APICS is not responsible for statements or opinions expressed by individuals in its publications or at its meetings. The views expressed are solely those of the individual and are not necessarily endorsed by APICS.
The Great Cookie Crisis – 2006 Utilizing the Tools of Quality in PIM Performance Improvement
Brian Koenig CPIM
The Elmore Institute LLC
Doug Brandt CPIM, CIRM
Armstrong Air Conditioning
Engaged in Improvement???
“How many agree that the vast majority
of the workforce in your organization
possess far more talent, intelligence,
capability and creativity than their
present jobs require or even allow?”
Stephen Covey
The 8th Habit – From Effectiveness to Greatness
The Great Cookie Crisis
• Problem Solving Methodology Process Control – Predictability & Stability Scientific Method – Hoshin Planning / Policy Deployment
• Tools of Quality Which tool, when, how and why? Long Term – Process Improvement Medium Term - Problem Solving Short term - Daily Manufacturing Process Control
• Ottawa Baking Toledo - 400,000 per week Atlanta - 250,000 per week
Cookie Defects
What issues hinder our success??
Corrective Action & Help!!!
Continuous Improvement
from optimizing
Effectiveness and Efficiencies?
5 Step – Methodology
1. Define current process / problem.
2. Define future process / goal.
3. Analysis of data and alternate solutions.
4. Selection and implementation of solutions.
5. Verification of results / future condition.
• Kaoru Ishikawa
• Tools Support the processes How and when Methods = Results Simple = Effective
• Lean / ISO objectives Employee Involvement Continuous Improvement
Basic Tools
1. Gantt Chart
2. Tally Sheets
3. Run Chart
Scatter Diagram5-Why’sControl Charts
4. Pareto Analysis
5. Flow Charts
6. Fishbone Analysis
Corrective Action Matrix
Failure Mode & Effects (FMEA)
Poka-Yokes
The MeetingApril ‘05
• Veronica’s office – Rainy Tuesday morning
• Quality Issues
Lost 3 of 10 largest customers in since last fall. (quality?) Quality Mgr and Maintenance Supt – New ovens $1/2 mil. 11 of 36 cookies with “not enough” chips at party.
It’s up to us to solve the “problem”!
1. Initial Activities
• Member Selection
• Problem Definition
• Objectives
• Project Timeline
Assembling the Team
• Core Members
• Support Members
• Initiator Problem definition Goal Closure
Beware!
What is the Problem with Inventory???
1. Reduce average total number of cookies the inventory is off. (Average week +/- 20,000 of 1,000,000 in stock)
2. Reduce average number of items off by
+/- 1,000. (Average week 8 types out of 100 types)
3. Increase number of cookie types that are 100% accurate. (Average week 82%)
* * Examples * *
of different Definitions
ObjectiveOttawa Baking
• Our objective is to reduce the number of defective cookies based off scrap, audits and customer credits / complaints for the Toledo and Atlanta facilities.
• Developed by core members during 2nd meeting. Goal to be developed after base data collected.
Is this too Broad? - Veronica’s mandate
Gantt ChartNice Recruiting Tool !!!
Cookie Defect Reduction
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct
A Select Members X X X X X X X
B Current Condition X X X X X X X X X X X X
C Select Goal X X X X X X
D Root Cause X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
E Corrective Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
F Standardize X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
G Revised Condition X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
• Communications and buy-in
• Project Management
• Methods, documentation & records Up to individual organizations What? Who? How? Results?
• Training & Competencies
2. Current Condition
• Data Collection – What do we collect? Data aligned with future problem / solution needs? User friendly and understood? How much do you need to collect? Sorting, ranking, presenting?
• Tools Tally Sheet – Initial collection Run Chart – Defects by Quantity Pareto Chart – Defects by Type Flow Chart – Sequence of activities
Tally Sheet User Friendly!!!
Defects – ‘000
Defect Wk 1 Wk 2 Wk 3 Wk 4
1. Burned IIIII IIII
2. Broken IIII II
3. Packaging II I
4. Size I I
5. Stuck II
6. Chips I
Total 15 8
Run Chart Ottawa Baking
Defects Per Week
WeeklyDefects( '000 )
35
30
2425 O
2020 O 18 Avg Defects
O 17,000 per Week
15O O
10 14 O 1412
5
0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Week
“Secondary Sorts”Stratification – Six Sigma
Breaking data apart into different categories to assist future analysis. Could be by: shift, plant, department, cookie type, etc.
Total 20 14 24 18 12 14 Total
Shift - 1 9 7 10 8 5 8 47
Shift – 2 5 4 8 5 4 2 28
Shift – 3 6 3 6 3 3 4 25
Pareto Chart Rule of 80/20
Defects by Type
Ottawa Baking
Defects ' 000
8065
60
4040
25
2010
5 5
0
Burned Broken Pkg Size Stuck Chips
Flow ChartCurrent
Ottawa BakingProcess Flow
Receiving Mixing Baking Packaging Shipping
Inventory Inventory Inventory Inventory
3. Future Process / GoalWhere are we going?
“SMART” Goals
• S pecific
• M easurable
• A ggressive
• R ealistic
• T ime bound
Goals impact the activities and resources allocated to the project.
Ottawa BakingProject Goal
Reduce the 6-Week moving average of Defective Cookies by 30% in 180 days.
12,000 or less per week - Toledo
7,000 or less per week - Atlanta
4. Root Cause Analysis
• Identify lowest level of cause
• 5M’s + E / Fishbone / 5 Why’s Scatter Diagram / ANOVA A single “problem” can have multiple Issues / Root
Causes attached to it.
5M’s + ESources of Variation
1. M an Left in oven too long
2. M aterial Dry dough
3. M achines Hot spots in ovens
4. M ethods Tray versus belt
5. M easurement Inconsistent scale
E nvironment Ambient humidity
Fishbone
BurnedCookies
Environment
Measurements
Methods
Material
Machines
Man
Defective Cookies
Start counting last pack of
M&M’s.
5 – Why’sPossible multiple analysis
1. Why burned cookies?Hot spots
2. Why hot spots? Thermocouple calibration
3. Why calibration? Not on PM checklist
4. Why not on checklist? Issues with updating
5. Why not updated? Staffing shortages / Priorities
** Possible to have multiple 5-Why analysis within a project.
5. Corrective Action Plan
• Designing and executing the “Action” Plan Multiple activities per project – Coordinate Tools - DOE / FMEA / APQP / Poka Yokes / Standardize
• Best way to organize Who’s available / interested Vertical vs. Horizontal ex. Training (all groups
responsible for their own or one groups trains all?)
• Corrective Action Matrix Issue, C/A, Leader, Target Date, Results
Corrective Action Matrix
Issue Activity Leader Date Status
1. Dough Review Eng 7-31 Closed Temp
2. Oven Calibration & DB/BK 9/30 Closed Temps Location Maint
3. Tray Verify and DB/BK 9/30 Closed
Type Standardize
4. Set-up Baking and DB/BK 9/30 Open Packaging Maint
6. Sustaining the Gains
• Standardization and Work Guidance
• Future Monitoring and Verification What, Who, When, “How” SPC – Control Charts Departmental audits
Standards (Specs - What)
Clear image of desired conditions
Make abnormalities obvious
Simple and Visual
Work Guidance (How)
Robust - wide
Dynamic - changing
Input from users
Standards & Guidance
Manning: 1 operator - 17.5 minutes Takt Time:Station: 1
Location: MIXING STATION W.S. PPE:Rev. Date: 4/25/2002Rev. Level: 1
PPE: SAFETY GLASSES/ RUBBER GLOVES/ BOOTIES/HAIR NETModel: Candy Coated Chocolate Chip
Task Description MCT Fixt./ Gage VRA Tools Mach.1. MEASURE MEASURE 40 LBS. OF FLOUR PUT IN 40# SIZED VAT AND DUMP INTO MIXER 2.8 MIN 40 LB FLOUR VAT MIXER
2. MEASURE MEASURE 6.4 GALLONS OF WHOLE MILK IN 4.4 GALLON CONTAINER AND POUR INTO MIXER 2.4 MIN6.4 GALLON CONTAINER
MIXER
3. MEASURE MEASURE 5.3 GALLONS OF PREPARED EGGS POUR INTO MIXER 1.2 MIN5.3 GALLON CONTAINER
MIXER
4. MEASURE MEASURE 1.7 LBS OF SALT AND POUR INTO CONTAINER .8 MIN1.7 LB SALT CONTAINER
MIXER
5. MEASURE 3.2 LBS OF BAKING SODA AND POUR INTO MIXER 1.1 MIN3.2 LB BAKING
SODA CONTAINERMIXER
6. MEASURE 7.8 LBS OF BAKING POWDER AND POUR INTO MIXER 1.3 MIN7.8 LB BAKING
POWDERMIXER
7. MEASURE MEASURE 11.6 LBS. OF SUGAR POUR INTO MIXER 1.8 MIN11.6 LB SUGAR
CONTAINERMIXER
8. MEASURE MEASURE 2.3 GALLONS OF VANILLA AND POUR INTO MIXER 1.3 MIN2.3 GALLON CONTAINER
MIXER
9. MIX START MIXER AT 54 STROKES PER MINUTE 11 MINMIXER SPEED CONTROL AND
TIMERMIXER
10. MEASUREAFTER MIXER HAS RUN FOR 11 MINUTES, MEASURE 12 LBS. OF CANDY COATED CHOCOLATES AND POUR
INTO MIXER1.8 MIN
12 LB CANDY COATED
CHOCOLATE CONTAINER
MIXER
11. MIXINCREASE MIXING SPEED TO 83 STROKES PER MINUTE AFTER ALL INGREDIENTS HAVE BEEN ADDED. RUN
MIXER AT THIS RATE FOR 6 MINUTES6 MIN
MIXER SPEED CONTROL AND
TIMERMIXER
12. MIX SEND MIXING VAT TO BAKING 8 MIN VAT
39.5 minutes
HAIR NET, ALL CLOTHING COVERS, SAFETY GLASSES, RUBBERGLOVES
Items StandardizedBurned Cookies
1. Tray types used by cookies
2. PM on thermocouples
3. Reference scales for cookie inspection
4. Competencies and training in baking and packaging
5. Min/ Max dough temps, prior to baking.
6. Operator, Supervisor and Quality inspection methods and responsibilities.
7. Revised ConditionAre we there yet?
Ottawa BakingDefects Per Week
WeeklyDefects( '000 )
28
24
20 1715 O
16 O 14 13 GoalO O 12,000 per Week
12O
8 10 O
84
0
Week 21 22 23 24 25 26
6 Week 15 14 15 13 12 11Average
8. Review and Record Keeping
• Evaluation of activities, findings, methods, tools and results.
• Story of the Team - summary Each organization, own requirements
Team Review
• Problem Description
• Goal
• Team & Input
• Current Process
• Current Condition
• Root Cause Analysis
• Counter Measures
• Future Condition
• Standardization
• Verification
• Documentation
• Results
Story of the Team
Reactive ???
Or
Proactive???
Hoshin PlanningAttaining Strategic Objectives
3 -Tier Policy Deployment – PDCA Cycles
1. Top Management2. Middle Management3. Departmental
Quality Hoshin Safety Hoshin Productivity Hoshin TPM Hoshin Sales Hoshin
Management can/should walk into the departments to verify how well departmental activities are aligned with and meeting higher level Hoshins.
Internal Objectives – Ottawa Baking
1. Employee Involvement
2. Visual Tools
3. Continuous Improvement
Internal Tools – Ottawa Baking
1. Daily / Weekly Meetings
2. Department Scoreboard!!!
Departmental Scoreboard
• Know the objective
• Assess the situation
• Adjust and attack
Departmental Scoreboard
Ottawa Baking
Quality Productivity Inventory Customer
A1 Defects Schedule Attainment On-Hand On-Time
Run Chart Run Chart Run Chart Run Chart
A2 Defects Downtime Accuracy Complaints
Pareto Pareto Pareto Pareto
A3 Root Cause Root Cause Root Cause Root Cause Analysis Analysis Analysis Analysis
A4 Action Log Action Log Action Log Action Log----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B1 Accidents & Efficiency Run Chart 5S Audit
Safety Audit Run Chart
B2 Safety Efficiency 5S Action Log
Action Log Action Log
Summary
• Tools identified and sequenced to help Ottawa Baking improve performance.
• Departmental “scoreboard” to improve day-to-day operations.
Thanks!!!
Hope you enjoyed the presentation...
Brian
Appendix
• Scatter Diagram
• Control Charts
• FMEA
• Additional Reading
Scatter Diagram
Temp vs Darkness
10 x x
DA 8 x x
RK 6 x x
NE 4 x x x
SS 2 x
0
325 F 350 F 425 F
Control Chart
• Processing Capabilities Control Limits Voice of Process Customer Specs Voice of Customer
• Common Cause vs. Special Cause Variation Reducing Common Cause Variation =
Continuous Improvement
• Accuracy vs Precision
Cookie WeightGrams
112
2%108
14%104
34%100
34%C
96
CB C C 14%
92
B B C 2%
88
A
FMEA
• Failure Mode & Effects
• Severity
• Occurrence
• Detection
• RPN Number (SxOxD)
Additional Sources
Lean Production Simplified
Pascal DennisStandards, Job Element Sheets, Hoshin Planning
Productivity Press
Understanding Statistical Process Control
Donald J. Wheeler / David S. ChamberlainControl Charts & Interpretation
SPC Press
Special Thanks
• AIC – Rita, Kathy, Sue, Margaret & Mike
• EMU – Dr Tucker, Veronica, Jim & Brian
• Owens CC – Students from QCT 110 / 231
We hope you enjoyed!
Brian Koenig CPIMeibk @ aol.com
Doug Brandt CPIM / CIRM Doug.Brandt @ aac-inc.com
Session #: E – 09 Title: The Great Cookie Crisis
Please return your completed session survey to the room monitor or the collection boxes near the exit
APICS programs are noncommercial forums. Speakers have agreed to refrain from the use of brand names and specific product endorsement whenever possible. Speakers understand that the association’s podium cannot be used as a place for direct promotion of the presenter’s product, services, or for monetary self interest.