Assessment Criteria- Maintenance

PRACTICES ASSESSMENT TOOL Focus of this assessment tool

Technical System • Planning and internal logistics • Loss elimination • Maintenance system • Quality system • Manpower system • Safety and housekeeping

Management Infrastructure Operating System

Management Infrastructure • Organization design • Contractors and suppliers management • Performance management • Support function processes • Capability building processes • CI infrastructure

Mindsets & Behaviors

Mindsets, capabilities and behaviours

1

Technical System – planning and internal logistics 1 Material flow (The movement of product along the value stream (both within and between value-adding process steps)

3

4

5

• Production processes

• Production processes are departmentalised, but there are efforts to reduce WIP between various stations

• Production processes are

• There is not

• Coordinated 1X1

• Lot of movement and

• Complex conveyance

• Material movement is

• Material movement is

• There is minimized

• There is a notion of pull,

• Production system is

• Production is driven by

• Detailed fact-based

• Detailed fact-based

• Detailed fact-based

are isolated “islands” with large amounts of WIP between operations (i.e.departmentalized). hand handling of material takes place outside normal process flow

• Material enters and is

pushed down-stream on forecast only. Overproduction is the norm to mask downtimes.

• Current bottleneck

unknown. Equipment

productivities are not known

Information flow (Production control processes for logistics, production instruction, and conveyance)

2

• Complex production

planning processes that promote push production (start based on forecast as early as you can and make as much as you can)

• Production volumes and

WIP are controlled weekly through an MRP system. Inventory is uncontrolled ‘no target’, no planning

systems is in place to optimise material movement, but there’s lot of handling outside conveyance

• There is some concept of

pull at the bottleneck stations, but there is lot of overproduction in the system

• Bottleneck known from

experience. Bottle neck

equipment capacities are recorded but values are not used

• Production planning

continues to be forecast and only push system based

• WIP and volumes are

controlled on weekly basis. There’s a target inventory level but varies a lot depending on production (reactive vs proactive inventory)

departmentalised, but there is an orchestrated effort to reduce WIP

through conveyance systems, with minimum manual handling / transportation

but the system is not visual, and controlled daily counts/adjustments

analysis of bottleneck has been conducted.

Equipment productivities are benchmarked against Industry leader

• Production planning

process are simple, and promote pull production, however there is a degree of overproduction built into the planning system to deal with production inefficiencies

• Production volumes and

WIP are controlled daily through an MRP system. Target inventory is based on minimum safety buffer required.

departmentalization. WIP is always minimized.

through conveyance systems and there are efforts to minimize conveyance requirements (eg planning / redesign) driven by Pull system. WIP at bottle neck and change over points in system analysis of bottleneck has been conducted. Bottle

neck equipment uptime schedule are in place but not adhered to strictly

• Pull production system driven by customer demand for made to order products.

• Some built in over

production is there to account for fluctuation is demand. Target inventory is based on minimum safety buffer required and is usually met.

production occurs for all operations, as well as coordinated shutdowns for planned downtime. transportation of people / materials through the plant

“Pull” signal from downstream process. WIP is strictly limited & system highly disciplined analysis of bottlenecks is regularly updated. Equipment productivity

best practice standards are established and known

• Simplified production

planning processes that translate actual customer demand (throughout the processes) into production instruction; build only what’s consumed or ordered

• Visual signals vs.

complex order instructions are deployed; flow of product volume is dictates production order. Inventory seldom varies from buffer inventory.

2

Technical System – loss elimination 1 Waste reduction (Anything which adds cost but no value in the eyes of the customer)

• No clear understanding of what adds value and what does not.

• There’s a lot of waste (eg energy waste through leaks, multiple start-stop) although employees are not aware. Improvement focus on large capex projects only.

Variability reduction (Deviation from the target value)

• Performance is not

measured at machine level

• Variability is accepted as the norm and dealt with through overcapacity, large WIP, overttime

• There has been some

education / analysis on what adds value and the sources of loss in manufacturing processes

• Concept of waste (eg 7 types) is understood but no to little efforts are made to eliminate it except for capex.

• Efforts are made to the

root cause of the problem but problem solving approach is not followed • Variability reduction is partly tackled through project approach

• Equipment speed limits

3

4

• Value addition from

• There is evidence of

• Concept of waste is

• Performance measure

• Daily address system for

• Visual management is used to

• Variability reduction

• Root cause analysis is

• Root cause analysis is used by

of customer value

waste elimination, but the effort is neither vigorous nor systematic. Efforts to minimize energy / spare parts loss have mixed results.

by department with paper/computer reports

approach is project based only (e.g. 6 Sigma) and takes a long time. Engineers analyse the root causes of variability. • Equipment speed limits are known from facts. The speed performance is well recorded and reviewed regularly

customer perspective is clearly defined.

clearly understood by everyone and regular improvement happen.

crucial processes

used by engineers to solve the problems in projects and in daily shopfloor activities.

• New product introduction

• New product introduction

• The disturbance caused

• Staff is trained for crucial

• In the eyes of the

• There is some

• The value of flexibility is

• Flexibility is highly

organization, flexibility is something to suppress to improve unit cost

takes around 2 months to be debugged

understanding of value of flexibility but it is still viewed as an added cost.

by new product introduction is dealt with in a relatively effective manner

recognized versus unit cost (e.g., in investment decisions)

• Value in the eyes of the

customer is clearly defined & understood throughout the organization. 7 types of waste are well understood throughout the organization

• A systematic approach is used

to identify & eliminate sources of waste. Energy or spare parts waste is at a minimum

highlight current condition or performance versus the target value

all. People distinguish between common cause and special cause, 80% effort is daily, 20% project based

• Regular technical study to

are not known. No recording of actual speed

leads to months of quality and delivery issues in both new and existing product lines

5

• Moderate understanding

are known from experience. Recording of speed information but patchy and unreliable

• Equipment speed limits

Inflexibility reduction (The inability to provide exactly what the customer wants when the customer wants it)

2

• A technical study have

identified the technical limit and improvement levers to increase speed. The speed is well recorded.

processes before job one on the new line

valued by everyone

identify new speed improvement opportunities. Very detailed record of speed and review every day

• New products are

systematically debugged, the line adapted and the staff trained before job 1, there is almost no disturbance to production

• There is a common

understanding the flexibility is indispensable and costs less

3

Technical System – maintenance system (1/2) 1 Maintenance Planning and scheduling (The processes which ensure the people with right information, skills, and resources are doing the right job at the right time)

2

3

• <50% planned work

• 50% planned work (man-

• 75% planned work (man-

• 90% planned work

• Most of the work done in

• Maintenance team has to

• Number of emergencies

• Number of emergencies

and scheduled in details 1 week in advance • Almost no emergencies

• Backlog is < 6weeks

• Backlog is <4 weeks

• Backlog is less than 3

• Detailed planning and

• Complete work package

• Kitting and work package

are prepared for most jobs before they start (tools, spare parts). Schedule adherence is 80-90%

preparation for all jobs. Schedule adherence is >90%

• Planned shutdowns never

• Planned shut down never

• Preventive plan for all

• A specific reliability

• Critical equipment

• Critical equipment

analysis conducted

analysis conducted

• FMEA conducted and

• FMEA conducted and

(man-hours)

emergency and parts / tools are often missing • High backlog (>6 months)

• No detailed advanced

planning or scheduling

deal with a lot of emergency • Backlog of ~3 months

• A distinct planner function

prepares plans for all jobs (scope, responsibility and resources)

hours)

is manageable

schedule development: clear critical path for shutdowns, 1 week schedule for routine maintenance. Schedule adherence is <80%

• Planned shutdowns

• Planned shutdowns often

• Planned shutdowns

• No or over-aged

• Preventive maintenance

• Use of condition

always run over

Maintenance strategy (Execute low total cost equipment strategies focused on preventing failures)

hours)

preventive maintenance plan

• Critical equipment unknown

• No equipment strategies

run over

plan defined and use some condition monitoring (but mainly visual inspection). Preventive plan not defined for all equipment and/or not fully implemented

• Critical equipment known from experience

• No clear equipment strategy

• Some information • No records of equipment history (work done, breakdowns, etc.)

recorded (history, work order) even if patchy and unreliable

seldom run over

monitoring, preventive plan for all equipment

• Critical equipment

assessed from facts and FMEA conducted • Some calculation of MTBF

• Use of computer system

to record complete reliable equipment history

4

5

• >95% of work is planned

is manageable

run over

equipment regularly updated and 100% implemented. Advanced condition monitoring extensively used (when cost effective)

MTBF calculated for >75% of equipment • A single CMMS is used by maintenance for equipment history, planning, W/O tracking

weeks

run over

engineering function continuously seeks to optimize cost and downtime by reviewing equipment strategies and updating all preventive plans

MTBF calculated for 100% equipment • CMMS extensively used by everyone (incl. technicians)

4

Technical System – maintenance system (2/2) 1 Work execution (Utilize best practice efficiency tools -- (e.g. SMED, standardized work, 5S etc. – to execute maintenance jobs without waste)

3

4

5

• Operators not involved

• Operators don’t

• Operators do daily

• Daily involvement of

• Operators extensively

• No tracking of job

• Some record of job

• Time to complete

• Clear SOPs and target

• Regular job have an

• --

• --

• SOPs and target time

• Tracking of MTTR /

• Each job has a target

• No root cause problem

• Ad-hoc analysis on

• Systematic root cause

• All issues are

• Equipment fixed right

• Maintenance downtime

• Maintenance

• Aggressive OEE and

• OEE and maintenance

• Small list of identified

• Pareto analysis has

in maintenance – “the equipment is yours to repair and maintain”

execution

Root cause problem solving (The processes to continuously improve equipment reliability through root cause problem solving)

2

solving • Maintenance only do quick-fix and problems reoccur

• No tracking of

downtime / production loss

• No list of identified issues

participate but communicate and cooperate with maintenance

time but patchy and unreliable

clean and check (but mainly visual inspection)

operators in maintenance: clean, check (not only visual) lube, simple changes

time for all regular maintenance jobs

jobs / MTTR measured and tracked

time to complete jobs

for some jobs

repeated problems but mainly involving maintenance / engineering only. Simple problem solving tool (eg 5 whys)

is measured but patchy and unreliable

issues, but no prioritization

problem solving methodology used for major issues involving ooperators, engineers, maintenance, equipment supplier together

systematically analyzed to the root cause using a standardized process. Involvement of operators, engineers, maintenance, equipment supplier etc

downtime is measured and reviewed weekly

identified and provided data on top 10 issues on each machine

•

maintenance downtime target set and chart of actual vs target visible in control room Pareto analysis has identified and provided data on top 10 issues on each machine

and proactively participate in maintenance (incl. assist in preventive jobs and repairs, problem solving) SOP that is strictly followed

time and actual vs. target is tracked

the first time through systematic crossfunctional-problem solving– issues never repeat themselves. Very high employees involvement in problem elimination

downtime target are regularly reviewed and chart of actual vs target visible in control room • Pareto analysis of top issues updated regularly

5

Technical System – quality system 1 Quality assurance

3

4

5

• Customer complaints are

• Customer complaints

• Production is actively

• Production is actively

• Production is actively

• No efforts to record or

• No problem solving

• Ad-hoc quality tools are

• Proper quality tools are

• PDCA* action plans are

• In case of deviation from

• Clear SOP and trouble

handled by marketing or quality department, not by production

take care of customer complaints • No record of customer feedback is kept in production department

Quality control

2

• No Standard Operating

Procedure (SOP) and Quality control Procedure

are well communicated and timely addressed

culture for customer complaints • Rework, scrap and Customer complaints are recorded in production department but not 100% complete / accurate

• SOP and Quality control procedure are documented but not easily accessed

involved in dealing with customer complaints and developing solution used to solve problems

• Complete rework, scrap

and customer complaints are kept in production area

• SOP and Quality control procedure are documented and easily accessed

• High defect rate in daily

• Quality KPIs are defined

• Quality KPIs are tracked

• No real process control

• Clear process mapping in

• SPC is used for some

production, but no clear tracking of quality KPIs

• No plan for testing /

measurement equipment maintenance

and tracked weekly. No major focus on solving quality problems

place and KPIVs/ KPOVs** are identified

• Periodic plan exist for

some equipment for is not rigorously followed

and reviewed daily. Quality problems are prioritized at least on a weekly basis

processes but could be improved – Incomplete record – Done only 1/ shift – Done on the computer, not on the shopfloor • Periodical measurement system analysis and calibration plan for testing equipments

involved in dealing with customer complaints

used in a structured problem solving approach • Rework, scrap and customer complaints are visually displayed in production area • Operator well aware of quality issues

quality standard, operators follow clear instructions given by a standard trouble-shooting guide, record and report timely • Quality KPIs are tracked and reviewed daily. Source of the variance are analyzed weekly and actions are taken to improve

• SPC is properly used for key processes

– Records are complete

involved in dealing with customer complaints

initiated and conducted by production team • Quality knowledge and ownership in every step of production value chain

shooting guidelines

• Process audits are

performed and corrective action plans are set up systematically

• Operators own quality

KPIs and drive review and improvement action plans by themselves

• SPC properly used for all process

and accurate – Data plot on SPC charts several times per shift

• Periodic MSA and

calibration is done for most testing equipment-

• Periodical measurement

system analysis and calibration plan for testing equipments. Error proofing systems are established by type of products and machines

6

Technical System – manpower system 1 Work standards (The way that the most efficient and safest way to get the job done is defined)

• Primitive work standards

• Work standards are

• Workload planning is

• Occasional use of the

• New hires are trained

• There are some trainings

• There is little or no multi-

• Majority of the work force

exists. But adherence is poor

based on historic achievements (perceived capacity)

through apprenticeship only

Manpower allocation (Method for optimizing labour productivity)

2

tasking due to lack of training, layout constraints or union agreements

adhered to but not improved

work standards to do macro level workload planning

for new comers, these trainings are not comprehensive (e.g. no problem solving methodology training)

is trained to work on a single process. Only a couple of processes are based on multi manned based on ease of training

3

4

5

• Manual processes have

• More than 60% manual

• Almost 100% manual

• Work standards are one

• Work standards used as

• Work standards used as

• There are trainings for

• Effective, visual training

• Effective, visual training

• Some critical processes

• Skill matrix is used to

• Manpower are flexible

work standards (25%) developed by engineers. The standards are not all up-to-date or rigorously followed

of the factors for planning (other factors: e.g. Individual operator capability) and labour efficiency measure new comers including problem solving methodology training, but some are outdated

have multiple people trained, the skill matrix is used scarcely

tasks have defined work standards, developed or finalised by shop-floor. Audit system exists to ensure standards are followed basis for planning and evaluation to improve work loading (balance to demand rate) and improve labour efficiency tools that enables quick new hire training of best practice methods

man critical processes.

tasks have defined work standards, developed or finalised by shop-floor. Multiple methods exist including audits to ensure standards are followed basis for planning and evaluation to improve work loading (balance to demand rate) and improve labour efficiency tools that enables quick new hire training of best practice methods

(cross skilled workforce) and the processes are regularly rebalanced to face up to changing customer demand

7

Technical System – safety and housekeeping 1 Priority on people, health and safety (Anything that can effect health or safety of the people)

2

3

4

5

• No personal protection

• Personal protection

• Personal protection

• Personal protection

• Personal protection

• No safety training

• Employees have been

• Anybody entering the site

• Safety protocol for

• Mandatory safety training

(eg number of incidents)

• Visual safety indicators,

• Visual safety indicators,

• Visual safety indicators,

• Accidents are reported by

• Accidents are measured

• Accidents are captured

• Accidents and near

equipment available

• No safety communication

• Accidents are the responsibility of the safety manager, he records and reports them

equipments are available but not used by all operators

trained for safety regulations before they start their work in the company

• Visual safety indicators

the safety manager, but there is good debrief with the front line employees

equipments are used by all operators

(employee, visitor) needs to pass a safety induction

Regular safety communication

and acted upon by the line management. Near misses are not captured

equipments are used by all operators

visitors and training for all employees is a must

every shift meeting mention safety issues / observations. Regular safety audits

by the line management and root cause problem solving is done in due course of time. Near misses are captured but not dealt with thoroughly

equipments are used by all operators

for all, with graduation and regular refresher course

safety part of the culture, every meeting, even management, start with a safety discussion

misses are actively measured and acted upon by the line management, any accident report can not be closed unless the root causes identified and counter-measured, all potential unsafe areas and activities are eliminated through systematic FMEAs

• Plant is very clean: no • Awareness of • No or little housekeeping: dust and trash everywhere, lot of unsafe conditions

housekeeping issues: lot of efforts to clean but impact is minimized by leaks / poor practices. Still some unsafe conditions

• No unsafe conditions.

Lots of effort on housekeeping but still doesn’t result on plant being ‘very clean’

• Plant is very clean: no dust or trash can be found

dust, everything is at the right place, employees pro-actively take initiative to improve work environment / housekeeping

8

Management Infrastructure – organisation design 1 Line organisation structure Design and structure of the front line size

• There are no team leaders on some or all shifts. Only supervisors exist

• The production

Functional organisation structure Design and structure of the functional organizations, including integration with the front line

organisation is by function, the primary objective of functions to self optimise • Functional support departments are silos that optimise themselves before serving front-line

• Decision for centralised

versus decentralised dept’s are based on history or individual manager’s preference

2

3

• Team leaders’ span of

• There is an appropriate

• There is an appropriate

• The production organization is organised by function but linkages are not defined

• The ops organisation is

• The operation has

• The operation organis-

• Functional support of

• Functional supports’

• Explicit linkage of

• Explicit linkages (e.g.,

• Decision of centralized

• Decision for centralised

• Good mix of centralized

day to day working requirements are linked to the front line.

versus decentralized of direct support department is need based

control is inadequate (i.e. stretched) by function, the links between functions are defined but not fully implemented

linkage to front-line are well defined

versus decentralised dept’s are based on production needs but cost primarily

• Jobs are not clearly

• Jobs are defined at top

• Jobs are clearly defined

• There are no team leaders

• Team leaders don’t have

• Team leader position is

Decision process The decision rights and responsibilities (who decides, who has a say, and who is involved) and decision-making protocols (e.g., individual authority versus committee consensus)

• Decision rights are not

• Decision rights are

Communication Formal mechanisms by which information is shared and actions are coordinated, e.g., regular meetings, dissemination of executive committee minutes, etc.

defined

• Group decisions are made by the senior managers

• Decisions are made that

the highest level • There is little awareness of important information at the front line

• Senior management hardly ever go to shopfloor

5

• Team leaders are in position along with supervisors

Job design Specific content of the positions within the hierarchy, e.g., job descriptions, roles and responsibilities

defined at any level

4

management level

clearly defined teams

defined at managerial level only • Group decisions at middle mngmt • Decision making is associated to position with no inputs from functional level.

• Information is not

classified as important and otherwise and there are no channels for propagation • Senior managers don't have regular visit to shop floor

for managers only

defined but no resources are provided • Decision rights are defined at some functions

• Group decisions are

made by dept managers

• Lower levels do not

always feel easy to use their decision rights • Important info reach the front line, but in inadequate intervals

• Senior Managers carry

out some communications but this is often short & one way

spans of control for team leaders started to organize like value stream and cross functional teams are available immediate support functions is fully defined.

and decentralized support help maximize service quality efficiency & responsiveness of certain support functions • Jobs are not defined at engineer level, with no description of direct working staff • Team leaders roles are amply clear with clear team structure

• Decision rights are

defined for all functional levels • Group decisions by majority • Lower levels feel empowered to make decisions in their area of expertise

• Important information is amply displayed

• Communication

meetings are held for interaction at regular intervals

spans of control for team leaders ation is by value stream or if by function, links are clearly defined and promote value streams

dotted lines) show important relationships, such as between service providers and internal customers • Proper mix of central-ized and decentralized support help maximize service quality efficiency & responsiveness

• Comprehensive job

descriptions articulate each employee’s duties, roles & responsibilities • Team leader/supervisor roles are clearly defined

• Decision rights are clear and codified

• Group decision are based consensus

• Decisions tend to be made at the lowest possible levels • Communication channels ensure people are aware of important information at all levels

• Comms. channels are

designed to maximize contact between managers & operators

9

Management Infrastructure – contractors and suppliers management 1 Contractors management

2

4

5

• Trade-off between internal

• Trade-off evaluated for

• Trade-off between

• Trade-off between

• No input from the line

• Some input from the line

• Line management input

• Line management input

• Site team leaders review

• Site team leaders review

• Major jobs are evaluated

• Major jobs are evaluated with performance criteria based on preset agreement on a job-byjob basis.

• Full scope of contractor

• Full scope of contractor

• Some purchasing on

• Equipment/sub-

• Equipment purchased on

• Equipment purchased on

• Vendor rating system for

• Vendor rating system for

Vendor rating system for most vendors and corrective action requirement

• Vendor rating system for

and contract resources are not evaluated (make vs. buy). Anyone in the facility can bring in a contractor and use any firm of their choosing

(production/maintenance) in contractor selection. Contractors not involved in work scoping

• Contractor presence in plant is not monitored.

• No evaluation procedure

for contract performance in place.

• No reviews of overall

contractor performance

some jobs based on price only. Contractors requirement go through selection/need process

in contractor selection. Contractors not involved in work scoping.

• Contractor work is informally monitored

• Major jobs are evaluated, with little feedback to contractor.

• Contractor performance reviews only held when major concerns/ issues arise

Suppliers management

•3

• Equipment/sub-

components purchased on lowest up-front cost

• No vendor rating system

direct life-cycle cost where maintainers insist upon it, Equipment spares replacement cost reduced by using secondary suppliers some vendors

internal and contract resources only done for major jobs. There is rigorous control of the procurement of contractors systematically asked by purchasing for contractor selection. Contractors are involved in major scope decision contractor work in most cases and react to problems

with performance criteria based on preset agreement on a job-byjob basis. performance vs. established KPIs conducted yearly

components purchased on total direct maintenance life-cycle costs. Equipment spares costs negotiated after equipment purchased most vendors

internal and contract resources only done for major jobs. The contractors used must be pre-qualified and on an approved list systematically asked by purchasing for contractor selection. Contractors are involved in major scope decisions contractor work as part of normal standard daily rounds

performance vs. established KPIs conducted quarterly with action plans for improvement

total life-cycle cost (direct and throughput loss). Equipment spares costs negotiated after equipment purchased

• Continuous trade-off

between internal and contract based on price, availability, performance, possible loss of capability. Contractors used must be pre-qualified • Full partnership between the line. purchasing and the contractor in well defined contractor selection process

• Contractors leader has

daily interactions with site personnel on status of work being performed

• Every job is completely evaluated and performance criteria is part of contractor agreement.

• Contractors productively

establish program to improve performance and share improvement ideas across site

total life-cycle cost (direct and throughput loss). Equipment replacement cost negotiated with supplier when equipment purchased all vendors with corrective action and continuous improvement expectations

10

Management Infrastructure – support functions 1 HR HR supports the manufacturing systems

• HR function is only

IT IT supports the manufacturing systems

• HR function supports all

• The IT group is not

• The IT group is resp-

• The IT group is resp-

• IT investments often run

• IT investments are

• IT investments are

• Finance department and

• The financial tracking

• The financial tracking

• Investment decisions are

• Investment decisions are

• Investment decisions are

responsible for supporting manufacturing systems

manufacturing management track spend and revenue separately (no trust)

based on financial return only and have no link to manufacturing strategy (which is often unknown)

Sales Manufacturing works in collaboration with sales

3

• HR is involved in capability building but in a limited way

involved in recruitment, disciplinary actions and union negotiation • HR does not actively support capability building and talent management

contrary to manufacturing future needs

Finance Finance supports manufacturing group with appropriate data and working capital

2

onsible for supporting manufacturing systems, but not held accountable

reviewed in-line with manuf. Strategy but often based on cost / payback

tech/processes are well defined but the responsibility left to finance department

based on manufacturing strategy but have to payback within short term (e.g. 1 year)

necessary people related issues, but in a reactive manner (wait for complaints or requests by line managers)

onsible for supporting manufacturing systems, but not held accountable

reviewed in-line with manuf. Strategy but often based on cost / payback

tech/processes are well defined but the responsibility left to both finance and operations department based on manufacturing strategy but have to payback within short term (e.g. 1 year)

4

• HR is actively involved in all the activities but there is no genuine follow up.

5

• The HR group proactively

supports 4 key processes:

– Recruiting, orientation – Staffing, scheduling – Training – Payroll, benefits

• The IT group is held

• The IT group is held

• Technology/processes

• Technology/processes

accountable for assessing and meeting the hardware, software, and training needs of the manufacturing system • Strategic IT decisions (e.g., ERP) are linked with and support the manufacturing strategy

created for financial tracking provide line managers needed information on spend and revenue • Finance provides working capital as needed by the manufacturing system, and the manufacturing system is consistent with the financial strategy

accountable for assessing and meeting the hardware, software, and training needs of the manufacturing system • IT reports are generated at value stream levels, KPIs are directly obtained from the IT system, shop floor has IT displayes supporting manufactuing system

created for financial tracking provide line managers needed information on spend, revenue and other management accounting information (cost variance, utilization, efficiency etc)

• Finance accounts cost by

value stream and guides operations through flow manufacturing accounting

• There is little or no

• There is some

• There are some channels

• Manufacturing receives

• Manufacturing will get

• Sales regularly

• Sales try to respect the

• Sales try to set a balance

• Sales force ensure that

• Sales work to ensure the

working communication with sales apart from at the highest level compromise prod needs (e.g. level production) to fulfil their KPIs (e.g endmonth targets)

communication between sales and manufacturing

production schedule but their own KPIs are top most priority

setup to provide sales feedback to production, but sparsely used between respecting production needs and their KPIs

feedback from sales periodically (every 2-3 months)

the production schedule is respected without effecting their own KPIs to a very large extent

constant feedback form sales and improve product spec/quality/… manufacturing system parameters are respected

11

Management Infrastructure – performance management Clear KPIs, linked to business objectives, are defined and cascaded and used at the front line

1

2

• There are too few or too

• Important KPIs are identified and their linkage to the business need is clear. No shop floor KPI are defined

• Clear KPIs measuring

• There is little or no

• There is performance

• Data collection starts at

• There are no real shop-

• There are shop floor

• There are no shop-floor

• Occasional shop floor

many KPIs with weak link to business objectives and even weaker link to shop-floor metrics performance tracking or data collection on the shopfloor. No visual mamagement. floor targets, the operational targets do not match the BP

reviews, management reviews are adhoc and not fact based, everyone protects their silos

tracking or data collection on the shop floor only for few or critical processes. No visual management. targets at some levels, but they do not match the BP

reviews, but they are held systematically. Everyone protects their silos

3 performance (and partially health) are defined and cascaded; the link to shopfloor KPIs are weak shopfloor by supervisors and input directly into IT. Some visual management.

• There are targets set at

each level of hierarchy, the targets do not match

• The performance reviews are open and systematic. They are held at every level but shopfloor

Performance monitoring and review mechanism are in place and adequate countermeasures are taken

• People below managers have no real personal objectives discussed or agreed. There are no personal reviews in place.

• There are no or little

performance related pay or non-financial incentives to promote people performance

• Shop floor linkage of

bottle neck equipment and process KPI is clear, with tracking system.

• Data collection at

important stations by operators and input directly into IT. Wide use of visual management.

• Targets at each

hierarchical level match

• Regular and constructive performance reviews are held regularly

• Corrective action plan is

• No or little corrective

action planning. Most of the effort is spent fire fighting

4

• Some corrective action

planning in place (in some critical areas).

• Front line operators have

no personal objectives set. Personal reviews happens but the frequency is low.

• Financial or non financial incentives are linked to performance only at the top level. No incentive at lower levels.

• Corrective action

planning is common place, the improve-ment lead-times exceed reviews cycle

• There are personal

objectives set for most people in the organisation, however failing objectives has little consequence. Performance is reviewed but the improvement levers are vague. • Financial or non-financial incentives (e.g. bonus) have little link to people performance (individual or team)

used effectively. 50% of actions are planned & executed within the review cycle

• Personal objectives are

set for everyone in the organization. Performance reviews take place at right intervals, however there is no coaching for the identified corrective actions. • Motivation system is more related to financial rewards, no system for punishing underperformers

5

• Clear KPIs, linked to

business objectives, are defined & cascade to frontline with balance of leading and lagging indicators to track performance & health • Data collection starts at shopfloor and is visual, It is supported by IT systems . Wide use of visual management.

• Performance and health

targets are set & cascaded throughout hierarchy

• Effective performance

reviews (using visual tools) are held at every level using calendared meeting process and with a constructive but challenging dialogues

• Corrective action planning

is used effect-ively. 80% of actions are planned & executed within the review cycle

• Personal objectives are

set and linked to operations objectives. Personal review processes are mostly executed with appropriate coaching, development and corrective action in real time • Effective motivation system design allows management of rewards – and consequences for underperformance

12

Management Infrastructure – capability building processes 1 Training & development Formalized programs (content) and processes, and infrastructure for training and developing the skills, knowledge, and abilities of employees

• The only real training is for new starters and is brief (days)

• Skill requirement not clarified

• All training is class-room

2 • There are some basic trainings that are given to everyone without realising the applicability

• Skill requirements are practically defined to meet job needs and are documented in a job description • Concept of coaching doesn’t exist

3

• The are trainings at

engineers/managers levels, which is identified by the indi-vidual based on his/her preference and less by business needs • Regular skills evaluation and tracking

4

• The process of need based training identification doesn’t exist

room based

identify training needs

• Trainings are immediately applicable

• A skill matrix is visually

• Emphasis is there on

• Trainings are through

coaching as well

based

• There is formal process to

• A skill matrix is used

and reviewed at least every 6 months to track skills

• Most trainings are class-

5

classroom & coaching

Knowledge management Codification and dissemination of constantly evolving best practices; “guardian of the production system”

• There is no system to

• Best practices are codified

• Best practices are

• No one owns the exiting

• Know how capturing exists

• Knowledge is owned

Talent review Formalized activities to attract, develop, and retain talented staff

• There is no value

• Employee value

• Employee value

• Employee value

• Employee value proposition

• People performance is

• Employee evaluation is

• Employee evaluation is

• Reviews are based on

• Employee evaluation is

share best practices

know-how within the organisation

proposition defined for employees not reviewed

• No periodic reviews

but there is no system of sharing but is not thorough.

proposition is defined only for very few employees linked to performance

• Reviews are not

transparent and one way

codified but known only to engineers centrally but the dissemination is weak and not systematic

proposition is defined but not known outside HR linked to performance

• Reviews are top-down

• Best practices are

displayed and updated regularly

codified but sharing is not regular across different levels • Dissemination of knowledge not rigorous but managed centrally

proposition is clearly defined

360 degree feedback but process is not rigorously followed. • Reviews are 360 based but not frequently done

• Best practices are codified

and effectively shared with all related

• Evolution and dissemination of knowledge is managed centrally

is clearly articulated

linked to performance and health (e.g. values)

• Reviews are based on 360 degree feedback

13

Management infrastructure – CI infrastructure 1 CI resource Dedicated continuous improvement resources to drive improvement from shop floor base

• No continuous

• There are some

• No involvement of

• Mainly managers /

• No root cause problem

• Employee suggestion scheme is a primary source of CI. Ad-hoc analysis on key problems. Use of some problem solving methodology (eg 5 whys)

improvement resource

employees in CI

Problem solving methodology Systematic problem solving methodology and process supported by a strict implementation tracking mechanism

solving. No clear process for improvement idea generation

• Action plans informal and

Improvement ideas CI organization translates ideas into new front-line and management practices

2 resources responsible for continuous improvement

supervisors are involved in CI • Some operators involved in CI but on a case by case / project basis

• Action plans recorded in

3

• The CI team runs

• More than 90%

• Managers / supervisors

• ~50% employees are

involved in regular CI activities • Operators own CI activities themselves, not driven by management

• >90% of employees are

are key drivers of CI activities • Some efforts to involve operators in CI activities on a regular basis

• Improvement process

• Standardised, company

• Standardised

• All action plans well

• All action plans well

recorded and documented (incl. financial impact) – Monthly review of project progress – Management more involved in pushing implementation (‘holding the whip’) than problem solving

documented with KPIs, targets, deadline, and responsibilities – Action plans and their progress visually available to all – Deadlines are met – Management involved more in problem solving mode than progress supervision

• Idea capturing is a well

• CI org. captures and

cross-functional CI team • At least 1 person per department has been trained in improvement tools (e.g., SMED, 6Sigma, etc.)

and root cause problem solving methodology used (eg DMAIC, PDCA) but limited to a few selected key projects. Problem solving is only through brainstorming

meeting minutes but not easily available to all – Tracking is informal and highly depends on the area manager

• Action plans are recorded

• People’s ideas for

• Idea capturing is not

• Systematic idea capturing

systematic and no collection point is there

5

• There is a dedicated

not documented (oral commitment) – No tracking of initiatives

improvement are not captured

4

and centralised – Action plans include responsibilities and deadline but KPIs and financial targets not clearly defined – Manager review and track implementation

system in place where important ideas are implemented

improvement workshop at least once every three month in each flow • The CI team supports problem solving on the shop floor to deal with daily issues raised

tailored improvement process and root cause problem solving methodology used by 50% of employees

established system, but implementation is not business need based

improvement activities driven by CI team are implemented on time • 25% of all personnel trained on improvement tools (e.g., 25% of staff is a 6Sigma GB/BB) actively involved in CI activities to reach the improvement goals

improvement process and root cause problem solving methodology widely used by all employees, incl. operators, technicians in day to day activities

syndicates the improvement ideas and ensures implementation

14