One of objectives in the first year of our lean plan is to sort out (from 5S) where we are with lean, sort data we've collected, and among other things sort our people. By this I mean assessing where we stand from a skill perspective across the company.
This assessment tool is used in various formats and is generally formatted to fit the needs of the company. However, the intention is to assess skill level, identify training needs, set priorities, and track progress. It will also identify operational risk by highlighting areas where few employees are proficient in critical tasks.
So far, we have the major task required to assess the skill level completed. We recently sent to every employee a categorized list of skill requirements for the fields of design, human resources, lean, and software. We used excel and inserted a comment with a detailed description of each skill requirement and employees assessed themselves on a scale of 1 - 5, with 1 being completely unaware and 5 being at a proficiency level where the employee could train others in the particular skill.
Additionally, each employee identified their interest level in upgrading skills or the need for skill in each particular category. For example: administrative assistants would have no requirement to train in design work and, structural designers expressed interest in piping design. Employees indicated their interest or need with a simple A B C scale with A representing high priority, proficiency essential. Simple colour coding gives a visual representation of the results for both skill level and training requirements. There is also an area to capture employee comments.
Now that we have all of this information, what do we do with it and how can it improve our company?
1.) Time has to be taken by management to review each of the completed assessments for accuracy and ensure management is aware of the actual skill level within the company. It is often different from their perception, both from an individual perspective and overall.
2.) Each skill needs analysis to determine the overall company proficiency level, and a determination of whether or not it's satisfactory is required.
3.) From this analysis, deficiencies need to be prioritized and an overall plan to improve proficiency developed through training, workshops, or mentoring.
4.) Employees who have expressed interest in achieving proficiency in areas outside their normal work need to be identified and development decisions and plans undertaken.
In any case, once the assessment is analyzed and the plans are set in motion, the company begins to improve, remove waste, and offer value to the customer.
Every company can obviously benefit from this type of analysis and it is not difficult to achieve. The key though is actually setting out to get it done. Assign a champion, and begin. The results can be astounding.
Ken Hogan
Lean Guy at Genoa
Monday, September 24, 2007
Monday, September 17, 2007
Survey Results - Lean Diagnostic
The Lean Diagnostic is a tool used to measure lean performance across a number of categories. It enables a company to benchmark lean performance, set goals for improvement, and compare performance against other lean organizations. It's a scorecard based assessment and when completed assigns a percentage of lean implementation in each category as well as an overall score. For more detail see blog “We Changed our Goal” July 12, 2007.
In April, we completed an assessment based on Genoa’s performance to date and scored 32%. Scores across categories ranged from 0% in categories such as Lean Lean Product and Process Design and Lean Accounting and 60% in Value Stream Mapping and Total Productive Maintenance.
Following this initial assessment, we compiled a survey in July based on the category criteria and sent it to all of Genoa’s employees asking them to rate performance in each category based on their current knowledge. We did not alter the criteria language because it is our intent to ask these same questions annually improving employee knowledge through training and teamwork as we execute our plan.
We also added two categories that were included in older versions of the diagnostic; Safety, and Mistake Proofing. We included a feedback section and some other general questions on lean knowledge and how Genoa communicates with employees about the company.
The results of the survey were pretty much as expected with the group scoring 43% and higher than the lean consultant in most categories. This was probably due to a lack of complete understanding of the lean tool scored.
The good news is that the category scores, as well as the communication and lean knowledge scores will be improved with the implementation of the five-year plan. As well, the issues raised in the employee comments sections will be addressed through various parts of the plan.
This is a good baseline measure as we progress toward our goal of 38% at the end of year 1 and 80% at the end of five years. The complete results of the survey will be shared with employees soon.
Ken Hogan
Lean Guy at Genoa
In April, we completed an assessment based on Genoa’s performance to date and scored 32%. Scores across categories ranged from 0% in categories such as Lean Lean Product and Process Design and Lean Accounting and 60% in Value Stream Mapping and Total Productive Maintenance.
Following this initial assessment, we compiled a survey in July based on the category criteria and sent it to all of Genoa’s employees asking them to rate performance in each category based on their current knowledge. We did not alter the criteria language because it is our intent to ask these same questions annually improving employee knowledge through training and teamwork as we execute our plan.
We also added two categories that were included in older versions of the diagnostic; Safety, and Mistake Proofing. We included a feedback section and some other general questions on lean knowledge and how Genoa communicates with employees about the company.
The results of the survey were pretty much as expected with the group scoring 43% and higher than the lean consultant in most categories. This was probably due to a lack of complete understanding of the lean tool scored.
The good news is that the category scores, as well as the communication and lean knowledge scores will be improved with the implementation of the five-year plan. As well, the issues raised in the employee comments sections will be addressed through various parts of the plan.
This is a good baseline measure as we progress toward our goal of 38% at the end of year 1 and 80% at the end of five years. The complete results of the survey will be shared with employees soon.
Ken Hogan
Lean Guy at Genoa
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
The Team...
Notes on trying to run the company and also stay tapped into the Lean project at hand.
It is so easy to become engrossed in day to day activities, marketing, human resource issues, fires, emergencies, floods, requests, proposals, hiring, planning, strategic sessions, and all the other "stuff" that seems to interfere with running a business. Let alone trying to grow and develop a business under the umbrella of Lean principles.
As an infant might cry... "wah wah wah".
This emphasizes the importance of a Lean Champion. Someone who's primary mission in life is to push ahead with Lean improvements.
Thank goodness for "The Lean Guy at Genoa".
Thank goodness for our VP Operations, Darren, who works closely with Ken to get the right data, analyze it in the right context, identify the opportunities and help Ken push.
Thank goodness for a staff who care and are open to a shift in culture.
Thank goodness for the plan and action to bring the shift in culture about.
But to bring it full circle...one loose spoke, and the wheel fails.
I have learned that one person can only do so much. The answer is bringing the right team together.
I believe I have said this before...but it's worth repeating.
It is so easy to become engrossed in day to day activities, marketing, human resource issues, fires, emergencies, floods, requests, proposals, hiring, planning, strategic sessions, and all the other "stuff" that seems to interfere with running a business. Let alone trying to grow and develop a business under the umbrella of Lean principles.
As an infant might cry... "wah wah wah".
This emphasizes the importance of a Lean Champion. Someone who's primary mission in life is to push ahead with Lean improvements.
Thank goodness for "The Lean Guy at Genoa".
Thank goodness for our VP Operations, Darren, who works closely with Ken to get the right data, analyze it in the right context, identify the opportunities and help Ken push.
Thank goodness for a staff who care and are open to a shift in culture.
Thank goodness for the plan and action to bring the shift in culture about.
But to bring it full circle...one loose spoke, and the wheel fails.
I have learned that one person can only do so much. The answer is bringing the right team together.
I believe I have said this before...but it's worth repeating.
Testing continues…
Posted by Leonard...
Written by The Lean Guy at Genoa...
When we set up this blog we had a couple of purposes in mind; document our journey and share our successes, failures, and lessons learned with others. As I mentioned previously we’ve collected reams of data from past projects and loaded all of it to an excel file knowing that somewhere in there was the path to establishing takt time in our design world.
Well, I’ve just completed a high level analysis of the data and have worked out some basic production averages including parts per hour and parts per volume. This is broken out by ship part regardless of type of ship and all project hours are used. There were some obvious outliers in the data so one standard deviation was used to establish upper and lower control limits to arrive at a more “reliable” average.
The data looked great in scatter diagrams with some obvious patterns emerging.
Remember, one of our goals is to use historical data to calculate project hours based on volume or weight or some other parametric. That said, we took the rates and tested them against a project that had already been completed, calculating parts based on the known volume of each unit, and calculating hours based on the calculated parts.
The results were a little disappointing with calculated parts off by as high as 85% but on average 20%. Calculated hours were off on average 33% but as high as 70% for one unit. I thought they would be better but have to keep reminding myself that this is data from all types of ships applied against one particular type.
A positive result of our analysis, which has shown to be consistent across all ship types and unit types, is the percentage of total project hours that can be applied against modeling, assembly, nesting etc.
Written by The Lean Guy at Genoa...
When we set up this blog we had a couple of purposes in mind; document our journey and share our successes, failures, and lessons learned with others. As I mentioned previously we’ve collected reams of data from past projects and loaded all of it to an excel file knowing that somewhere in there was the path to establishing takt time in our design world.
Well, I’ve just completed a high level analysis of the data and have worked out some basic production averages including parts per hour and parts per volume. This is broken out by ship part regardless of type of ship and all project hours are used. There were some obvious outliers in the data so one standard deviation was used to establish upper and lower control limits to arrive at a more “reliable” average.
The data looked great in scatter diagrams with some obvious patterns emerging.
Remember, one of our goals is to use historical data to calculate project hours based on volume or weight or some other parametric. That said, we took the rates and tested them against a project that had already been completed, calculating parts based on the known volume of each unit, and calculating hours based on the calculated parts.
The results were a little disappointing with calculated parts off by as high as 85% but on average 20%. Calculated hours were off on average 33% but as high as 70% for one unit. I thought they would be better but have to keep reminding myself that this is data from all types of ships applied against one particular type.
A positive result of our analysis, which has shown to be consistent across all ship types and unit types, is the percentage of total project hours that can be applied against modeling, assembly, nesting etc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)