our lean - ciras

Our lean journey

HNI/ILC member use only 1

Overview• Company history

• Lean beginnings

• Lean today

• Closing


HNI history


Company founders

• Maxwell Stanley, Engineer

• Clement Hanson, Marketing

• H. Wood Miller, Industrial Designer

• Foresaw a post-war housing boom

• Desired to put returning G.I.s to work

• Incorporated Home-O-Nize in 1944

Miller Stanley Hanson


Home-O-Nize

• First production• April 1947

• Aluminum hood for commercial gas

• Plant in Muscatine, IA

• Contract work• Steel shortages 1947-1948

• Aluminum coasters from scrap

• Recipe boxes

• First profitable year 1948• John Deere’s Harvester Works

• 1950 Purchase of the Prime-Mover


H-O-N

• 1950s• Decreased dependence on

contract work• Sales passed $2 million 1954• Expansion of product offering• H-O-N product branding

• 1960s• Increased market share of office

products• Entered wholesale marketplace• Stanley Howe becomes President• Name change to HON

INDUSTRIES, Inc• Plant opened in Cedartown,

Georgia• Sales of $25 million


HON INDUSTRIES Inc

• 1970s• Acquisitions of Holga Metal

Products, Corry Jamestown, Norman Bates Inc, and Murphy-Miller

• Wood and seating office furniture manufacturing

• Sales of $198 million

• 1980s• Acquisitions of Heibert Inc,

Heatilator, J.K Rischel Company, Budget Panels Inc (later Maxon), Ring King Visibles, and The Gunlocke Company

• Fortune 500 company

• Sales of $555 million


HNI Corporation

• 1990s• Jack Michaels becomes President

and CEO• Expansion into international

business • First decline in sales since 1952• Investments in new product,

equipment, businesses, and members

• Acquisition of Allsteel Inc, Panel Concepts (later Maxon)

• 2000s• Purchase of Paoli Inc, OFM, Lamex,

HBF, Lamex, and multiple hearth brands

• Name changed to HNI Corporation in 2004

• Stan Askren named CEO in 2004• RCI activities during recession


HNI Corporation today

• HNI Corporation• A family of leading brands

providing products and services for the office and home

• Jeffrey Lorenger named CEO in 2018


HNI Founding Beliefs

• Focused on participatory relationships

• Required fairness and respect

• Highlighted employee/management relations

• Considered employees as members

• Encouraged belonging and participation

• Empowered members to find better ways

HNI use only - not for distribution 10

We believe…


Lean beginnings


Catalyst for improvement

• 1991- First decline of sales in four decades

• Flat growth in the office furniture industry

• Lowest level of housing starts since WWII


1992 race for improvement

• Launched rapid continuous improvement (RCI)

• Secretive about efforts

• Hired Shingijutsu consultants

• 180 degree shift in culture


Resistance to improvement

• Mentality of “we’re profitable, why change?”

• New principles were hard

• Couldn’t identify the benefit

• It was a journey, not a fix


The bridge to improvement

• Linked to founding principles

• Always finding a better way

• Not a new concept

• Turned over to the members

• Provided training

• Used shop floor as a laboratory

• The member doing the job knows it best


Learning to see

• Started with value stream pilots

• Used value stream maps to “see”

• Organized around value streams

• Realigned metrics with value stream

• Used experts for teaching

• Developed lean leaders

• Celebrated successes

• Learned from mistakes


Constructive discontent

• 1993 Focused on waste elimination

• Reduced lead time by 50%

• 1995 Focused on 80/20

• Improved inventory turns

• Cash flow increased

• Lead times reduced 60%

• Lost-time accidents down 90%

• 1996 Focused on non-manufacturing areas

• Customer get “feature-rich products”

• No increased cost due to design


Lean today


Business Process Improvement

• Road map for value creation

• Foundational lean

• Transformational lean

• The model never ends


BPI certification process

• Orientation

• Skill application

• Lean training

• Lean application

• Continuous learning


BPI certification

• Expectations based on level

• Higher level = higher influence

• Requirements challenge

HNI/ILC member use only22

BPI certification requirements

• Mi Ideas

• Classroom training

• Problem solving projects

• RCI participation and leadership

• Reading

• Responsibility changes as levels progress

• Learning

• Leading

• Mentoring

• Transforming

23 HNI/ILC member use only

Value stream mapping

• Completed for production and non-production (admin) areas• Complete current state map(s)

• Complete idea state map

• Create bridge plan with effort/impact matrix

• Most areas complete a VSM exercise annually to either create or update VSMs

• Action items drive goals specific to the department


Mi Ideas

• Member Implemented Idea• Process

– Member submits an improvement idea and moves Mi Idea slip from Blank to New

– Manager reviews with member and approves or rejects; Mi Idea slip is moved from New to In Process

– Member completes idea and moves Mi Idea slip to Complete

– RCI department picks up completed ideas and logs in an excel tracker


Mi Idea examples


• Ideas can focus on safety, quality, visual management, or the 7 wastes

• Ideas range from updating prints to implementing poke-yokes

• Outstanding Mi Ideas are nominated for the Mi Idea of the Month

Problem solving• The size of the paper = the size of

the problem

• Primary tools for problem solving• Mi Idea

• 5 why

• Fishbone diagram

• 8D

Mi Idea

Newspaper/5 why/Fishbone

8D


RCI events

• 4-5 day Kaizen events

• 5-10 member team with a leader

• Goals and objectives approved by leadership prior to event

• Focus on eliminating waste in Genba

• Fail fast and move forward

Rapid Continuous Improvement


RCI planningHoliday week Consultant week 124

Start (-4) Event Week Event description Factory/areaApproval

statusResponsible Event status 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52

50 2 Aluminum VSM Aluminum Approved Kyle Nethery Complete 1

50 2 Steel/Steel Accy VSM Steel Approved Josh Langford/Rory Huston Complete 1

1 4 DC Ergo DC Approved Zach Goddard Complete 1

1 4 Item Creation VSM Supply Chain Approved Lisa Nelson Complete 1

2 6 Specialty Packout Ergo Aluminum Approved Angie McKiddy Newspaper 1

2 6 Byrne Flow Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne Approved Logan Keese Complete 1

2 6 Knife Edge 3P Worksurfaces Approved Dale Tetmeyer Complete 1

3 7 BOM accuracy Admin Approved Collin Meisner Complete 1

3 7 Worksurfaces scrap Worksurfaces Approved Chris Watson Complete 1

4 8 Glass damage Glass Approved Doug Shelly Complete 1

5 9 Aluminum/Glass future state Aluminum Approved Alan Cross Complete 1

5 9 Steel/Flex FMEA Steel Approved Rob Becker Complete 1

5 9 Pallets flow Supply Chain Approved Lisa Nelson Complete 1

5 9 Worksurfaces packaging Worksurfaces Approved Rebecca Flicher Complete 1

6 10 Supplier scorecard Supply Chain Approved Eric Eskra Complete 1

7 11 DC Accessories sort area flow DC Approved Derek Franck Complete 1

7 11 Screens NPI 3P Fabric/Tiles/Frames Approved Jared Dusthimer Complete 1

7 11 Steel PO FMEA Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne Approved Marco Prada Complete 1

8 12 Lectra sorting Fabric/Tiles/Frames Approved Matt Blair Complete 1

13 17 Aluminum purchasing optimization Supply Chain Approved Leah Hance Complete 1

14 18 Panels FMEA Fabric/Tiles/Frames Approved Dylan Balmer Complete 1

14 18 Supplier Assessment Supply Chain Approved Jay Senatra Complete 1

15 19 Frame Information Flow Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne Approved Donna Palmer Complete 1

15 19 Worksurfaces scheduling Worksurfaces Approved Pedro Perales Complete 1

16 20 Steel A flow Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne Approved Josh Langford Complete 1

17 21 DLT VSM Admin Approved Jeremy Klug Complete 1

17 21 Hardware Flow Aluminum Approved Jake Skidmore Complete 1

17 21 Frame Clamp Packs Implementation Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne Approved Duston Gillaspie Complete 1

17 21 Crossroads Flow Supply Chain Approved Leah Hance Complete 1

18 22 Fabric Cut PFMEA Fabric/Tiles/Frames Approved Ben Deininger Complete 1

18 22 Silea scavenger hunt Steel Approved Gabe Benitez Complete 1

19 23 Inbound quality audits Supply Chain Approved Aaron Hoover Complete 1

20 24 Internal material replenishment Supply Chain Approved Jay Senatra Complete 1

21 25 Glass scrap Glass Approved Doug Shelly Complete 1

22 26 Tile corner quality (bookfold) Fabric/Tiles/Frames Approved Stacy Bazal Newspaper 1

24 28 Steel Accy ergo Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne Approved Brian Swink Complete 1

25 29 Hardware Containment Aluminum Approved Jake Skidmore Complete 1

25 29 DC/Worksurfaces rack relocation DC Approved Steve Wassenhove/Pedro Perales Complete 1

25 29 Frame clamp packs - info flow - Allsteel Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne Approved Mindy Newsom Complete 1

25 29 Corner Store Layout Supply Chain Approved Lisa Nelson Newspaper 1

26 30 Future State Glass Store Glass Approved Ben Deininger Complete 1

27 31 Aluminum Block 3P Glass Approved Scott Kappel Complete 1

27 31 Frame Clamp Packs Implementation - Allsteel lines Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne Approved Tony Campbell Complete 1

27 31 Worksurfaces Size 3P Worksurfaces Approved Russ Hillman Newspaper 1

29 33 1st Piece Inspection Fabric/Tiles/Frames Approved Ben Deininger Newspaper 1

29 33 S+J Weld 3P Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne Approved Josh Langford Complete 1

30 34 Accessories Standard Work Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne Approved Megan Rudd Newspaper 1

30 34 Menasha Cart Standardization Supply Chain Approved Jay Senatra Complete 1

32 36 Aluminum PFMEA Aluminum Approved Mike Plank Complete 1

32 36 Door Cell 3p Fabric/Tiles/Frames Approved Patrick Mura Complete 1

32 36 PFMEA - A8/BIX Fabric/Tiles/Frames Approved Gary Tomlinson Complete 1

34 38 Procurement VSM Supply Chain Approved Jeremy Klug Event week 1

36 40 Lamination Quality Fabric/Tiles/Frames TBD Tim Warren Pipeline 1

36 40 Weld Cell TPM Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline 1

37 41 MES Mapping-Fabric Factory Fabric/Tiles/Frames TBD Jared Dusthimer Pipeline 1

38 42 Hardware Flow Aluminum TBD Jessica Meeker Pipeline 1

38 42 Fabric Roll Ergo Fabric/Tiles/Frames TBD Tim Dale Pipeline 1

38 42 Glass TPM Glass TBD Sean McCleary Pipeline 1

40 44 1514 Staging Sequencing Glass TBD Ryan Oliver Pipeline 1

40 44 A8 Ergo Fabric/Tiles/Frames TBD Gary Tomlinson Pipeline 1

40 44 R & N - A flow/ergo Glass TBD Scott Kappel Pipeline 1

#VALUE! Q3 PFMEA - Aluminum PO (possibly several events) Aluminum TBD Marco Prada Pipeline

#VALUE! Q3 PFMEA - Aluminum Fab Aluminum TBD Marco Prada Pipeline

-4 Local Lean Transportation Optimization Supply Chain TBD Jay Senatra Pipeline

-4 Discontinuation Process Admin TBD Kim Dezeeuw Pipeline

-4 Aluminum saws dust collection 3P Aluminum TBD Hollie Frieden Pipeline

-4 Ergo placeholder Aluminum TBD Mikel Plank Pipeline

-4 DC sort area flow DC TBD Steve Wassenhove Pipeline

-4 DC VSM DC TBD Steve Wassenhove Pipeline

-4 Pod loading flow (develop pod concept info flow) DC TBD Steve Wassenhove Pipeline

-4 Inbound damage/can't finds DC TBD Sean Carolan Pipeline

-4 Sort to DLT material handling (tugger implementation?) DC TBD Steve Wassenhove Pipeline

-4 Pod loading 3P (develop pod and understand material handling) DC TBD Steve Wassenhove Pipeline

-4 Lines to Sort material handling (tugger implementation?) DC TBD Steve Wassenhove Pipeline

-4 Worksurfaces damage reduction - bulk pack DC TBD Sean Carolan Pipeline

-4 Fabric Scheduling Fabric/Tiles/Frames TBD Ben Deininger Pipeline

-4 Lectra Pull Ahead Fabric/Tiles/Frames Approved Tim Warren Pipeline

-4 Fabric WIP Storage Method Fabric/Tiles/Frames TBD Tim Dale Pipeline

-4 Bix Flow/ Stage Fabric/Tiles/Frames TBD Marc Caldwell Pipeline

-4 A8 Cell Simplification Fabric/Tiles/Frames TBD Chris Marsiglio Pipeline

-4 Metals WIP Storage Method Fabric/Tiles/Frames TBD Dylan Balmer Pipeline

-4 Metals Layout(Post Rollform Move) Fabric/Tiles/Frames TBD Chris Marsiglio Pipeline

-4 PFMEA - Tackboards Fabric/Tiles/Frames Approved Marco Prada Pipeline

-4 Fabric VSM Fabric/Tiles/Frames TBD Jared Dusthimer Pipeline

-4 A8 further design simplification 3P Fabric/Tiles/Frames TBD Trent Busch Pipeline

-4 Model A line Glass TBD Kyle Nethery Pipeline

-4 Ergo/safety 1 Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline

-4 Ergo/safety 2 Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline

-4 Thick gauge steel (possibly several events) Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline

-4 Robotic welding (possibly several events) Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline

-4 Robotic forming Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline

-4 Weld cell physical flow (home location improvements) Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline

-4 Information flow on weld cell (scheduling) Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline

-4 PCB's in weld cells Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline

-4 PCB's in Packout Areas Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline

-4 PCB's at the coil lines Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline

-4 Daily efficiency for flex Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline

-4 Paint Flow Steel TBD Rory Huston Pipeline

-4 Frames auto welding Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne TBD Josh Langford Pipeline

-4 Packaging bucketing for end panel/Voi/O leg (A flow) Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne TBD Kevin Young Pipeline

-4 Steel Accy Ergo 2 Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne TBD Josh Langford Pipeline

-4 Wrap and pack paced packout Steel Accy/Frames/Byrne TBD Josh Langford Pipeline

-4 Laminate Bucket Scheduling Supply Chain TBD Lisa Nelson Pipeline

-4 Continuous Flow Supply Chain TBD Kevin Young Pipeline

-4 Laminate transactions (target B SKU) Supply Chain TBD Torie Stewart Pipeline

-4 Pallets 2.0 Supply Chain TBD Lisa Nelson Pipeline

-4 P.O. Output Worksurfaces TBD Pipeline

-4 Edge Band Uptime Worksurfaces TBD Pedro Perales Pipeline

-4 Carton Inventory Control Worksurfaces TBD Shanna Showalter Pipeline

-4 Std work/TPM - boring/edgebanding (OKL) Worksurfaces TBD Pedro Perales Pipeline

-4 Std work/TPM - sorting/decoupling (CDT) Worksurfaces TBD Pedro Perales Pipeline

-4 Std work - odd shapes to new routers Worksurfaces TBD Pedro Perales Pipeline

-4 Core size re-eval w/HSR (A flow line specific) Worksurfaces TBD Pedro Perales Pipeline

-4 Damage reduction Worksurfaces TBD Pedro Perales/Steve Wassenhove Pipeline

-4 Gallery panels Worksurfaces TBD Pedro Perales Pipeline

-4 Stretcher 2 for 1 Worksurfaces TBD Pedro Perales Pipeline

-4 Pipeline

-4 Pipeline

-4 Pipeline

-4 Pipeline

-4 Pipeline

-4 Pipeline

-4 Pipeline

-4 Pipeline

MAY JUN JULWEEK JAN FEB MAR APR AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

• Create strategic plan for events by area using Gantt chart• Reviewed with area Managers

twice a year• Updated weekly as events are ran

• Weekly RCI planning meeting• Site leadership meets with RCI

leaders to discuss event• Standard prep time for an event is 4

weeks

• RCI prep work• Checklist of items to complete for

all events• Generic list of pre-work activities

needed for specific types of events• Typical pre-work items: data

collection and analysis, root cause analysis, team member training, genba walk, securing tools and supplies


RCI events• Monday kick off

– Review team, goals, and day 1 objectives

• Tuesday and Wednesday leader update– Review goal attainment and daily

objectives

• Thursday leader walkthrough– Review changes in genba and allow

leadership time for questions

• Friday final report-out– Entire team report on results and

show examples of improvements made

– Congratulate team and give feedback


RCI Project WorksheetHwy 61

Rapid Continuous Improvement

Required (-2)

Team # Area Start Date Consultant

Project Type Duration Champion

Project Description

Goals & Deliverables

Event Driver Effected PD Metric

Required Pre-Event Data Required Training

#

2 Other -2 Tasks ("X" for complete)

2 Data Collected x

2 Results Worksheet x

2

2 Other -1 Tasks ("X" for complete)

2 Team Meeting x

4 Member Meeting x

Day 1 Newspaper x

3

3

4

4

4 Breakout Area

Hwy 61RCI Engr

Hwy 61Natalie Horan RCI Engr

Member Ryan Olson

Member Carl Butzen Menasha Material Flow

Member

Sean Carolan

1908A 2/18/19 Brad Determan

Doug Shelly ME

Name

N/A

Quality

Glass

Redesign glass packaging to get product to the job site intact

Re-define glass packaging standards for HNI based on best practices

Gain final approval from customer for proposed solutions

Leader

Customer Satisfaction

Hwy 61 Glass

Role Job Title

Co-Lead

Angie Mckiddy

Kyle Nethery

Sales Rep ACH Foam

Member Jeff King CI Installer CI

#: 1 = Operations, 2 = Support, 3 = Other HNI, 4 = Non-Member

Member Jeff Ingwersen Design Engineer ACH Foam

3P - trial packaging configurations for solutions identified utilizing 7 Ways

5

Hwy 61 DC

Member Jack Hovland

Member

Packaging Engineer LFO

Member Alan Watts

LFO

Required (-4) Required (-3)

Home Location

Required (-1)

3P Packaging

Member

Jon Jones Category ManagerMember LFO

DC Engr

Machine Build 2nd floor

LFO

Member Packaging Design Engineer

Tech Services Engineer

Chad Lilja Lakeville

Rachel Holt EDCP LFOMember

Why this RCI event?

Damage represents 25% of customer complaints for the Glass factory with the

primary failure occurring during shipping. Packaging does not meet shipping

standards, is not consistent across product offerings, and has not been reviewed

since volume and offerings have grown.

How does this align with the business objectives?

Deliver an excellent customer experience by improving packaging and handling

methods.

RCI Daily Objectives Hwy 61

1908A - 3P Packaging - Glass

Monday's Objectives Member(s) AssignedStatus

(C,OT,B,NS)

1 Establish teams and outline competition objectives Team C

2 Review current test results Team C

3 Complete 7 Ways exercise Team C

4 1 Prototype/team completed & sent for testing Team C

RCI Results Worksheet Hwy 61Rapid Continuous Improvement


Project Type Duration 5 Days Champion

Project Description

3P Packaging Kyle Nethery

1908A Glass 02/18/19 Brad Determan


Goals & Deliverables MeasurementPre-Event Event Week Follow-Up

Start +8 Wks +12 Wks+4 Wks

Propose 3 solutions to

Develop passable ISTA 1AYes/No 0 3 2 8

Target Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4

8 8 8

Gain final approval from

customer for proposed

solution

Yes/No No Yes 0 0 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

2 8

RCI follow-up

• RCI newspaper tracks any follow-up items

• Follow-up done by RCI leader at 30, 60, and 90 days to ensure no “back sliding”

• RCI department monitors open newspapers and 30/60/90 follow-up

RCI Results Worksheet Hwy 61Rapid Continuous Improvement



Project Description




Goals & Deliverables MeasurementPre-Event Event Week Follow-Up

Start +8 Wks +12 Wks+4 Wks

Propose 3 solutions to

Develop passable ISTA 1AYes/No 0 3 2 8

Target Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4

8 8 8

Gain final approval from

customer for proposed

solution

Yes/No No Yes 0 0 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

2 8

RCI Newspaper Hwy 61Rapid Continuous Improvement



Project Description

1 A

2 A

3 A

4 A

5 B

6 B

7 A Complete

3/13/2019 Complete

4/12/2019 Complete

Fragile tape is not structured Complete ECR to structure new tape

Fragile tape is not structured Fragile tape structure Meisner 4/8/2019

Doug 3/10/2019

Need EA for tooling redesign Complete EA with signatures Doug 3/10/2019 3/10/2019


Assigned

Member

Completion Date


3/1/2019

Need a final plan established Develop project implementation plan Doug 3/1/2019 3/11/2019

DougShort term solution Implement short term solution as

tooling will take 6 weeks

Complete

3/11/2019 Complete

StatusTarget Actual

Complete

Missed trialing with packout as customer

Test short term solution

recommendations in packout &

determine feasibility

Doug/Nat 3/1/2019 3/11/2019 Complete

Missed trialing with packout as customer

Test long term solutions

recommendations in packout & select

final design

Doug/Nat


3/1/2019 3/11/2019

No. Priority Opportunity Action


MDI

Managing for Daily Improvement

Primary visual for daily production status

Quality

Delivery

Cost

Safety

Group Leaders and Team Leaders own the process

Reviewed daily with members and weekly with leadership


MDI processStatus at a

glance

Daily trend

Pareto

Newspaper

• Updated daily for prior day metrics

• Trend shows a month to date data by day

• Any day that doesn’t hit goal is noted in red and those that hit goal or above are noted in green

• Red indicators broken down by root cause (pareto)

• Actions noted on newspaper once root cause is determined


Lean assessment

• Unbiased assessment of lean principles vs industry best practices

• Auditors brought in from outside the facility

• Audit is a multi-day process and follow-up is ongoing throughout the year

• Leadership for site (VP of Operations, Plant Manager, RCI Manager) involved

• Gaps align to site strategies• Actionable feedback provided• Follow up visits

Location:

Date:

Week #:

Title of Assessor Name

Hwy 61

8/26/19

35

BST Manager

Brad Hufford

Alan Cross

Kevin Young

Brad Determan

Plant Manager

Director, Manufacturing

Sr RCI Manager

VP, BPI

BPI Manager

Plant Manager

Home Location

Assessment Team

Rusty Taylor

Henry Harden

LFO Hwy 61

LFO Hwy 61

LFO Hwy 61

LFO Admin

HTT MTP

LFO Admin

Joe Cruse LFO Hwy 61

RCI Manager John Gray LFO CSO

RCI Engineer Josue Saucedo LFO Progress Park

VP, Manufacturing Kevin Hoban LFO Admin

RCI Manager Hollie Frieden LFO Hwy 61

HNI Corporation 600 East Second Street, Muscatine, Iowa 52761, Tel 563 272 7400 www.hnicorp.com

Lean Assessment

2019

Company: Current Date: 9/18/2019

Location: 8/26/2019

Key Strategic InitiativesHNI

Hwy 61

Improvement Strategy 1 of 3

Build a strong member owner culture

Assessment Date:

Current State:

Full-time member turnover rate at 31%

(annualized)

Improvement Strategy

Future State:

12 month rolling average TO at or

below 20%

Improvement Milestones Qtr.-Yr.

Implement a 6S audit process and assign owners Q4 2019

Evaluate and correct leader span of control

Provide action based training

RCI Immersion and BPI Certification

Focus Mi Ideas around PD and MDI metrics; set MDI targets

for all members and incorporate into Cornerstone goals

Q2 2019

2020

Q4 2020

Q1 2019

Category Section # Description Calculation Graph, chart, or visual reference needed Final Calculation

Cre

ate

Val

ue

1 Financial ManagementOperating Company Defined Financial Metric.

Percentage based on 3 years of data. Insert graph here 42%

2Customer Quality

Experience

Measures CQR/Warranty claim rate.

Continuous improvement of customer

quality experience. Rolling 12 month

number.

Insert graph here 2,493

3 Customer COT%

Metric is customer driven and based on the

original promise communicated to the

customer. Based on a standard

measurement. Rolling 12 month average.

Insert graph here 98.8%

4

Plant Safety Results

(OSHA Recordable

Incident Rate)

Rolling 12 month average. Also examine

severity of LT accidents and worker's comp

issues when preparing feedback.

Insert graph here 4.49

5 Member Survey Scores

Should be from the HNI survey form. Score is

based on a ranking of 1-5. If using a 10 scale

ranking, divide score by 2. Show the past 3

year trend.

Insert graph here 4.2

Vie

w P

rob

lem

s as

Op

po

rtu

nit

ies

6 Mi Ideas

Previous 12 month average. Only

implemented Mi Ideas count. Improvements

made during RCI events are not included in

this number. Total # Mi Ideas / average

headcount.

53.64

Fou

nd

atio

n

Star

t W

ith

th

e C

ust

om

er

Enga

ge M

em

be

rs

Fou

nd

atio

n

CEOExec.VPsHNI VPs

Operating Co.Presidents,

GMs, Functional VPs

GMs, Functional VPs

Engineering Mgrs, Controllers,Functional Mgrs, Factory Mgrs,

Territory Mgrs, MCR Mgrs, RCI Mgrs,

Supervisors, Distribution Mgrs, Quality MgrsSupport Group Mgrs, Group Leaders, Engineers

Engineers, Group Leaders, Skill trade leads, DC Leads,

Supervisors, Specialists, Sales Mgrs, Team Leads,Factory support managers, Customer Service Leads,

Analysts, Accountants, Designers, MCR staff, Value Stream Mgrs,

Plant and Office Members

Every Member in Plant and OfficeAnyone routinely performing transactions, building product

or delivering service

SilverLeading

30%

GoldMentoring

15%

PlatinumTransforming

5%

95%

96%

97%

98%

99%

100%

Aug-18 Sep-18 Oct-18 Nov-18 Dec-18 Jan-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Apr-19 May-19 Jun-19 Jul-19

Customer COT % (12-Month Rolling Average)

Target 12 month roll ing avg

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00


OSHA Recordable Incident Rate(12-Month Rolling Average)


0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

Aug-16 Nov-16 Feb-17 May-17 Aug-17 Nov-17 Feb-18 May-18 Aug-18 Nov-18 Feb-19 May-19

Member Survey Average Monthly ScoreTarget Actual Linear (Actual)

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0


Mi Ideas Per Member(12-Month Rolling Average)

Target 12 month rolling avg

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000


Customer Claim Rate(12-Month Rolling Average)


0

1


Financial Target Hits/MissesHit Miss

0 1 2 3 4 What Each Line Item Measures Score Comments

Cre

ate

Val

ue

1 Financial ManagementPlant achieves financial targets <50%

of time.

Plant achieves financial targets

50.1 - 65% of time.

Plant achieves financial targets 65.1% -

80% of time.

Achieves plant financial targets

80.1% - 90% of time.

Achieves plant financial targets 90.1%

- 100% of time.

Operating Company Defined Financial

Metric. Percentage based on 3 years

of data by quarter (i.e. 9 out of 12

quarters=75%).

0 42%

2 Customer Quality Experience >18,000 <18,000 - 11,500 or a 5%

improvement YOY

11,499 - 1,000 or a 10% YOY

improvement999 - 249 ≤250




number.

2 2493

3 Customer COT% No customer measurement for

delivery.

Standardized internal measurement in

place (i.e. backorders). 95% - 97.9% and positive trend. 98% - 98.9% and positive trend 99.0% - 100%

Metric is customer driven and based

on the original promise

communicated to the customer. This

based on a standard measurement.

Rolling 12 month average. If not a

positive trend deduct one point.

3 98.8%

4Plant Safety Results (OSHA

Recordable Incident Rate)≥4.0 3.9 - 3.1 3.0 - 2.1 2.0 - 1.1 <1.0

Rolling 12 month average. Also

examine severity of LT accidents and

worker's comp issues when preparing

feedback.

0 4.5

5 Member Survey Scores ≤3.0 3.01 - 3.39 and positive trend. 3.4 - 3.69 and positive trend. 3.7 - 3.99 and positive trend. > 4.0

Should be from the HNI survey form.

Show the past 3 year trend. If not a


4 4.19

Vie

w P

rob

lem

s as

Op

po

rtu

nit

ies

6 Mi Ideas No Mi Idea program.Members contribute up to 6 Mi Ideas

per member.

Members contribute Mi Ideas up to

12 per member.

Members contribute Mi Ideas up to

25 per member.

Members contribute Mi Ideas more

than 25 per member.


implemented Mi Ideas count.

Improvements made during RCI

events are not included in this

number. Must be using HNI Mi Idea

standard program.

4 53.6

7 Strategy AlignmentNo vision or strategy. Not all

departments have goals.

Vision and strategy defined.

Department goals not aligned to

vision and strategy.

Vision and strategy defined. Some

goals and actions aligned to strategy.

Current state and future state exist.

Vision, strategy, and goals are

understood at a staff level.

Vision, strategies, goals, and actions

are aligned and achieving some step

level improvements. Front line leaders

understand vision strategy and goals.


are aligned and achieving world class

results. All Members understand how

they impact goals.

Vision and strategy is well defined,

communicated, and drives specific

improvement efforts for achieving

world class results. Vision is typically a

broad statement reflecting step

function improvements in the QDCS

and/or metrics within.

2

Basic architecture is good; focus less

on "projects" and more on business

process chnage; 3 main levels aren't

getting past the FM/manager level;

consider impact of 3x3x3 and number

of initiatives; no visible connection to

upstream strategies (i.e. connect to

the mothership)

8 Leadership

Autocratic top down leadership.

Communication and feedback are

minimal and members have no sense

of ownership and accountability.

Leaders support the vision and values

of the company. Communication is

top down and one way. Leaders

manage from areas other than genba.

There is not a systematic approach to

solve problems which results in

reactive management.

Leadership actively lives the vision and

values of the company. Members are

occasionally asked for feedback with

sporadic follow-up. Members are

sometimes included in solving

problems. There is evidence of genba

activity on a daily basis.

There is a disciplined process to

provide coaching/feedback.

Leadership creates an environment

that encourages and fosters the

RCI/BPI culture and member

engagement. There is evidence of

member development and internal

promotions and focus is solely on high

potentials.

Leader has a robust system to

proactively address issues.

Members/Leaders understand, are

engaged, and empowered to drive

sustained results. There is a closed

loop approach to communication.

Leaders have a systematic approach to

develop members that includes

understanding aspirations and

capabilities and matching them to

business needs.

The extent to which leadership has

committed to: Clearly defining roles,

goals, and expectations, establishing a

systematic PDCA process to provide

coaching/feedback, engaging in all

aspects of the business, and leading

by example with an eye for all

stakeholders.

3

Leadership appears strong, more focus

on servant leadership and support

structure; running MDI as an

accountability process vs support

process; good leadership training and

development; leadership values BPI

and RCI

9 Culture

Members not consistently living the

basics of the HNI vision. This is

demonstrated by garbage left on floor,

graffiti, cigarette butts on the ground,

and/or unsanitary bathrooms. There is

a "It's not my job" mentality.

Members rely on direction from

leaders to provide coaching and

feedback on policy violations (start

times, break times, PPE, etc.).

Members must seek approval to make

changes. Facility common areas

cleaned based on upcoming tours.

Leadership driven initiatives to

maintain site appearances in common

areas. Members occasionally hold

each other accountable for policy

violations and are occasionally

recognized by peers. Leaders provide

recognition.

Members often hold each other

accountable for policy violations and

are recognized by peers via formalized

recognition programs. There is a

schedule and funding to maintain site

appearances in common areas. The

site understands future state cultural

needs and action is being taken.

The culture fosters mutual respect.

Members consistently hold each other

accountable and recognize and

regularly celebrate each other's

efforts. Members have a high level of

engagement, take pride in facility, and

strive to serve customers. There is a

comprehensive plan to improve

facility infrastructure to create a

competitive advantage for attracting

and retaining members.

The extent that the location is a great

place to work. There is a culture of

constructive discontent, members are

engaged and excited about working in

the company. Members are not afraid

to fail and are rewarded for efforts.

Members are proud of their work

areas.

2

Solid safety culture but still pushing

5S with limited success; good

recognition programs (i.e. Safety Star)

from the members for the members;

need to focus on 6S and standards in

common areas (all common areas)

and put strategy/effort to

improvements to move to next level,

common areas reflect the expectation

of leadership

Cre

ate

Val

ue

Star

t W

ith

th

e C

ust

om

er

Enga

ge M

em

be

rs

0 1 2 3 4 What Each Line Item Measures Score Comments

Bronze

86%

Silver

11%

Gold

5%

2 Direct Involvement in RCI ≤.05 per member .06 -.14 with positive trend .15 -.24 with positive trend .25 -.34 with positive trend >.35 with positive trend

Events include A3 problem solving

events, RCI blitzes, VSM, etc. Previous

12 month total. Total direct members

participated / average direct

membership. If not a positive trend

deduct one point.

1 0.13

3 Indirect Involvement in RCI ≤.5 per member. .6 -.99 with positive trend. 1.0 -1.49 with positive trend. 1.5 - 1.9 with positive trend. >2 with positive trend.



12 month total. Total indirect

members participated / average

indirect membership. If not a positive

trend, deduct one point.

4 2.33

4Quick Changeovers/ Set-up

Reductions

There are no goals or efforts to reduce

set up time.

A general process to follow to reduce

set up time.

Established standard work is posted

and practiced. Set-up times tracked

and visible for critical path processes

Set-up times tracked and visible for

critical path processes. There are goals

established to target set up time.

There are goals established to target

set up time reduction <10 min.

Capable of running every part every

day without holding inventory > 1 day.

The extent to which goals target setup

reduction for assembly and fabrication

processes. Focus on set-up times to be

minimized in order to reduce run sizes

and increase inventory turns. Lot sizes

are reduced as a result of the efforts.

4

Set up doesn't impact scheduling logic

and lead times; using of quick

changeover dies; can run every part

every day, no long runs/batches due

to setup

5 Member Turnover Rate > 20% 19.9% - 15% 14.9% - 10% 9.9% - 5% Less than 5%

Do not include temporary members in

the calculation. Rolling 12 month

average.

0 21.1%

6 FTY (First Time Yield)

No evidence that critical to quality

processes have been identified or first

time yield is being measured.

Critical to quality identification

process is visible and FTY is being

measured in a couple of the critical to

quality processes with positive trends.

FTY is being measured at most critical

to quality processes and showing

positive trends.

Critical processes have a FTY of 95% -

98% and a positive trend.

Most critical processes have a FTY of

98.1% or greater and a positive trend.

First time yield which includes rework

and scrap throughout the process.

There are continuous improvement

efforts at critical to quality processes.

If not a positive trend deduct one

point.

2 94.5%

7Customer Lead Time Order Entry-

ShipmentNo Measurement.

Measurement in place. Hitting target

≤80% of the time.

Hitting business unit target 80.1% -

90% of the time.

Hitting business target with 90.1% -

94.9% positive trend in reducing or

maintaining industry best lead times.

Hitting business target >95% with a

positive trend in reducing or


Including transfers. The metrics in

boxes 1-3 are determined by the

business unit and the operating entity

and must include peak season

performance. Previous 12 months of

data. % of months that targeted lead

time was achieved.

3 93%

8 Raw Material/WIP Inventory Turns ≤10 turns 10.1 - 29.9 turns with positive trend. 30 - 59.9 turns with positive trend. 60 - 99.9 turns with positive trend.Greater than >100 turns with positive

trend.

Measures how well raw material

assets are managed compared to

usage. This is not a "within the four

walls" calculation. All off-site, owned

inventory should be included in the

calculation. If not a positive trend

deduct one point. Show three year

trend.

1 10.7

9 QMS (Quality Management System)

A majority of the key elements of the

QMS are performed on an ad hoc

basis with little or no standard work.


QMS are defined with standard work

but execution is sporadic.

All key elements of the QMS are

defined with documented procedures

and standard work. Compliance to the

documented procedures and standard

work is routinely assessed via internal

audit and management is involved in

system reviews.

QMS processes are reaching maturity.

Global CA is performed. A systems

approach to improvement is deployed

where possible throughout value

stream.

QMS processes are mature. Global CA

is performed routinely. Systems


throughout value stream. QMS is

formally audited on a regular basis. All

business systems are linked through

the QMS. This includes Design, RCI,

MCR, Supplier Quality, Supply Chain

Management, Operations, Logistics,

etc.

A formalized and systematic approach

to quality is in place throughout the

enterprise from suppliers to the end

user. The key elements of QMS are

corrective action, monitoring and

measuring of product and process,

calibration, PPAP, training system and

records, control of quality records,

document control, internal audit,

management review, non-confirming

process, and FMEA.

1

QMS framework is sound with the

exception of supplier management;

discipline to follow process needs to

keep progressing; activities are aligned

with overall HNI strategy; get back to

basics on problem solving (go to

genba, get proof, put in permanent

corrective actions); NPI quality has to

be a bigger focus

10 Product Development Process No evidence.

Sporadic product testing

manufacturability, quality, and human

factors but no documentation or

corrective action. Cross functional

team in place, some use of 3P.

Manufacturing has victim mentality

with minimal upfront involvement.

Product testing and documentation

for some product with no set

standards, some action taken. Team

considers Voice of Customer and

moonshine phase of 3P employed for

most product. Product launches are

not measured. Manufacturing has

minimal or delayed involvement.

Defined NPD processes are effective.

Minimum process capability is

ensured for all new equipment and

processes. Cross functional team with

measured performance. Moonshine

phase employed on new and existing

product. Initial understanding of

standardized parts and processes

coming online. Product launch metrics

are tracked and reported. Lessons

learned platform/database is

established and is used for new

product introduction on an ad-hoc

basis.

Systematic, closed loop NPD processes

drive smooth launches. Minimal

engineering changes required after

launch. Standardization of parts and

processes are documented and

followed. Product risks are mitigated

through FMEA processes and

extensive testing. There is strong

evidence suggesting these processes

efforts are effective and are leveraged

across all product development

platforms. Evidence shows that

lessons learned are applied to new

products and are effective in reducing

product design risk. Product launch

metrics hitting targets.

Testing for manufacturability,

function, and installation through out

the new product development life

cycle. NPD process involves cross-

functional teams and development

tools such as Voice of the Customer

and use of 3P to covert customer

needs into product specifications and

tolerances. Cross functional team

could include marketing, design,

procurement, quality & manufacturing

including line members.

3

Customer and manufacturing involved

in NPI; customers/installers get

multiple designs to review and

provide feedback (i.e. "dealer

designers"); solid process

11 Benchmarking No evidence.

Only following up on suggested

benchmarking from lean assessment

recommendations. Random

benchmarking with no plan.

Plants are identifying needs and

researching benchmarking plants.

Systematic process fully aligned to

strategic plan, with resources

allocated and budgeted, and goals

include PDCA as part of the process.

Enterprise wide with broader scope

and audience aligned to strategic plan,

resources allocated and budgeted, and

goals include PDCA as part of the

process. Benchmarking occurs

externally and internally. The plant is a

benchmarking location of choice.

Feedback provided during internal

tours drive improvement activities.

The extent to which a location has a

systematic process to benchmark in

order to address key initiatives and

opportunities. An ideal system would

include allocation of resources

(money, people, time) and follow a

PDCA methodology to ensure

implementation of key take-aways.

1

Form/tracking just starting, not much

strategy behind where/when to

benchmark; evidence of several trips

and some improvments implemented

Flo

wU

nd

ers

tan

dSi

mp

lify

Stab

ilize

Un

de

rsta

nd

1Member Training and Skill

Improvement Process

No evidence of BPI certification

process.

BPI certification program launched

with < 25% of members are bronze

certified.


with at least 95% members bronze

certified and 50% of leaders silver

certified.

95% members bronze certified and

80% of leaders silver certified and 15%

of leaders gold certified.

Determine the approach to

organizational learning and expanding

job knowledge to ensure business

performance and continuity. This is a

progressive measurement (must meet

lower criteria to score higher). Leaders

are defined as problem solvers (staff

level managers, GLs, engineers, etc.).

Refer to certification pyramid.

1

BPI certification launched with <50%

of members bronze certified and 20%

of leaders silver certified.

Tier Level: Silver Tier

1

2

3

1

2

3

32

46

78

Top 3 Opportunities

Total Score

Benchmarking Suggestions

Top 3 Best Practices

Foundation ScoreTransformation Score

5S, 5S, 5S

Defined physical flows and standard work - utilize VSM

6S and visual management - this reflects the leadership commitment

Mi idea participation rate and quantity is outstanding

Member and leadership engagement/culture - Quality Club, Safety Committee, Member Relations Committee,

members actively pursuing BPI certifications, RCIs being ran weekly

Beacon adoption for LPAs and 6S

Reliance on member driven containment processes vs. error proofing and true corrective actions

0

30

60

90

120

150

2019201820172016

YOY Results

Foundation Transformation Foundation threshold


Lean assessmentFoundation categories• Financial

management• Customer quality

experience• Customer COT%• Plant safety results

(OSHA recordable rate• Member survey

scores• Mi Ideas• Strategy alignment• Leadership

• Culture• Quality• Capacity management• Member safety• Member training and

skill improvement process

• Problem solving• Visual workplace• Standard work

0 1 2 3 4 What Each Line Item Measures

Financial ManagementPlant achieves financial targets <50%

of time.

Plant achieves financial targets

50.1 - 65% of time.

Plant achieves financial targets 65.1% -

80% of time.

Achieves plant financial targets

80.1% - 90% of time.

Achieves plant financial targets 90.1%

- 100% of time.

Operating Company Defined Financial

Metric. Percentage based on 3 years

of data by quarter (i.e. 9 out of 12

quarters=75%).

Customer Quality Experience >18,000 <18,000 - 11,500 or a 5%

improvement YOY

11,499 - 1,000 or a 10% YOY

improvement999 - 249 ≤250




number.

Customer COT% No customer measurement for

delivery.

Standardized internal measurement in

place (i.e. backorders). 95% - 97.9% and positive trend. 98% - 98.9% and positive trend 99.0% - 100%

Metric is customer driven and based

on the original promise communicated

to the customer. This based on a

standard measurement. Rolling 12

month average. If not a positive trend

deduct one point.

Plant Safety Results (OSHA

Recordable Incident Rate)≥4.0 3.9 - 3.1 3.0 - 2.1 2.0 - 1.1 <1.0

Rolling 12 month average. Also

examine severity of LT accidents and

worker's comp issues when preparing

feedback.

Member Survey Scores ≤3.0 3.01 - 3.39 and positive trend. 3.4 - 3.69 and positive trend. 3.7 - 3.99 and positive trend. > 4.0

Should be from the HNI survey form.

Show the past 3 year trend. If not a


Mi Ideas No Mi Idea program.Members contribute up to 6 Mi Ideas

per member.

Members contribute Mi Ideas up to 12

per member.

Members contribute Mi Ideas up to 25

per member.

Members contribute Mi Ideas more

than 25 per member.


implemented Mi Ideas count.

Improvements made during RCI events

are not included in this number. Must

be using HNI Mi Idea standard

program.

Strategy AlignmentNo vision or strategy. Not all

departments have goals.

Vision and strategy defined.

Department goals not aligned to vision

and strategy.

Vision and strategy defined. Some

goals and actions aligned to strategy.

Current state and future state exist.

Vision, strategy, and goals are

understood at a staff level.


are aligned and achieving some step

level improvements. Front line leaders

understand vision strategy and goals.


are aligned and achieving world class

results. All Members understand how

they impact goals.

Vision and strategy is well defined,

communicated, and drives specific

improvement efforts for achieving

world class results. Vision is typically a

broad statement reflecting step

function improvements in the QDCS

and/or metrics within.

Leadership

Autocratic top down leadership.

Communication and feedback are

minimal and members have no sense

of ownership and accountability.

Leaders support the vision and values

of the company. Communication is

top down and one way. Leaders

manage from areas other than genba.

There is not a systematic approach to

solve problems which results in

reactive management.

Leadership actively lives the vision and

values of the company. Members are

occasionally asked for feedback with

sporadic follow-up. Members are

sometimes included in solving

problems. There is evidence of genba

activity on a daily basis.

There is a disciplined process to

provide coaching/feedback. Leadership

creates an environment that

encourages and fosters the RCI/BPI

culture and member engagement.

There is evidence of member

development and internal promotions

and focus is solely on high potentials.

Leader has a robust system to

proactively address issues.

Members/Leaders understand, are

engaged, and empowered to drive

sustained results. There is a closed

loop approach to communication.

Leaders have a systematic approach to

develop members that includes

understanding aspirations and

capabilities and matching them to

business needs.

The extent to which leadership has

committed to: Clearly defining roles,

goals, and expectations, establishing a

systematic PDCA process to provide

coaching/feedback, engaging in all

aspects of the business, and leading by

example with an eye for all

stakeholders.

Culture

Members not consistently living the

basics of the HNI vision. This is

demonstrated by garbage left on floor,

graffiti, cigarette butts on the ground,

and/or unsanitary bathrooms. There is

a "It's not my job" mentality.

Members rely on direction from

leaders to provide coaching and

feedback on policy violations (start

times, break times, PPE, etc.).

Members must seek approval to make

changes. Facility common areas

cleaned based on upcoming tours.

Leadership driven initiatives to

maintain site appearances in common

areas. Members occasionally hold

each other accountable for policy

violations and are occasionally

recognized by peers. Leaders provide

recognition.

Members often hold each other

accountable for policy violations and

are recognized by peers via formalized

recognition programs. There is a

schedule and funding to maintain site

appearances in common areas. The

site understands future state cultural

needs and action is being taken.

The culture fosters mutual respect.

Members consistently hold each other

accountable and recognize and

regularly celebrate each other's

efforts. Members have a high level of

engagement, take pride in facility, and

strive to serve customers. There is a

comprehensive plan to improve

facility infrastructure to create a

competitive advantage for attracting

and retaining members.

The extent that the location is a great

place to work. There is a culture of

constructive discontent, members are

engaged and excited about working in

the company. Members are not afraid

to fail and are rewarded for efforts.

Members are proud of their work

areas.

Quality

Inconsistent commitment to quality.

Schedule attainment focus. Members

do not feel empowered to stop the

line when quality issues arise.

Critical quality processes identified.

Basic understanding of customer

requirements. Control through

inspection and basic tracking

mechanisms.

Self checks for inspection with simple

check devices such as go/no-go

gauges, run charts, etc. on critical

dimensions in key areas. Line stop

philosophy is evident.

Wide spread use of Poke-yoke.

Proactive application of process

capability and appropriate advanced

quality tools to attack and control

variation. Solid understanding of risks

potentially identified by FMEA

processes. Control plans in place with

defined and documented quality

checks. Line stop philosophy is

prevalent and used whenever there is

a failure to meet quality requirements

or inability to perform standard work

as designed.

Process capabilities have been

integrated into the new product

development process. All critical

processes are capable. Solid evidence

of regular use of advanced quality

tools such as A-3's, root-cause C/A,

FMEA, etc. Effective real time problem

resolution is evident at all levels of the

organization. These efforts are driven

by the line stop philosophy and

standard work/takt time deviations.

Organization understands Voice of

Customer, demonstrates the

commitment, and has the expertise to

apply appropriate quality tools, such

as SPC, run charts, etc. to achieve

process capability at critical processes.

Capacity Management

Outside influences dictate schedules

leading to over commitment and

massive daily fluctuations. Victim

mentality.

There are some attempts to avoid

over commitment. The facility is aware

when risk has been assumed which

results in spikes and excessive

overtime.

Daily Order Execution Mode(DOEM) or

Sales Production Inventory (SPI) or

equivalent process in place and is

sometimes followed. Focus in on short

term planning. Daily schedule

attainment is achieved but varying

sequence.

There is a scheduling forecast system

is in place focusing on mid-term

planning. Location knows risks and

puts buffers in place to mitigate.

Regular reviews of long term capacity

are conducted. Hot spots are

identified and plans are created. OT is

effectively managed through

scheduling decisions. Schedule

sequence is tracked, issues identified,

with actions to improve.

Capacity management plan in place to

meet customer expectations while

minimizing variation in the facility.

Focus is on long term planning

utilizing Sales and Operations Planning

(S&OP). Escalation process in place.

Action plans in place to address short

to long term changes in capacity

needs.

The extent to which the facility

proactively takes ownership of the

scheduling process and understands

customer needs, customer demand,

facility capabilities, and standardized

processes to improve internal

efficiencies and reduce customer pain.

Member Safety

Inconsistent basic safety orientation

training completed at hire. Basic

machine guarding and facility security

measures not in place. Emergency

preparedness drills are not routinely

conducted.

Site conducts basic safety training

which includes the HNI safety

philosophy and safety appeal process.

There is evidence of job specific safety

training which includes JSAs and LOTO

signoffs. Plant leadership actively

pursues safety issues.

Site has effective safety programs that

drive awareness and engagement.

Safety compliance training is routinely

conducted (i.e., hazardous chemicals,

LOTO, MSDS, etc.). There are member

driven safety improvements. Safety Mi

Ideas are prevalent.

A plan for preventative shop floor

activities is present. Ergo assessments

and tools are applied and prioritized

with action items.

Location is proactively pursuing safety

improvements in product and

processes using a systematic

approach.

The extent of which safety is

proactively and reactively addressed in

the facility. Members are engaged in

the safety improvement process. This

is a progressive measure and the prior

criteria must be met in order to score

higher.

Member Training and Skill

Improvement ProcessSome regulatory training in place.

Location has a documented OJT plan,

utilizes and uses an on boarding

process for new members.

Some areas have skills gap-analysis

documented, visible, and driving

action for flexibility in the workforce.

All areas have skills gap-analysis

documented, visible, and driving

action for flexibility in the workforce.

Job rotation schedules are in place.

All areas have a gap-analysis that is

aligned with location's strategic goals

and objectives and has been executed

to fill the majority of the gaps. Job

rotation schedules are defined and

followed.






lower criteria to score higher).

Problem SolvingThere is not a good system in place to

recognize and address problems.

Inconsistent use of problem solving

tools but do not always have actions

plans to drive results. Tools are only

used when instructed by

management. Focus is on treating

symptoms versus root cause

elimination.

Obvious displays of problem solving

tools are used and actions taken.

Efforts are focused on significant

events (i.e., quality, delivery, etc.).

Consistent displays of problem solving

tools are used and results being driven

from the analysis or as the result of

internal triggers.

Every area is expected to initiate and

utilize problem solving tools following

a systematic approach. Efforts are

focused on proactive problem solving.

Does the location systematically

identify problems? Does the location

view problems as opportunities? Are

PCB, pareto analysis, and other tools

routinely used to identify problems,

determine root cause, and implement

effective corrective actions?

Visual Workplace

Difficult to see abnormalities.

Production status unknown. The lack

of 6S is an impediment to an effective

organization.

Facility is clean and well lit. 1S and 2S

in place in some of location.

Production status is easy to see and

understand in some areas.

Facility must have 1S and 2S in place.

Most items have and are in their

home. Daily production status is easy

to see and understand in most areas.

Facility must have 3S and 4S in place.

Material flow is easy to see and

understand, machine parameters such

as gauges, etc. are labeled and

marked. Signage in the area is

maintained. HNI visual standards are

consistently used. There is an effective

audit system in place.

Abnormalities are visually obvious to

area and drive immediate actions.

Hourly production status is easy to

understand. KPI status is visible and

drives actions. 6S is a self sustaining

culture in all areas.

Is the workplace (plant and offices)

visual in the sense that abnormalities

and production status can be

identified at a glance and immediate

actions are taken?

Standard Work Nothing to indicate standard work.

Large batches of WIP in days or weeks.

Work elements of std work defined.

CT, TT, SWIP and standard work

sequences are identified and evident

in some areas. Large lines have

isolated islands and WIP is in hours.

Work elements of std work defined.

CT, TT, SWIP and standard work

sequences are identified and evident

in most areas. Members provide input

for changes.

All work stations have all elements of

standard work documented and

member compliance, monitored and

have a regularly audited process.

Processes in place to routinely

evaluate and address SWIP to ensure

that materials flow through plant with

minimal manual intervention to keep

production flowing.

Visible deployment of standard work

in manufacturing and support areas.

Ensures that all three elements of

standard work (i.e., TT, CT, SWIP) are

defined. Materials flow through the

plant with minimal manual

intervention. Clear methodologies or

explanation exist for why WIP is

present.


Lean assessmentTransformation categories

• Member training and skill improvement process

• Direct members involved in RCI

• Indirect members involved in RCI

• Quick changeovers/setup reduction

• Member turnover rate

• First time yield

• Customer lead time compliance

• Inventory turns

• Quality management system

• Product development process

• Benchmarking

• Variation management

• Cost reductions

• Ergonomic improvements

• Integration in suppliers and customers in value creation

• Equipment management

• Sustainability

• Community involvement

• Supplier performance measures

• PFEP

• Life cycle management

0 1 2 3 4 What Each Line Item Measures

Direct Involvement in RCI ≤.05 per member .06 -.14 with positive trend .15 -.24 with positive trend .25 -.34 with positive trend >.35 with positive trend



12 month total. Total direct members

participated / average direct

membership. If not a positive trend

deduct one point.

Indirect Involvement in RCI ≤.5 per member. .6 -.99 with positive trend. 1.0 -1.49 with positive trend. 1.5 - 1.9 with positive trend. >2 with positive trend.



12 month total. Total indirect

members participated / average

indirect membership. If not a positive

trend, deduct one point.

Quick Changeovers/ Set-up

Reductions

There are no goals or efforts to reduce

set up time.

A general process to follow to reduce

set up time.

Established standard work is posted

and practiced. Set-up times tracked

and visible for critical path processes

Set-up times tracked and visible for

critical path processes. There are goals

established to target set up time.

There are goals established to target

set up time reduction <10 min.

Capable of running every part every

day without holding inventory > 1 day.

The extent to which goals target setup

reduction for assembly and fabrication

processes. Focus on set-up times to be

minimized in order to reduce run sizes

and increase inventory turns. Lot sizes

are reduced as a result of the efforts.

Member Turnover Rate > 20% 19.9% - 15% 14.9% - 10% 9.9% - 5% Less than 5%

Do not include temporary members in

the calculation. Rolling 12 month

average.

FTY (First Time Yield)

No evidence that critical to quality

processes have been identified or first

time yield is being measured.

Critical to quality identification

process is visible and FTY is being

measured in a couple of the critical to

quality processes with positive trends.

FTY is being measured at most critical

to quality processes and showing

positive trends.

Critical processes have a FTY of 95% -

98% and a positive trend.

Most critical processes have a FTY of

98.1% or greater and a positive trend.

First time yield which includes rework

and scrap throughout the process.

There are continuous improvement

efforts at critical to quality processes.

If not a positive trend deduct one

point.

Customer Lead Time Order Entry-

ShipmentNo Measurement.

Measurement in place. Hitting target

≤80% of the time.

Hitting business unit target 80.1% -

90% of the time.

Hitting business target with 90.1% -

94.9% positive trend in reducing or


Hitting business target >95% with a

positive trend in reducing or


Including transfers. The metrics in

boxes 1-3 are determined by the

business unit and the operating entity

and must include peak season

performance. Previous 12 months of

data. % of months that targeted lead

time was achieved.

Raw Material/WIP Inventory Turns ≤10 turns 10.1 - 29.9 turns with positive trend. 30 - 59.9 turns with positive trend. 60 - 99.9 turns with positive trend.Greater than >100 turns with positive

trend.

Measures how well raw material

assets are managed compared to

usage. This is not a "within the four

walls" calculation. All off-site, owned

inventory should be included in the

calculation. If not a positive trend

deduct one point. Show three year

trend.

QMS (Quality Management System)


QMS are performed on an ad hoc basis

with little or no standard work.


QMS are defined with standard work

but execution is sporadic.

All key elements of the QMS are

defined with documented procedures

and standard work. Compliance to the

documented procedures and standard

work is routinely assessed via internal

audit and management is involved in

system reviews.

QMS processes are reaching maturity.

Global CA is performed. A systems


where possible throughout value

stream.

QMS processes are mature. Global CA

is performed routinely. Systems


throughout value stream. QMS is

formally audited on a regular basis. All

business systems are linked through

the QMS. This includes Design, RCI,

MCR, Supplier Quality, Supply Chain

Management, Operations, Logistics,

etc.

A formalized and systematic approach

to quality is in place throughout the

enterprise from suppliers to the end

user. The key elements of QMS are

corrective action, monitoring and

measuring of product and process,

calibration, PPAP, training system and

records, control of quality records,

document control, internal audit,

management review, non-confirming

process, and FMEA.

Product Development Process No evidence.

Sporadic product testing

manufacturability, quality, and human

factors but no documentation or

corrective action. Cross functional

team in place, some use of 3P.

Manufacturing has victim mentality

with minimal upfront involvement.

Product testing and documentation

for some product with no set

standards, some action taken. Team

considers Voice of Customer and

moonshine phase of 3P employed for

most product. Product launches are

not measured. Manufacturing has

minimal or delayed involvement.

Defined NPD processes are effective.

Minimum process capability is

ensured for all new equipment and

processes. Cross functional team with

measured performance. Moonshine

phase employed on new and existing

product. Initial understanding of

standardized parts and processes

coming online. Product launch metrics

are tracked and reported. Lessons

learned platform/database is

established and is used for new

product introduction on an ad-hoc

basis.

Systematic, closed loop NPD processes

drive smooth launches. Minimal

engineering changes required after

launch. Standardization of parts and

processes are documented and

followed. Product risks are mitigated

through FMEA processes and

extensive testing. There is strong

evidence suggesting these processes

efforts are effective and are leveraged

across all product development

platforms. Evidence shows that

lessons learned are applied to new

products and are effective in reducing

product design risk. Product launch

metrics hitting targets.

Testing for manufacturability,

function, and installation through out

the new product development life

cycle. NPD process involves cross-

functional teams and development

tools such as Voice of the Customer

and use of 3P to covert customer

needs into product specifications and

tolerances. Cross functional team

could include marketing, design,

procurement, quality & manufacturing

including line members.

Benchmarking No evidence.

Only following up on suggested

benchmarking from lean assessment

recommendations. Random

benchmarking with no plan.

Plants are identifying needs and

researching benchmarking plants.

Systematic process fully aligned to

strategic plan, with resources

allocated and budgeted, and goals

include PDCA as part of the process.

Enterprise wide with broader scope

and audience aligned to strategic plan,

resources allocated and budgeted, and

goals include PDCA as part of the

process. Benchmarking occurs

externally and internally. The plant is a

benchmarking location of choice.

Feedback provided during internal

tours drive improvement activities.

The extent to which a location has a

systematic process to benchmark in

order to address key initiatives and

opportunities. An ideal system would

include allocation of resources

(money, people, time) and follow a

PDCA methodology to ensure

implementation of key take-aways.

Variation Management

No effort to impact variation. Demand

and supply inconsistencies are

accepted.

Mapped out information and material

flow with causes of variation

identified.

Plant focus on minimizing variation

through scheduling techniques level

loading, SWIP, buffer stock, and

inventory.

Plant focuses on minimizing variation

through continuous improvement in

supply chain from supplier to plant

(i.e. backlog manipulation, parts SWIP,

etc.).

Plant focuses on minimizing variation

through continuous improvement in

entire value stream from supplier to

customer (i.e. influencing customer

order patterns, shaping demand, etc.).

Examine the extent that plant

management has gone to understand

and address the impact of variation on

all parts of the value stream. The

intent is to Isolate, mitigate, and

eliminate sources of variation.

Examples include manpower,

materials, method, equipment, and

information flow.

Cost Reductions No evidence.Cost reductions identified and minimal

action taken.

Cost reductions identified and some

action taken with emphasis on

productivity and scrap reduction.

Resources allocated to identify and

implement internal and external cost

reduction by focusing on long term

value creation (supplier to customer).

Systematic process for identifying and

implementing cost reductions that

have a favorable impact on YOY

financial metrics and consistently

achieve plant targets.

The identification and implementation

of cost reduction opportunities

throughout the entire supply chain.

How does the facility go about

meeting their cost reduction goals and

objectives?

Ergonomic Improvements No evidence.

Some documented ergo assessments

with work stations prioritized based

on risk.

A majority of the location has

documented ergo assessments. Work

stations have been prioritized by risk

and documented actions are taking

place with sustained results.

There is a policy of not introducing

zone 3 deviations to the shop floor. A

process is in place to review and

analyze new work stations'

compliance to ergonomic standards.

Ergonomics is included in every RCI

event.

The new product introduction process

considers ergonomics to ensure poor

ergonomics are not introduced to the

shop floor.

Is the location proactively going after

improving the ergonomics of

new/existing work stations? Has the

location performed 80/20 on the risk

associated with various operations? Is

ergonomics included in every RCI

event? This is a progressive measure

and the prior criteria must be met in

order to score higher.

Integration of Internal and External

S uppliers or Customers in Value

Creating Methods

No evidence.Members are aware of their internal

customers and suppliers.

Members can identify value creation

and waste elimination opportunities

with customers and suppliers.

Members can identify value creating

and waste elimination opportunities

and take some action to improve

them as displayed by Mi ideas.

Evidence of some RCI events with

internal and external customers and

suppliers.

Direct involvement with internal

customers and suppliers in value

creation and waste elimination. Efforts

are ongoing and documented. External

customers and suppliers are routinely

included in RCI process or formal

improvement activities.

The extent to which members can

identify value creation and waste

elimination opportunities with their

internal and external customers and

suppliers. To what degree do they

work with their internal customers

and suppliers to improve them?

Equipment Management

Equipment and tooling upkeep by

skilled trades dept. No operator

involvement; mostly reactive.

A planned maintenance system by

skilled trades is in place. An operator

maintenance program has been

established. Downtime issues known

and some evidence to reduce.

Most critical equipment has gone

through 6S, operators have been

trained to take care of minor

maintenance issues, and kaizen is

taking place to improve efficiencies.

Visual tracking for the PM and TPM

activities is posted on the

equipment/tooling and complied with.

All critical equipment has gone

through the first three steps of TPM.

Documented standards for new

equipment and tooling have been

established and are followed. Metrics

to track equipment performance and

proactive maintenance exist.

Most equipment has gone through the

first three steps of TPM. Skilled trades

metrics are showing positive trends

and promote continuous

improvement. Proactive skilled trade

time is about 80%. There is a

systematic approach to downtime in

place and documented positive

results.

To measure how effectively a location

manages equipment and tooling. The

first three steps of TPM are 6S,

operator training to do minor

maintenance, and kaizen to improve

efficiencies.

Environmental Initiatives and

SustainabilityFull regulatory compliance.

The location proactively defines and

identifies regulated and permitted

activities aligned to the requirements

in the HNI environmental workbook.

Goals and plans have been developed

to achieve the environmental targets.

Records and training requirements are

defined for regulated activities.

Actively seeking process

improvements to eliminate regulatory

constraints. Members are actively

involved in achieving the goals and

executing the plans. Systematic

approach towards energy cost

reductions.

Uses a full systematic approach and

able to actively account for costs,

accomplishments, and cost savings

associated with environmental and

sustainability. Becomes a

differentiator for customer, sales, and

employee decisions.

The degree to which the location has

gone to create practices, systems, and

infrastructure to ensure

environmental compliance and

sustainability. Targets set and

measured.

Community Involvement No evidence.Occasional company sponsored

community partnering by members.

Location and members regularly

support community needs.

Members are recognized by the facility

or company for community

involvement.

Location or members are recognized

for excellence in community

involvement. Must include diverse

range of activities and significant

number of members and have a tie to

the business strategy.

To measure the level of involvement

of the location with the community.

This is a progressive measurement.

Supplier Performance Measures and

DocumentationNo evidence.

Performance metrics (including lead

time, quality, and delivery) used to

establish levels of certification but not

communicated with the supplier.

Supplier certification process with

quality, delivery, lead time, and cost

performance. There is a formal review

with supplier.

Facility integrated with suppliers in

improvement process with

documented actions.

Suppliers actively engaged in facility

continuous improvement projects

with positive results illustrated.

Processes are in place to drive

improvements in quality, delivery,

lead-time, innovation, and cost with

key suppliers. Score based upon level

of supplier involvement,

communication and continuous

improvement efforts. Locations with

centralized corporate procurement

should understand the certification

process, where top suppliers rate, and

what communication has occurred.

PFEP (Plan For Every Part)

Signals, home locations, and delivery

methods are random and don't have

rules.

Majority of plant has pull signals. Line

side inventories are somewhat

controlled. Most materials have home

locations.

Some consistency in delivery methods.

Containers, racks, and carts are

consistent and suited to line storage.

Receiving dock/stores have product

pushed to them.

Most delivery methods are consistent.

Non standard containers draw

attention and are not acceptable.

External suppliers deliver exclusively

by pull signal.

Plant wide system in place.

Documented PFEP for 100% of facility.

Delivery method, container, and pull

signals are common and repeatable

and being used.

Every part has a plan that includes

where and how it is stored including

container sizes and flow racks, etc. A

delivery system is in place that

includes stops and delivery points,

right sized point of use racks at

delivery points, signals for

replenishment of what parts, and

delivery times. There is a system in

place to maintain the integrity of the

plan for every part and procedures for

reacting to minimum and maximum

inventory levels. The degree to which

the operation has moved from a push

to a pull system within the entire

value chain. These are successive

measures and the prior criteria must

be met in order to move to a higher

score.

Life Cycle Management No evidence.

New product launches with minimal

plans to deactivate models. There is a

general understanding of the impact

of not participating in the life cycle

management process. No action has

been taken.

There has been activity to understand

complexity of product

offerings/options (i.e., 80/20 analysis,

etc.) with some actions taken.

Facilities are actively engaged in the

life cycle management process. There

is a clear understanding of impacts of

product launch, sourcing decisions,

commonizing of parts/platforms, and

discontinuation.

There is a comprehensive plan of life

cycle management integrated with

NPD and 50% of sales are from

products introduced in the last three

years.

The extent to which a facility

understands, participates, and actively

engages in the life cycle management

process.

Member Training and Skill

Improvement Process

No evidence of BPI certification

process.


with < 25% of members are bronze

certified.


with at least 95% members bronze

certified and 50% of leaders silver

certified.

95% members bronze certified and

80% of leaders silver certified and 15%

of leaders gold certified.






lower criteria to score higher). Leaders

are defined as problem solvers (staff

level managers, GLs, engineers, etc.).

Refer to certification pyramid.

BPI certification launched with <50%

of members bronze certified and 20%

of leaders silver certified.


Lean assessment follow-ups• Follow-up on benchmarking

suggestions

• Top opportunities become strategic priorities for following year – strategic deployment

Tier Level: Silver Tier

1

2

3

1

2

3

32

46

78

Top 3 Opportunities

Total Score

Benchmarking Suggestions

Top 3 Best Practices

Foundation ScoreTransformation Score

5S, 5S, 5S

Defined physical flows and standard work - utilize VSM

6S and visual management - this reflects the leadership commitment

Mi idea participation rate and quantity is outstanding

Member and leadership engagement/culture - Quality Club, Safety Committee, Member Relations Committee,

members actively pursuing BPI certifications, RCIs being ran weekly

Beacon adoption for LPAs and 6S

Reliance on member driven containment processes vs. error proofing and true corrective actions

0

30

60

90

120

150

2019201820172016

YOY Results

Foundation Transformation Foundation threshold


Closing


Closing

• Link lean to core beliefs

• Create a culture

• Get outside help

• Create lean leaders

• Reward successes and failures


Q & A


Contacts

• Hollie Frieden, RCI Manager, [email protected]

• Jason Connell, Lean Development Manager, [email protected]


mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

our lean - ciras

Documents