Piece-Part Incentives Gone Wrong
by Dean Prigelmeier, President of Proactive Technologies, Inc.
Sometimes we are tempted to take the easy route, even though it may cost more in the end, offer much less on the path to the desired outcome or cause us to repeat the effort another way. Shallow analyses and shortcuts often lead to unintended consequences. Changes to weaken metrics to convince us, or others, that progress is better than reality only postpones solutions to the underlying challenge. Too often we are focused on the search for a solution to a symptom and not the problem. The example I am about to share represents all of these tendencies.
As a Quality Control Line Inspector at an aerospace manufacturing facility in my early years, one of my first assignments was to in-process inspect work samples from several rows of NC Lathes, Mills and Grinders. I was assigned there with the implicit instructions to be on the look-out for “problems” identified by management: decreased quality yield, substantially high rates of scrap and rework, which lead to increased worker costs and lower returns. The proposed solution was more rigorous quality inspection of parts in-process before they became a component of an expensive sub-assembly or assembly.
click here to expandWhile making my rounds, meeting the operators and inspecting samples, it seemed I was seeing evidence that management identified the “problem” correctly. I say problem, but my feeling was that I had not gotten to the root cause of what I was observing. I was rejecting parts at nearly every work station, on every pass. I decided to dig a little deeper – get to know the operators a little better to see if I could determine why this was happening.
What I found out was that the operators were, for the most part, experienced and knowledgeable. They knew how to measure their products and should have been able to detect parts drifting out of tolerance. Yet, each station had two barrels – one for scrap and one for rework – as if it were foregone conclusion. And they were working at a very high rate of output with, voluntarily, no breaks or lunch. The effort expended seemed to run counter to the outcome. Read More
How Start-Ups and Joint Ventures Can Benefit from Structured On-The-Job Training
by Stacey Lett, Director of Operations – Eastern U.S. – Proactive Technologies, Inc.
A article in a previous issue of the Proactive Technologies Report entitled “Enterprise Expansion/Contraction and Worker Development Standardization” explained the process of standardizing training for expanding, contracting, merging and acquiring enterprises. It discussed how to take inventory of incumbents and new-hires in training, and how to standardize multiple worker development strategies. But what about standardizing tasks that are in design, have just been designed or are evolving in their design? Or the importance of this component in creating an enterprise to perform the tasks meant to lead to profit from an innovation? If the goal is the repeatable high-quality performance of tasks once they have been formalized, then standardizing and documenting the procedural steps is necessary, though often an afterthought.
click here to expandEntrepreneurs and engineers that design and fine-tune a production process or service strategy are immersed in it until they feel confident it is ready for scaling. Whether through “expert bias” – the overconfidence that results with satisfaction in discovery leading to the opinion that everyone should understand their innovation – or through mere oversight, a brilliant idea can fail in proliferation during efforts to transfer the processes and techniques without a formal structure. Read More
Reluctant to Reshore Due to Apparent Shortage of Skilled Labor? Don’t Be
by Dean Prigelmeier, President of Proactive Technologies, Inc.
These are relatively uncertain times for some manufacturers with supply chains that transcend borders to countries subject to punitive tariffs, and/or social, political and economic unrest. Knowing where to invest time and precious resources isn’t as clear as it was a couple of decades ago, yet that is the situation many are in.
We all remember how quickly companies relocated part (in some cases all) of their operations, and/or prodded their suppliers to do the same, to lower wage, lower regulation and lower property cost environments – regardless of the transport costs, and risks of regional instability and supply chain disruption. As those economies developed and the associated operational costs increased, those perceived savings continued to erode. And as regional instability rose, many employers started to plan their next move. Once again, the U.S. looks like a viable site alternative.
click here to expandOne over-hyped and inaccurate factor in the U.S. is the shortage of skilled labor, which some workers see as a veiled attempt to justify importing labor who will take the job for significantly less. There are plenty of skilled labor available who were displaced during the Crash of 2008, or recently displaced by the trade wars, and who had to change career course to feed their families. Many of these workers are still waiting, and could be quickly and easily “re-tooled” for today’s manufacturing jobs with a focused structured on-the-job training program. Some are kept from seeking out these opportunities by wages and benefits for the job they once had now offered at 50% – hardly enough to attract skilled candidates back – not to mention for retaining a “skilled worker.”
Some see this as a sort of hypocrisy; the publicized, frantic search for “skilled” and “talented” workers, while offering these skilled workers less for the job they once held with that employer or a similar employer in the industry. So, for now, many of those workers that are that skilled and talented abandoned the career of their choice for the career that pays the bills.
Unless employers can convince their shareholders that wages and benefits have to go up to attract the workers they prefer, employers will have to accept the candidates that remain of which there are plenty. These are the ones with the college degrees you see working in service positions, just waiting for an opportunity to apply their skills to a job with more substance. Read More
Quality Policies and Process Sheets Do Not Equal Training
by Dean Prigelmeier, President of Proactive Technologies, Inc.
A very common fallacy in business operations is that a description of what should be done listed in a quality policy, such as a quality control policy or a quality assurance plan, that seems to be sufficient for the training component of ISO/IATF/AS certification meets, therefore, the company’s training requirement in general. Perhaps this false equivalency is wrongly supported by the additional fallacy that the existence of standard work instructions is the equivalent of on-the-job training plans. Too often this is used to defend the belief that this replaces formal task-based training.
Sometimes this leads to the rationalization that if the company keeps it simple and barely meets what an ISO/IATF/AS auditor might accept for their certification purposes, the training requirement is covered. But an auditor at that stage is just looking at what the company is intending to do, not how they carry it out. That is discovered later.
click here to expandThis false assumption is challenged when product or services turn up defective, and customers expect an explanation and a corrective action. This is when a weak, or no, connection can be drawn between the policy that guides quality standards, work processes and who trained and certified the employee to perform the task independently is discovered. This is when the records that exist, if any, do not support the assumption that mastery of the task ever occurred. This is when the customer loses faith in the producer or supplier – not just in the task(s) isolated in the one incident, but possibly performance of all tasks on which they depend.
From a learning perspective, manufacturing environments present hurdle after hurdle to learning and mastering the work to be performed. Unrelenting production schedules, technology advancements and continuous improvement efforts – all offer little room for deliberate task-based training while changing the task out from under the worker while they are trying to learn and master it. Read More
WELCOME MENNEL MILLING!
by Proactive Technologies, Inc. – Staff
Proactive Technologies, Inc. is happy to welcome Mennel Milling! Mennel has been milling wheat into flour since 1886. Whether for a restaurant chain or a food company of any size, Mennel can be counted on for all custom flour blend and bakery mix needs, perfecting over 300 recipes.
Mennel operates 13 country grain elevators throughout Ohio, Indiana and Virginia. Mennel has 26 industrial sites throughout the U.S.; 19 of them in Ohio. Thanks to their long-standing commitment to research and development, Mennel has a proven reputation for providing outstanding products. Their team of research scientists identify new applications for their flour and co-products, and as a result develop new or specialty post-milling processes and products.
click here to expandProactive Technologies will be working with Mennel Milling to set-up and implement structured on-the-job training programs for new-hires and incumbent workers for positions such as Maintenance Technicians, Operator, Supervisor and Quality Assurance Technician. Read More
Read the full August, 2022 Proactive Technologies Report newsletter, including linked industry articles and online presentation schedules.
Proactive Technologies, Inc.®; PROTECH; Human Resource Management for Tomorrow...Today!® and logo;