and to eliminate waste (nonvalue added operations or activities), all for the purpose of

meeting customer demand at the lowest cost, and with the highest quality. Lean thinking relies on recognizing the seven wastes over-production, over-processing, inventory, motion, scrap, waiting, and transportation. Target maps reveal which of these wastes can be eliminated now, and where. With simulation, it is easy to avoid the traditional problem of eliminating waste at an operation where there is no net gain. That is because the revised systems performance can be compared to the current state, to see the impact of the proposed change.

The key to producing useful target maps is to look for low-cost improvements that encourage flow, reduce inventory, and test the organizations ability to manage in a lean environment. The challenge of developing the attitudes, systems and communication necessary for a true pull system operating at customer takt should not be underestimated. A high inventory system hides a multitude of problems, which will slowly be exposed as batch sizes and WIP are reduced. The level of organization and standardization required for one-piece flow are rarely found in companies with traditional production planning and traditional management.

1. Over-production

Over-production is the production of material which is not needed now. It usually occurs in the form of large batches, produced faster than the rate at which they can be consumed (and ultimately shipped). In job shops, it means working on something before it can be used by the next step in the process, or before it is required by a customer. In either case, the result is product that sits in work in process queues, or in a finished goods stock, but is not needed today. Overproduction is caused by a number of factors, such as long setups, poor quality, machine unreliability, avoidance of setups in order to make performance measures look better, or the desire to keep an expensive resource working. Lead time is, of course, directly related to inventory and overproduction. For operations that are easily able to produce at a faster rate than demand, it is typical that one machine produces a variety of products. This means that the machine must be changed over periodically. Traditional cost accounting has ways of calculating the batch size appropriate for a given length of changeover (such as the economic order

quantity, or EOQ). Changeover time is usually set as a standard, and therefore there is no argument about how much must be produced each time the machine is set up. Contrary to Lean thinking, if quality is poor or the machine is subject to breakdowns, the batch size will be increased. Furthermore, it is not uncommon for operators and supervisors to decide to produce even more, when things are going well, because well use it some time, or just in case Lean thinking challenges the notion of a standard changeover time. Simple industrial engineering will easily point out where changeover time can be reduced. Good organization and changeover planning, by themselves, are often capable of reducing setup time by 50%. Standardization and integration of changeover components will often account for another 25%. This kind of relatively low-cost improvement will allow setups to take place much more frequently, thus allowing smaller batches to be run economically. Of course, the kind of machine being considered here (a stamping press, an injection molding machine, a large mixer, a high volume printing press, etc.) is shared among a number of product families, so the impact of change will be felt beyond the product family being considered in the particular mapping exercise at hand; this may limit which improvement suggestions can be implemented. Furthermore, if demand is erratic in some product families, it is unlikely that batch sizes will be reduced by even as much as 50%. It may be necessary to include demand profiles for these shared products in the target map, in order to test the feasibility of reducing batch sizes for the product family being considered. With simulation, try mapping all the value streams that use a particular resource, and add up operating and setup times for the resource, to see if it can all fit into the available time. Working ahead is, unfortunately, very common. It is also a significant reason for long lead times. Working ahead happens for two main reasons. If work lists are available, operators will tend to put together similar orders, and do them together. This avoids setup and feeds the natural tendency to gravitate towards repetitive work. Secondly, not every machine has a full schedule every day, but everyone wants to look busy, so they tend to overproduce (or slow down). Simple ways to avoid these problems are to put out only what the next product to be produced is, and to help operators stay busy by crosstraining them, and then moving them to where the work is when their first task is complete. In the target map, this is accomplished by putting operators into groups. When the situation is one of keeping a fast, expensive machine (henceforth called a super-machine) going, it is easy enough to say that it should only be used when required. However, the reality is that managers and cost accountants want to see it run.

It takes a real attitude change to admit that super-machines are not always the answer. Some other potential solutions might be to sell it and buy more appropriate technology (i.e. smaller, more flexible machines), to shut it down when not needed (and absorb the overhead elsewhere), or to find more work for it (after solving the setup problem). Finally, scrap and downtime can be decreased (though not completely eliminated) relatively cheaply through standardization. Standardization means doing things the same way each time. Setup is the key here, and standardization of setup means that the settings and materials are standardized. This leads to less scrap and better reliability, since each run will have almost identical characteristics to all other runs. Once again, just being consistent can reduce scrap and increase reliability by about 50%. A lot of what has been discussed above can be put under the heading of 5S. 5S is an approach to shop floor cleanliness, organization, and discipline that is considered the foundation of lean manufacturing. The 5S system consists of five standardized activities, implemented through five sets of activities:

1. Activity number one (called seiri, or clearing up; popularly Sort) gets rid of all unnecessary items in the workplace. It creates space and flexibility to do what is required, without hindrance. The outcome is a standard that states what is allowed in the workplace, and how often the workplace needs to be reviewed for unused items.

2. The second activity (called seiton or organizing; popularly Separate) finds a place or role for everything that remains after clearing up. It ensures that everyone knows where to find what they need with a minimum of delay.

The outcome is a standard that states where everything is to be found at all times, and systems for laying out work areas so that the most frequently used items are closest at hand.

3. The third activity (called seiso or cleaning; popularly, Shine) ensures that everything works well and is properly adjusted, through operators checking and cleaning the workplace regularly. The resulting standard specifies how often the

cleaning and checking activity should take place, and includes it in the scheduling of work (much like breaks and meetings are scheduled).

The fourth and fifth aspects of the 5S system are not so much transformative steps as they are activities designed to maintain the state of affairs created through the first three steps.

4. The fourth step (called seiketsu or standardizing; popularly Standardize) makes sure that as the right way of doing things is discovered, it is turned into a standard practice, through development of policies and procedures.The standard for standardizing spells out review periods, and the data to be collected to ensure that the policies and procedures are working as expected.

5. Finally, the fifth step (called shitsuke or training and discipline; popularly Sustain) gets to the personal level, and demands that each member of the group is aware of what the rules are, and follows them. Without this level of standardized behavior, the 5S system will not be effective. Standardizing this aspect means ensuring that there is continuous improvement in what each person knows and is able to do, and in adherence to ever more stringent standards.

2. Over-processing

There are two aspects to this kind of waste (1) overdoing it in the sense of doing too much, too soon, and beyond what is necessary; and (2) using inappropriate equipment, especially equipment that is much larger, faster, or more complicated than necessary. It can be difficult to distinguish between over-processing and over-production, because the first often leads to the second. Over-processing is usually associated with going beyond what the customer requires. Examples are reports and presentations that have more information than the audience is looking for, and therefore are difficult to understand and act on. Products may be designed with more features than the customer needs, which end up being difficult to learn to use, and which cost more than necessary.

In the rush to outdo its competition, a company may offer far more features than the market demands. In doing so, they add unnecessary complexity to the layout, process, and product, and subsequently suffer from poor quality, longer lead times and higher costs.

Over-processing, in the second sense, can also be associated with super-machines. These are machines built for mass-production, and are capable of production rates far exceeding customer requirements. Many problems are associated with these production centers. They tend to be difficult to repair, and since most factories only have one, they can actually cause shortages when they are out of commission. It can be difficult to determine the source of quality problems, due to their complexity. It is very difficult to incorporate them into schedules, since they usually have long setups. In other words, they rob a plant of flexibility. When starting the journey to Lean, the first action should be to get rid of super-machines, and replace them with appropriately sized machines (usually several of them) that can be dedicated to individual product families.

Since super-machines are usually only replaced at long intervals, using appropriately sized machines will also ensure that upto- date technology is constantly flowing into the factory, as the smaller machines will be replaced more frequently.

The final reason for over-processing has to do with excessive processing in the form of removal of material, or requiring several assembly steps, when a near net shape piece of material would have required less. Examples include using two steps to assemble a metal part to a plastic part, when insert molding could have accomplished this in one step; operators trimming flash from plastic parts, when a well-maintained mould could eliminate this operation altogether; or having a cutting department, when steel could be purchased already cut to size.

3. Inventory

Whether in the form of work in process (WIP) or finished goods, inventory is considered the great evil of production. With material always available, the focus is taken away from the process, quality, and the rate of work. Inventory thus actually hides problems that exist in the production system. Over-production leads to waste associated with inventory, in requiring extra space for storage, time and effort spent controlling inventory, money tied up in purchased materials, the potential for damage and obsolescence rendering the inventory unfit for use, the need for larger material handling systems to move larger quantities of goods, and increase in lead time for delivery, to name only a few direct costs! In addition, inventory has an impact on waste that is indirectly caused by having more than needed. Inventory leads to a lack of attention to the process. This means that processes are designed with cycle times well outside of the average. By buffering the process with inventory, the wide variance in cycle times is not noticed until an attempt is made to set up a continuous flow cell or line. Equipment must then be replaced, or great effort expended trying to balance the flow to the rate of customer pull. The reliability of the machine can also be overlooked when there is plenty of inventory. In a system with reduced inventory, reliability must be very high, or everything comes to a quick halt. Lean factories achieve 100% uptime through 5S, productive maintenance, and simple machines. The same holds for quality. While mistakes will be made (as Shingo noted in Zero Defects), control must be 100% at the source. In getting to 100% defect-free production, rapid problem solving (at the machine) is a must; quick development of mistake-proofing devices and the use of simple, capable machines is also a must. Finally, standardization of work is necessary to achieving smooth flow and reducing inventory to a minimum. All activities should have a standard time, and all personnel must know and follow the standard procedure. This goes for assembly, loading and unloading, changeover, machine operation, and other activities.

4. Transportation

When a facility layout extends over a large area, the movement of inventory from operation to operation becomes necessary. It is thus another result of over-production. It also results from laying out production equipment by function. Functional layout places each type of machine (stamping presses, welders, injection molding machines, etc.) in

its own department, for a variety of reasons, mainly to do with the perceived benefits of specialization. The result, however, is usually over-production. When looked at from the point of view of uninterrupted flow of production, a functional layout is counterproductive. Focused factories, and cellular layouts, keep the equipment required for producing a family of products together. This is done in order to balance flow from one operation to the next, to provide rapid feedback on quality from one operation to the previous, to balance the number of operators to production requirements, and to allow pride in customer service. Creating a focused factory (a small space devoted to a product family, with all the necessary equipment for producing the products of the family), or setting up a cell (a group of machines which have one or at most a few pieces of WIP between operations, and usually laid out in a U-shape) brings the issue of over-processing to the fore, since in most circumstances the various pieces of equipment are not matched in production rate. It does, however, solve the issue of wasteful transportation, since the operations are now in close proximity. Movement of material can be accomplished using small containers, small hand-carts, gravity flow conveyors, or even taking a step or two from one operation to the next operation with the workpiece. Additional benefits of eliminating large material handling machinery include less damage to facility and WIP, the option of using narrower aisles, improved safety, and lower costs. In a cell or focused factory, visual control is much easier as well.

5. Motion

Motion is a waste associated with both operators and equipment. In the case of operators, wasted motion includes bending, walking to get or place parts, lifting, and taking more than one step to reach or view machine interfaces. In setups, it includes moving around the machine repeatedly to carry out the steps in the changeover in an unplanned fashion. Motion can add significantly to cycle time, and must therefore be considered separately when creating and balancing cells and focused factories. The waste of motion is reduced through ergonomics, work planning, standardization of work, 5S, and using smaller containers. In the case of equipment, wasted motion is associated with long strokes, air cut, and other non-production movement of machine parts. In designing machines, the emphasis is often on versatility. This is associated

with functional layouts and batch production. A general purpose machine is designed to handle a variety of tools. But from the point of view of continuous flow, this is not necessary, and waste therefore results. The solution is to customize the machine to its purpose, which is most easily accomplished when the machine is simple to start with.

6. Scrap

Scrap and rework are obviously wasteful. In batch production, scrap is rarely visible, since there is always more material available, and the run can be extended for a short while to produce the required quantity. In a continuous flow system, scrap is a serious problem, since every machine loses a cycle when a piece is rejected. This destroys balance, and when producing to customer takt, results in a missed shipment. When perfect quality is required, 100% source inspection is necessary. This is achieved through mistake proofing (poka-yoke), as Shingo has so elegantly shown. It also, of course, rests on good maintenance, equipment improvement to achieve greater reliability, and simplification of production machinery. 5S (especially cleaning and checking) and standardization of work are also significant in reducing mistakes and defects. Design for manufacturability and simplification of processing can also help considerably to reduce scrap and rework. It should be noted that rework is as serious a problem as scrap, since, from the point of view of time, both are lost cycles.

7. Waiting

Waiting takes a number of forms. Operators wait for machines to complete their cycle, or for material to arrive so they can work on it. Machines wait for work, and also for operators to load and unload work pieces or other production material. The kinds of waiting that are common in batch production facilities are different from the waiting that is wasteful in a continuous flow system. Most batch systems strive to keep equipment working at all times. This requires buffers of inventory to be placed in front of all machines. By assigning operators to specific machines, they are consequently kept busy.

In the progress to single piece flow, keeping all machines busy is not a goal (equipment is a sunk cost). The goal is to produce what is required by the customer, and no more. If a machine is capable of doing more, it is considered the wrong machine for the job. Over-production results from keeping the machine operating. It is considered important, however, to keep operators busy at all times. This is accomplished by moving operators from operation to operation, as the work flows through the process. This starts by completing the needed work (for example one days or weeks worth) at one station, and then moving on to the next step. With better balancing and training, as well as reduced setup time and improved reliability, it is possible to construct cells, where the number of operators is balanced with the required work, and there is only a small amount of work in front of each machine (an hours worth, or even only a single piece). Spare time should be used for continuous improvement activities and extra 5S operations.

2.3 VALUE STREAM MAPPING OBJECTIVES

Various objectives of using VSM as given by Mike and John (1996) are listed below: 1. It helps to visualize more than just the single- process level, i.e. assembly, welding, etc., in production. One can see the flow. 2. 3. 4. It helps to see more than the waste. Mapping helps to see the sources of waste in your value stream. It provides a common language for talking about manufacturing process. It makes decisions about the flow apparent, so one can discuss them. Otherwise, many details and decisions on the shop floor just happen by default. 5. It ties together lean concepts and techniques, which helps to avoid "cherry picking". 6. It shows the linkage between the information flow and the material flow. No other tool does this.

7.

Provides a company with a "blueprint" for strategic planning to deploy the principles of Lean Thinking for their transformation into a Lean Enterprise.

2.4

H O W TO US E VA LUE S TREAM MA PP ING

Mapping the value stream is a big-picture technique that takes into

consideration all processes and seeks to improve the enterprise as a- whole. In essence, the map is a simplified visual blueprint that identifies value and waste throughout the system and encourages a systematic approach to eliminating waste. The overall goal of VSM is to move from batch and push to one-piece flow and pull through the entire value stream. The ultimate goal is to design and introduce a lean value stream that optimizes the f l o w of the entire system - from information, to material, to finished goods arriving at the customer's door. Lead-time, inventory, and over-production are therefore reduced; throughput, efficiency, and quality are improved. Using a VSM process requires development of maps: a Current State Map and a Future State Map. In the Current State Map, one would normally start by mapping a large-quantity and high-revenue product family. The material f l o w (left to right) will then be mapped using appropriate icons in the rich VSM icon template. The product will be tracked from the final operation in its routing to the raw material storage. Relevant data for each operation, such as the current schedule (push, pull, order dispatching rules ) and the amount of inventory in queue, will be recorded. The information f l o w (right to left) is also incorporated to provide demand information, which is an essential parameter for determining the "pacemaker" process in the production system. After both material and information flows have been mapped, a time-line is displayed at the bottom of the map showing the processing time for each operation and the transfer delays between operations. The time-line is used to identify the value-adding steps, as well as wastes, in the current system. The comparison between the processing times and the takt time (calculated as Available Capacity/Customer Demand) is a preliminary measure of the value and waste. This takt time is mostly used as an ideal time for each operation to achieve (ideally, the cycle time for each operation should be the takt time).

Based on the analysis of the Current State Map, one then develops a Future State Map by improving the value-adding steps and eliminating the non-value adding steps (waste)

2.5 VARIOUS APPLICATIONS OF VALUE STREAM MAPPING

Now days, VSM is applicable in different fields other then automobile manufacturing. These are illustrated below: 1. VSM is uses in Administrative and Office Processes, the translation of lean factory principles into the office as given by Keyte and Locher (2004) 2. This tool was applied to redesign the department's core engineering design process by Goubergen and Landeghem. 3. Value Stream Analysis and Mapping (VSA/M) is uses by McManus and Millard (2002) as tool to improve Product Development (PD) business process. 4. VSM is used in medical clinics to design, implement, and maintain an integrated information system with two other health-care entities as per Snyder, Paulson and McGrath. (2005) 5. VSM is used for the development of a supplier network around a prominent distributor of electronic, electrical and mechanical components by Hines, Rich and Esain (1997) 6. VSM can provide necessary information for analysis of equipment replacement decision problems as per Sullivan et al (2002)

2.6

OBJECTIVE OF RESEARCH
Today, automotive suppliers have a great concern over improving quality and

delivery and decreasing cost, which leads to improved system productivity. In order to remain competitive, waste from the value stream must be identified and eliminated so to run system with maximum efficiencies. A Production is to order and large numbers of different products are produced, each in relatively small volume. A Production shop consists of number of machine centres, each with a fundamentally different activity. The problems of machine shop are delayed deliveries, long queues, and high work in process inventories, improper

utilization. These problems increase overall cost of production. The need for customized products/parts with reduced lead times together with the requirement of global competitiveness requires that products/parts be produced in small batch sizes as per customer's requirement. The processing in small batch sizes necessitates the adjustment in the flow of production through different processes as per their processing speeds. In addition it requires close monitoring of processes to reduce process variability (defect free production), efficient planned maintenance of all machines (for increased availability) and reduction in non value added activities such as setup times, movement of material in between the work processes and additional processing of material. The efficient utilization of machines while producing in small batches reduced WIP inventories, reduced throughput times and reduction in lead times leads to competitive manufacturing. It is need for machine shop manufacturing system to adopt lean environment. To improve productivity by identifying waste and then removing that by implementing lean principle in this industry we focus our attention on VSM tool. Value Stream Mapping enables a company to identify and eliminate waste, thereby streamlining work processes, cutting lead times, reducing costs and increasing quality and hence productivity. The goal of VSM is to identify, demonstrate and decrease waste in the process, highlighting the opportunities for improvement that will most significantly impact the overall production system. In this study lean concepts are introduced using VSM in working environment. Methodology for drawing VSM in industry is discussed in detail in next chapter.

Literature review related to concept of Lean Manufacturing:

Haycs and Clark (1986) established that transportation time is another source of waste. Moving parts from one end of the facility to another end does not add value to the product. Thus, it is important to decrease transportation times within the manufacturing process. One way to do this is to utilize a cellular manufacturing layout to ensure a continuous flow of the product. This also helps eliminate one other source of waste, which is energy. When machines and people are grouped into-cells unproductive operations 'can be minimized because a group of people can be fully dedicated to that cell and this avoids excess human utilization. Another source of waste is defects and scrap materials. Manufacturing parts that are fault-free from the beginning have profound consequences for productivity. Drucker (1987) discussed the problems of existing union work rules and job classifications in the implementation of J11- systems. It is often assumed that because implementation of most manufacturing practices requires negotiating changes in work organization, unionized facilities will resist adopting lean practices and thus lag behind non-unionized facilities. The business press has often asserted that unionization prevents the adoption of some "Japanese" manufacturing practices in US manufacturers Ohno (1988) identified that the Toyota production system has been created on the practice and evolution of one very useful technique that reduces cost and time while challenges every activity in the value stream. It is applying a methodology known as the "Five whys, "By asking why an activity is performed and then asking why after each response, it is frequently possible to get to the origin of the problem. Understanding the root cause assists in successful redesign. Womack et al (1990) explained the several features of lean, According to studies that were initially performed in the automobile industry.

(1) (2)

Lean is a dynamic process of change driven by a systematic set of principles and best practices aimed at continuously improving; Lean refers to the total enterprise, from the shop floor to the executive suite, and from the supplier to customer value chain;

(3) (4)

Lean requires rooting out everything that is non-value-added; and Becoming lean is a complex business - there is no single thing that will make an organization lean. Turnbull et al (1992) documented the adoption of the Japanese model of

manufacturing in the UK automobile industries. It is argued that the Japanese model involves very high intra and intergenerational dependences. Although this does not cause problems in Japan due to the structure of the Japanese motor industry, the structure of the UK vehicle industry present severe obstacles in the successful use of Japanese systems. Such exercises may even sweep away potential strengths of the existing supplier. Braiden and Morrison (1996) utilized lean manufacturing to identify bottlenecks in automotive motor compartment system. As a result greater production capacity was created by increasing the up time to over 90%. The current manufacturing system optimization carried out through lean initiatives. Cooper (1996) emphasized that lean thinking is related with quality and value for each product from the perspective of the end-customer. Lean producers rely on confrontational strategies to compete head-on for market share by developing competitive advantages. To successfully engage in confrontation, a firm must become expert at developing low-cost, high-quality products that have the functionality customers demand. Dankbaar (1997) established that lean production makes optimal use of the skills of the workforce, by giving workers more than one task, by integrating direct and indirect work, and by encouraging continuous improvement activities. As a result, lean production is able to manufacture a larger variety of products, at lower costs and higher quality, with less of every input, compared to traditional mass production: less human effort, less space, less investment, and less development time. Liker (1997) reported that the benefits of lean manufacturing generally are lower costs, higher quality, and shorter lead times. The term lean manufacturing is created to represent less human effort in the company, less manufacturing space, less

investment in tools, less inventory in progress, and less engineering hours to develop a new product in less time. Shingo (1997) developed the concept of single minute exchange of dies (SMED) to reduce set up times; for instance, setup times in large punch presses could be reduced from hours to less than ten minutes. This has a big effect on reducing lot sizes. Another way to reduce inventory is by trying to minimize machine downtime. This can be done by preventive maintenance. It is clear that when inventory is reduced other sources of waste are reduced too. For example, space that was used to keep inventory can be utilized for other things such as to increase facility capacity. Also, reduction in setup times as a means to reduce inventory simultaneously saves time, thus reduces time as a source of waste Hines et al (1998) found an application of value stream mapping in the distribution industry. Partsco, a distributor of electronic, electrical, and mechanical component decided to map the activities between the firm and its suppliers. Partsco introduce EDI which allowed the firm to work with its suppliers effectively and more quickly. In a short time period the company was able to reduce the lead-time from 8 to 7 days. Burr and Liker (1999) used advanced planning and scheduling (APS) for shop floor production as an enabler of lean manufacturing. The forerunner to modem APS like MRP and finite forward scheduling packages were used to schedule "push system" and generate schedule down to the level of individual machine and staffing requirements. Pavnaskar et al (2003) proposed scheme of classification for lean manufacturing tools and allied detailing. This scheme of classification is structured around seven levels: system, object, operation, activity, resource, characteristic and application. Each level is linked systematically so that lean manufacturing tools and metrics. or manufacturing waste problems, are classified in a meaningful and logical way. Abbett and Payne (1999) developed Current and future state maps with the objective of reducing lead-time according to customer's requirements.

LITERATURE REVIEW:

Hines P and Nick Rich (1997), Rother and Shook (1999), Womack and Jones (1996) and Jessop D et al. (1995) has studied the implementation Lean manufacturing is a production strategy for organizational effectiveness focusing on waste reduction and improving productivity through application of various tools (Mahapatra, 2007).Value Stream mapping technique involves flowcharting the steps, activities, material flows, communications, and other process elements that are involved with a process or transformation. In this respect, Value stream mapping helps an organization to identify the non-value-adding elements in a targeted process (Ramesh, 2008).

Hugh (2002) applied VSM to product development. The author proposed general VSA/M method for product development activities. Non-value-added tasks are activities deemed to only support the true value added-tasks (waste often tasks such as set-ups, reviews, etc.) or that are completely unnecessary in themselves (another type of waste often non-tasks such as waiting in inventory). In the lean manufacturing context, manufacturing cells, just-in-time delivery etc. are applied to create future state map. The future state map drives an implementation plan for improved state and is then used to generate further future states, and (ideally) the process is continuously improved.

Academics such as McDonald et al. (2002), Lian and Landeghem (2002) and Abdulmalek and Rajgopal (2007) have explored the integration of VSM with simulation. A multitude of VSM software (e.g. eVSM) is available over the internet. Such software presents the user with a dynamic view of the value stream (not static), allowing observation of the real-time impact of proposed improvements. Essentially it increases flexibility and information available to improvement teams.

Chitturi et al. (2007) discussed practical issues like how to calculate TAKT time, what process improvements can be done and how to handle different process and product families while mapping job shop operations using a standard VSM and also explained while drawing a VSM of a process, all pertinent data should be collected from first to the last operation with respect to it.

Chandradeep Grewal (2008) has explained the methodology of lean and VSM that can be applied for a small company and also stated that it is a powerful tool to identify the inefficiencies and improvement areas. Bhim singh (2010) implemented Lean to production industry. The author highlighted the benefits from the all the areas of lead time, WIP, processing time, inventory and manpower. Ibon (2008) is considered VSM is suitabletool for redesigning the production systems.

Wong (2009) has studied on adoption of lean manufacturing in the electrical and electronics industry in Malaysia. The author considered the areas viz., scheduling, inventory, material handling equipment, work processes, quality, employees, layout, suppliers, customers, safety and ergonomics, product design, management and culture for implementing. Petter Solding et al. (2009) have presented in their paper that, the concept for creating dynamic value stream maps of a system using simulation. Creating dynamic value stream maps makes it possible to analyze more complex systems than traditional VSMs are able to and still visualize the results in a language the Lean tools.

Balkema and Rotterdam (2004) have created current state map for a steel producer, a steel service center and first-tier component supplier. The current state map identifies huge piled of inventory and long lead-time. In the future state map target areas were subjected to different lean tools including kanban, supermarket, and continuous flow.

Ballard and Howell (1994) suggest that, the value stream mapping can serve as a goodstarting point for any enterprise that wants to be lean. It provides a common language for talking about manufacturing process. It ties together lean concepts and techniques which help to avoid "cherry picking". It forms the basis for an implementation plan by helping to design the whole flow.

Halpan and Kueckmann (2001) explain value stream mapping in aircraft manufacturing. They draw current and future state maps were developed with the objective of reducing lead time according to customer requirements. The implementation of the future state map attained lead-time reduction.

Summer, 1998 has described Activity Based Costing (ABC), identify various cost components and analyze the relative contribution to the total cost. The essence of ABC is that, product consumes activity, activity consumes resource and resources generate cost. Thus it is necessary to develop the relationship between activity, coast drivers and activity measures. Target costing is to anticipate the acceptable market price through intensive customer focus. Design and manufacturing teams allies to bring the product within the target cost. Target cost is the cost that can be incurred while still earning the desired benefit. The objective of the present work is to demonstrate how a manufacturing system operates with timing of step-by step activities.

Taiichi Ohno (1988), Womack et al (1990), Womack and Jones (1998, 2005), Daniel. T. Jones (2006), Rother and Shook (1999), and Peter Hines and Nick Rich (1997) have studied the implementation of Value Stream Mapping effectively.

In essence, Value Stream Mapping (VSM) is a visualization tool oriented to the Toyota version of Lean Manufacturing (Toyota Production System). It helps to understand and streamline work processes using the tools and techniques of Lean Manufacturing. The goal of VSM is to identify, demonstrate and decrease waste in the process. Waste being any activity that does not add value to the final product, often used to demonstrate and decrease the amount of waste in a manufacturing system. VSM can thus serve as a starting point to help management, engineers, production associates, schedulers, suppliers, and customers recognize waste and identify its causes. As a result, Value Stream Mapping is primarily a communication tool, but is also used as a strategic planning tool, and a change management tool. Toyota have been benefiting since 1940s, from Material and Information Flow Mapping (Value stream mapping).

Taiichi Ohno (1988) could not see waste at a glance (especially across a geographical area). He developed Material and Information Flow Mapping (VSM) as a standard method for mapping the flows visually and it became the standard basis for designing improvements at Toyota - as a common language. It became one of their business planning tools. VSM is now utilized throughout the world, in many businesses to

strategically plan and it is the starting point to any lean transformation and implementation.

Womack and Jones (1998) and Moore (2006) have stated that, the organizations of many types are implementing lean manufacturing, or lean production, practices to respond to competitive challenges. They have mentioned that lean initiatives can be taken up in the fields of automotive sector, aerospace, and consumer goods industries around the world. Moore has discussed various implementation tools of Lean Manufacturing, which can be incorporated in the industries.

Rother and Shook (1999) have discussed that Value Stream Mapping (VSM) is used to define and analyze the current state for a product value stream and design a future state focused on reducing waste, improving lead-time, and improving workflow. The use of VSM appears to be increasing, particularly since the publication of learning to see by Rother and Shook (1999). One of the unique characteristics of VSM in comparison with other process analysis techniques is that one map depicts both material and information flow that controls the material flow. The focus of VSM is on a product value stream (all actions required to transform raw materials into a finished product) for a given product family -- products that follow the same overall production steps.

Doolen et al (2002) have extended the applications of lean production techniques in the electronics manufacturing perspectives. Hyer (2002) has implemented Lean manufacturing in the office service and administrative processes.

Badrinarayana and Sharma (2007) discusses that the interdependent components form the value stream and Value Stream is the set of all specific actions required to bring out a specific product.

In order to attain noteworthy improvements the Zayko, et.al (1997) have decided to use value stream mapping to visualize the entire flow and select lean tools that yielded maximum benefits.

Hines and Rich (1997) has opined that, the value stream is the specific activities within a supply chain required to design order and provide a specific product or value.

Simchi-Levi et al (2004) are of the opinion that the customers are always concerned with their order status, and sometimes they value the order status more than a reduced lead time. But, McDonaldet.al (2002) point out that the VSM creates a common language for production process, thus facilitating more thoughtful decisions to improve the value stream. This will effectively reduce the wastes and improves the productivity. While researchers and practitioners have developed a number of tools to investigate individual firms and supply chains, most of these tools fall short in linking and visualizing the nature of the material and information flow in an individual company.

McDonald et.al (2002) have used simulation techniques for the high-performance motion control products manufacturing system to demonstrate that, simulation can be a very crucial tool in assessing different future state maps. They demonstrate that simulation can provide and examine different scenarios to complement those obtained from future state mapping.

The value stream mapping was extended in the field of aircraft manufacturing also. Abbett and Payne (1999) have discussed the application of value stream mapping in an aircraft manufacturingunit. They have developed the current and future state maps with the objective of reducing leadtime according to customers requirements.

New (1993), and Jones et.al (1997) and other researchers developed individual tools to understand the value stream. VSM extends guidance for improvements in the process, identifies the need to improve workflow and finally shows avenues to reduce waste.

Shingo (1989) has discussed the strategies for the effective implementation of Value Stream Mapping in a wood industry. He also opines that loops can be formed to identify the similar processes and these loops will be helpful in identifying the non

value activities in a systematic manner. He has suggested the ways to eliminate non value added activity and proposed measures to increase the Value added ratio.

Yang-Hua and Valandeghem (2002) describe, Value stream mapping as a mapping tool that is used to describe supply chain networks. It maps not only material flows but also information flows that signal and control the material flows. The material flow path of the product is traced back from the final operation in its routing to the storage location for raw material. This visual representation facilitates the process of lean implementation by helping to identify the value-added steps in a value stream, and eliminating the non-value added steps / waste (muda).Often, key questions in examining these types of processes are: what is the value-added ratio of these supporting processes to the organization? Should the current plans of manufacturing should remain internal or has to be outsourced? All these discussions have prompted the authors to carryout VSM as a useful tool to explore additional redesign opportunities, set targets and to propose for the future performance levels.

This prompted the authors to study the processes of manufacture of machining centers and have drawn CVSM for all the processes (I objective) and carried out brain storming sessions with the managers and engineers concerned to arrive at FVSM and have suggested action plans to be taken to effectively implement FVSM.

Definition of Terms related with concept of Lean manufacturing.

Available Production Time: Determined by taking the shift time and subtracting regular planned downtime events such as breaks. Available Operating Time: Determined by taking the available production time and subtracting changeover time.

Batch Size: A technique used to run a determined quantity of parts at one operation prior to moving them to the next operations: Changeover Time: The time that an operator spends at a work center switching the production tools in order to change from one product type to another. Downtimes: Those are considered break times. Downtimes are regular planned times and usually involve unpaid lunch and paid breaks. During a downtime the production does not run. Electronic Data Interchangeable: It is a tool that allows companies to process the purchasing order electronically. Finished Goods: Refers to parts that already have been manufactured and are in the completed stage waiting to be shipped to the customer. Kaizen: Continual improvement involving everyone within an organization (Ohno, 1998) Kanban: A tool to achieve just-in-time which consists of a card. containing all the information required to be done on a product at each stage along its path to completion and which parts are needed at subsequent processes (Monden, 1993) Lead Time: The time that parts take to be transformed from raw material to finished goods

METHODOLOGY:
VSM is the operational approach to analyze a process of its planning and execution.

Misunderstandings About Value-Stream Mapping, Flow Analysis, and Takt Time:

First, VSM does not equal flow analysis or the process of designing and creating optimum product flows. VSM is a simple tool to help operation managers and engineers (and others) understand how their flows currently operate and to help guide them through the process of analysis to improve those existing flows and design better ones in the future. VSM as described

in Learning To See (LTS) is not nor was it ever presented as representing the entire kit of tools to design optimum flow of product. VSM as described in LTS introduces none of the algorithms, calculations that are available to design optimum flow of product. If it did, perhaps it would be titled, Optimum Flow Design. Instead, it was given the curious title of Learning To See for a reason.

Learning To See does contain one small chapter on Characteristics of a Lean Value Stream. In this chapter, the most elementary, but essential, aspects of a lean value stream are introduced. However, the intent of the book was only to introduce the reader/user to a new way of thinking and looking at their operations. Thus, the description of takt time and the other concepts is necessarily kept very simple. As such, we believed the basic principles, concepts and tools described could be applied in a very wide variety of environments. However, the application of the concept/tool must, of course, vary according to the situation. It is been misunderstood in some circles that VSM, or takt time, or lean flow, is only useful in highly repetitive, high volume, low variety manufacturing. This is a highly unfortunate and total misunderstanding. To explain, lets review some history for a bit.

VSM is just a tool. As described in LTS, it is a tool to help people look at value streams rather than at discrete operations. For the most part, it seems that the book LTS and the tool VSM have helped many people and many companies.

The issue of designing or creating lean product flow, however, is a much, much broader issue. VSM relates to that broader issue in that it is a tool to assist in that design. But, VSM as described in LTS is only a beginning step in that regard. By lean product flow, I am referringto the material and information flows of the Toyota Production System (TPS). Among the key elements of TPS flow (the just-in-time pillar of TPS) is the concept you have been discussing:

TAKT TIME:

Takt time as a concept and tool predates theory of constraints (TOC) by decades. Takt time, in great contrast to the way some have misunderstood it, is NOT primarily for use on highly repetitive assembly lines! And its primary purpose is certainly not for staffing determination!! Takt time was developed as a manufacturing flow tool in the 1930s. It was thoroughly developed by Toyota internally as a manufacturing management tool in the 1950s. By the late 1960s it was in widespread use throughout the Toyota supply base and was well known throughout Japanese industry by the mid-1970s. In the U.S., Takt time was a well-known concept by the mid-19802, well before the term lean was even introduced.

The purpose of takt time is, first and foremost, to serve as a management tool to indicate at a glance whether production is ahead or behind. It serves as an alignment tool, aligning proceeding with following processes, aligning resource requirements with demand, aligning corporate functions with real-time production needs. Rather than being limited to repetitive production situations, takt time is actually most useful in helping establish flow under those very conditions when flow is especially difficult to establish or see. In fact, its first use (in 1930s Germany) was in the aerospace industry, where product flow was extremely slow and repetitive activities difficult to discern. Toyota adopted and further developed takt time in the 1950s to help them cope with their situation at that time, which was vastly different from their Detroit-based competitors, who were blessed with seemingly endless demand. Toyota at that time was producing volumes that were a tiny fraction of that of the Big Three (in 1950, Toyota as a company was producing in one month no more than each of the Big Three produced of one model on one assembly line in one day! And Toyota was producing numerous different models within that tiny volume).

From this you can probably see that another common comment that takt time has no

application in low-volume job shops is also a misconception. Most of Toyotas early suppliers were job shops and many of them still are. A purpose of takt time the alignment issue mentioned above is to bring them into the flow. Takt time is useful in situations where the product mix is complex, the flows are complex, the demand changing, and in various processing environments Toyotas Taiichi Ohno proved out almost all of the concepts in his machining shop before expanding to other areas. (This history of TPS and takt time is fairly well documented, in books available from LEI or Productivity Press, if you are interested in knowing more. Taiichi Ohnos own Toyota Production System is a great place to start and Takahiro Fujimotos Evolution of a Manufacturing System at Toyota is an incredible and often overlooked book.)

Takt time as introduced in LTS uses the simple ACME Stamping example that has one simple takt time for two variations of the product. However, most cases in real life involve products with varying levels of demand, and thus various takt times. Thus, one mixed model assembly line may have a takt time of 58 seconds, but that overall takt time or compound takt may consist of many different individual product takt times. And those times each are determined and used to achieve alignment with their various upstream value streams. The math used to determine the mixed-model takt time (the heijunka mixed flow) has characteristics that are analogous in function and complexity to the TOC flow and routing calculations. (And it can be used, as Toyota uses it, for extremely complex BOM situations). LTS does not go into the calculations simply because explaining the techniques of routing determination was never intended to be the purpose of LTS. (To repeat, if that was the purpose, why would the book have such a curious title?) (Mondens book, the Toyota Production System, is a good place to go to learn more about flow applications that are more complex than those presented in LTS.)

Some points of clarification regarding three final topics of your discussion come to mind. First,

takt time is typically determined over a longer time period than was mentioned in the discussion (a shift, a day, and a week). Toyota typically reviews takt time on a monthly basis, with a tweaking review conducted every ten days. Some plants, however, may change their overall takt time very infrequently, though different models in the mix may see takt times changing frequently.

Secondly, there is a fundamental difference between TOC bottlenecks and TPS pacemakers, though they are frequently misunderstood to be roughly analogous. What is analogous is that TPS, like TOC, strives to identify and break bottlenecks. But, TPS does not allow a bottleneck to set the pace of the value stream. After all, the bottleneck may exist for any number of problematic reasons excessive downtime, poor quality, long changeover times, etc. Why would I choose to let an operation with such problems determine the way I flow my entire value stream? Of course, I have to deal with the problem operation (the bottleneck), and there are numerous techniques to do so, but I will not let it dictate the pace (takt) of my entire product flow!

Finally, it is true that VSM as introduced in LTS ignores layout. Trust me, LEI and the LTS authors are aware there is such a thing as layout and that layout is indeed important. But, VSM intentionally delays layout considerations until after first making other observations and determinations. The reason is that many manufacturing managers and engineers tend to immediately jump to moving things around, which costs time, money, and other resources and frequently results in mistakes. Often, there is a flow solution within the existing layout. Look for that first. Think about rates of operation, what flows where currently, what should flow where ideally. Try first to exercise creativity without spending any money, which forces us to focus on the system, the methods we are using. Then do your layout analysis (which is certainly important, but simply wasnt the focus of VSM as introduced in LTS).

Oh yes, someone had a question about a bottleneck operation in a flow-line cell. TPS would never combine as one poster did for simplicity run time with setup time. The point, from the TPS point of view, is to reduce the setup time to enable more frequent changeovers in order to reduce lot size. So, simply put, the TPS way would be

to start with the theoretical capacity, the demand (over some period), determine the number of changeovers that are possible within those parameters, and then possibly determine run patterns or otherwise develop alignment with upstream and downstream processes (and yes, there is math for all that).

VSM and the various lean value-stream tools indeed exist within the tradition of industrial engineering as a discipline, as was mentioned in your discussion. They are mostly evolutions of tools that existed previously, but also involve major innovations over those previously-existing tools. Previous process mapping tools focused (as the name implies) on the processes whereas VSM focuses on the interdependence of the twin flows of material and information. Other mapping tools in common use among industrial engineers ignored information flow without which an integrated material & information flow system obviously can be neither visioned nor attained. This emphasis on understanding production as an integrated material & information flow system is a major innovation of the Toyota Production System and a value stream (or process) Map that ignores information flow is like a piece of sheet music that just lists notes randomly you know what notes to play but not when to play them! But, this is all less important than the main point of VSM, which relates to the reason we recommend VSM be done by hand. The point is not that the absolute optimum product flow is best calculated by hand. Of course not! But, do the central problems of American manufacturing revolve around the fact that we have inadequate queuing algorithms? Is what we need now yet another, bigger and better, software package? The value in creating the drawings by hand is that it forces the drawer to go look, observe, and to try to really see what is going on at the value stream not just individual process level. Many mathematicians have shown me algorithms that they claim can attain better material velocity through the system than Toyotas pull system. My reply is to them is always the same: Perhaps, but you have completely missed the point. The point rather revolves around observation and learning. Certainly, that may not sound as sexy as a new software package that will spit out the right answer. But, there is no right answer. There is the answer we, as manufacturing practitioners and leaders, determine through leading our people through the process of truly learning how our value streams are truly operating. We have no shortage of ability to develop theoretical ideals. Our shortage is in our collective ability to implement, to innovate, and react to contingencies

when things go wrong. Learning to See was an attempt to address that need. Of course, LTS isnt the complete answer to such a big problem. But, perhaps it was a start. To repeat, again, thats where the title comes from. You draw a map, and, yes, you draw it from personal observation. Thats whats important, not the map itself. Whats important is to try to really see whats going on. In the case presented in Learning to See, the focus is on seeing at the plant door-to-door level. Then you can use the map to set a vision and manage to a plan.

VALUE STREAM MAPPING

(Following a Production Path from Beginning to End)

Value Stream Mapping is a method of recording a product's production path (material sand information) from door to door. It can serve as a starting point for management, engineers, production associates, schedulers, suppliers, and customers to recognize identify waste and its causes. The VSM process involves physically mapping the current state while focusing on the desired goals, or the future state map, that can serve as the starting point for other Lean improvement strategies.

What is Value Stream Mapping?

A value stream is all the actions (value-added and non-value added) required to take a product from raw material to the customer, the design flow from concept to completion. Taking a value stream view means looking at the whole picture, not just individual processes, and improving the whole, not just individual parts. Value Stream Mapping is a pencil and paper tool that helps to see and understand the flow of material and information as a product makes its way through the value stream. The meaning is simple: Follow a product's production path from customer to supplier, and draw a visual picture of every process in the material and information flow. Within the production flow, the movement of material through the factory is the flow that usually comes to

mind. But the information flow must also be considered since it tells each process what to make or do next; both flows must be mapped.

VSM a Planning Tool

Value Stream Mapping can be a communication tool, a business-planning tool, and a tool to manage change in production processes. The first step is drawing the current state, done by gathering information on the plant floor. This provides the information needed to map a future state. The final step is to prepare and begin actively using an implementation plan that describes, on one page, how the future state can be achieved. More organizations with successful plant Lean programs are also applying Value Stream Mapping methods and Lean principles to administrative areas. Value Stream Mapping provides a simple, yet thorough method that relies on current data analysis and display. It links reporting requirements, metrics, people, and Lean tools to continue improvement and promote process learning. It gives managers and employees the same tool and language to communicate.

What is Value Stream Management?

Value Stream Management is a orderly approach that allows plant personnel the opportunity to plan how and when they will make the improvements required to meet customer needs. VSM is not about making people work harder, but working smarter. It is setting up a system for material to flow smoothly through the various manufacturing processes at the speed required to meet customer demand.

Value Stream Management is a process that:

Ties people, Lean tools, metrics, and reporting requirements together for a Lean enterprise.

 Requires a Lean coordinator to make the process go smoothly and ensures that Lean is continuous.

Lets everyone understand and continuously improve the understanding of Lean concepts.

Makes for a controlled process flow on the floor for an actual Lean implementation plan.

Value Stream Management Purpose

Value stream mapping is one of the latest trends to improve manufacturing processes, because value stream maps are an important part of what makes the storyboard an exceptional form of visual management. Without a good understanding of Lean manufacturing principles, mapping will not bring companies closer to reducing wastes and achieving excellence than early experimentations with Kaizen workshops. Many manufacturers recognize the many benefits of Lean manufacturing, only a few understand what must go into this effort to make it successful. Experience has shown that a successful Lean program depends on four main factors:

Make a true commitment to the success of the Lean program.

Understand exactly the specifications of the customers requirements.

Illustrate the current state as accurately as possible.

Effectively communicate to everyone involved on the team and involved in the program.

Make the Commitment Sincere

The Lean program is important enough to the financial health of any company for them to supply the resources required for its successful planning, implementation, and maintenance. In some companies the gains acquired through the savings in waste alone, wisely reinvested by the company in new technology can make the difference between being able to survive the competition or slowly wasting away. It is impossible to have a successful Lean program without full support from everyone in the company; the management and plant floor workers. The true commitment and guidance to the Lean program must start with top management and when the workers recognize their commitment, they will have the desire to become partners in the program. Making and supporting the commitment to the Lean conversion is important throughout the Value Stream Mapping.

The Importance of Personnel

Involving people early in things such as continuous improvement (Kaizen) programs and value stream mapping will earn their cooperation and give the process a better chance of being a success. Organizations that involve people in the overall planning process will come closer to reaching world-class status than those that do not.

People, and their focus on eliminating waste, are very important to successfully implementing and maintaining a Lean system. Value Stream Management only works as well as management's skills in promoting people's well being.