Transcript The Toyota Production System

The Toyota Production System
High Quality and Low Cost
COST VS
DEFECTS
Readings;
James Womack, Daniel T. Jones and Daniel Roos,
The Machine that Changed the World, 1990, Ch 3 and 4
Kenneth N. McKay, “The Evolution of Manufacturing ControlWhat Has Been, What Will Be” Working Paper 03 –2001
Michael McCoby, “Is There a Best Way to Build a Car?”
HBR Nov-Dec 1997
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
1
Consumer Reports
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
2
Toyota vehicle sales
Ward's U.S. Light Vehicle Sales Summary 2002
Septem ber
Units
Domestic Cars
Import Cars
Total Cars
Domestic Light Trucks
Import Light Trucks
Total Light Trucks
Domestic Light Vehicles
Import Light Vehicles
Total Light Vehicles
2.810
Current
Year-Ago
431,496
170,554
602,050
545,865
75,999
621,864
977,361
246,553
1,223,914
481,318
158,897
640,215
573,329
75,575
648,904
1,054,647
234,472
1,289,119
January - Septem ber
% Share
DSR
Current Year-Ago
% Chg.
35.3
13.9
49.2
44.6
6.2
50.8
79.9
20.1
100.0
37.3
12.3
49.7
44.5
5.9
50.3
81.8
18.2
100.0
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
Vol
Current
Year-Ago
-2.6 4,594,203 4,865,569
16.7 1,708,780 1,566,286
2.2 6,302,983 6,431,855
3.5 5,769,260 5,621,805
9.3
798,656
711,178
4.2 6,567,916 6,332,983
0.7 10,363,463 10,487,374
14.3 2,507,436 2,277,464
3.2 12,870,899 12,764,838
% Chg.
-5.6
9.1
-2.0
2.6
12.3
3.7
-1.2
10.1
0.8
3
The Toyota Production System
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
2.810
Historical View
Performance measures
Elements of TPS
Six Eras of Manufacturing Practice
Difficulties with Implementation
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
4
Three Major Mfg Systems
from 1800 to 2000
Machine tools, specialized machine tools, Taylorism, SPC, CNC, CAD/CAM
1800
Interchangeable
Parts at U.S.
Armories
2.810
1900
Mass
Production
at Ford
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
2000
Toyota
Production
System
5
Key Elements for New Mfg Systems
Element/
System
Need of
Society
Work
Force
Motivation
Enabling
Technology
Leader
Resources
Interchange- Military
able Parts
“Yankee
Ingenuity”
Machine
Tools,
Division of
Labor
Roswell
Lee/
John
Hall
U.S.
Govt
Mass
Production
Trans$5/day
portation Immigrant
Moving
Assembly
Line,etc
Henry
Ford
Earnings
Toyota
Production
System
Post War
CNC,
Integration
of Labor
Taiichi
Ohno
Japanese
Banks
2.810
Jobs,
Security
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
6
Q. By what method did these
new systems come about?
A. Trail and Error
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
7
History of the Development of the Toyota
Production System
ref; Taiichi Ohno
1945
2.810
1975
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
8
The Toyota Production System
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
2.810
Historical View
Performance measures
Elements of TPS
Six Eras of Manufacturing Practice
Difficulties with Implementation
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
9
Summary of Assembly Plant Characteristics, Volume Producers,
1989
(Average for Plants in Each Region)
Per for mance:
Producvitity ( hour s/Veh.)
Quality ( assembly
defects/100 vehicles)
Layout:
Space (sq .ft./vehi cl e/yr)
Size of Repair Ar ea (as %
of assembly space)
Inventori es(days for 8
sampl e parts)
2.810
Japanese
Japanese in
American in
in Japan
Nort h America
Nort h America
All Europe
16.8
21.2
25.1
36.2
60
65
82.3
97
5.7
9.1
7.8
7.8
4.1
4.9
12.9
14.4
0.2
1.6
2.9
2
69.3
71.3
17.3
0.6
Wor k Force:
% of Work Force in Teams
Job Rotati on (0 = none,
4 = freq uent)
Sug g estions/Employee
Number of Job Classes
Traini ng of New Pr oduction
Wor kers (hours)
Absenteeism
3
61.6
11.9
2.7
1.4
8.7
0.9
0.4
67.1
1.9
0.4
14.8
380.3
5
370
4.8
46.4
11.7
173.3
12.1
Automation:
Wel di ng (% of dir ect steps)
Painti ng (% of dir ect steps)
Assembly( % of di rect steps)
86.2
54.6
1.7
85
40.7
1.1
76.2
33.6
1.2
76.6
38.2
3.1
Source: IMVP Wor ld Assembl y Plant Survey, 1989, and J. D. Power Initial Quality Survery, 1989
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
10
Cost Vs Defects
Ref. “Machine that Changed the World” Womack, Jones and Roos
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
11
The Toyota Production System
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
2.810
Historical View
Performance measures
Elements of TPS
Six Eras of Manufacturing Practice
Difficulties with Implementation
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
12
How do you get this kind of
performance?
1. Womack, Jones and Roos
2. J T. Black’s 10 Steps
3. Demand Flow Technology’s 9 Points
4. MSDD, D. Cochran and Students
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
13
Womack Jones and Roos
Automation?

Yes, but….
DFM?

Probably
Standardized Production?

No!
Lean Characteristics?


2.810
Integration of Tasks
Identification and removal of defects
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
14
Cost Vs Automation
Ref. “Machine that Changed the World” Womack, Jones and Roos
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
15
J T. Black’s 10 Steps
Ref; JT. Black “Factory with a Future” 1991
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Form cells
Reduce setup
Integrate quality control
Integrate preventive maintenance
Level and balance
Link cells – KANBAN
Reduce WIP
Build vendor programs
Automate
10. Computerize
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
16
Demand Flow Technology’s
9 Points
1. Product Synchronization
2. Mixed Model Process Maps
3. Sequence of Events
4. Demand at Capacity
5. Operational Cycle Time
6. Total Product Cycle Time
7. Line Balancing
8. Kanbans
9. Operational Method Sheets
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
17
Current Value Stream Map
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
18
Future Value Stream Map
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
19
Manufacturing System Design
Decomposition (MSDD)
ROI
Costs
Sales
- s
quality
s
resolving problems
predictable output
Investments
m
delay reduction
Lower level actions
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
20
J T. Black –1, 2
1. Form Cells
Sequential
operations,
decouple operator
from machine,
parts in families,
single piece flow
within cell
2.810
2. Reduce Setup
Externalize setup
to reduce downtime during
changeover,
increases flexibility
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
21
TPS Cell
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
22
Standardized Fixtures
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
23
J T. Black – 3, 4
3. Integrate quality
control
Check part quality
at cell, poke-yoke,
stop production
when parts are bad
2.810
4. Integrate preventive
maintenance
worker maintains
machine , runs
slower
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
24
J T. Black – 5, 6
5. Level and balance
Produce to Takt
time, reduce batch
sizes, smooth
production flow
2.810
6. Link cells- Kanban
Create “pull”
system –
“Supermarket”
System
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
25
J T. Black – 7, 8
7. Reduce WIP
Make system
reliable, build in
mechanisms to self
correct
2.810
8. Build Vendor
program
Propagate low WIP
policy to your
vendors, reduce
vendors, make ontime performance
part of expectation
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
26
Manufacturing System Design
Decomposition (MSDD)
ROI
Costs
Sales
- s
quality
s
resolving problems
predictable output
Investments
m
delay reduction
Lower level actions
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
27
Example from Cochran –
Minimize production disruptions
FR-P1
Minimize production disruptions
DP-P1
Predictable production resources
(people, equipment, info)
FR-P11
FR-P12
FR-P13
FR-P14
Ensure
availability of
relevant
production
information
Ensure
predictable
equipment
output
Ensure
predictable
worker output
Ensure
material
availability
DP-P11
DP-P12
DP-P13
DP-P14
Capable and
reliable
information
system
Maintenance of
equipment
reliability
Motivated
work -force
performing
standardized
work
Standard
material
replenishment
system
FR-P121
FR-P122
FR-P131
FR-P132
FR-P133
FR-P141
FR-P142
Ensure that
equipment is
easily
serviceable
Service
equipment
regularly
Reduce
variability of
task completion
time
Ensure
availability of
workers
Do not interrupt
production for
worker
allowances
Ensure that
parts are
available to the
material
handlers
Ensure proper
timing of part
arrivals
DP-P121
DP-P122
DP-P131
DP-P132
DP-P133
DP-P141
DP-P142
Machines
designed for
serviceability
Regular
preventative
maintenance
program
Standard work
methods to
provide
repeatable
processing time
Perfect
Attendance
Program
Mutual Relief
System with
cross-trained
workers
Standard work
in process
between sub systems
Parts moved to
downstream
operations
according to
pitch
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
28
Some Basics Concepts of TPS
1. Smooth Flow and Produce to Takt Time
2. Produce to Order
3. Make system “observable” and correct
problems as they occur
4. Integrate Worker Skills
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
29
Two Examples;
1. Takt Time
2. Pull Systems
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
30
Takt Time
– to pace production
Available Time
Takt Time 
Product Demand
2.810
Calculate Takt Time per month, day,
year etc. Available time includes all
shifts, and excludes all nonproductive time (e.g. lunch, clean-up
etc). Product demand includes overproduction for low yields etc.
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
31
Takt Time
Automobile Assembly Line; Available time = 7.5 hr
X 3 shifts = 22.5 hrs or 1350 minutes per day.
Demand = 1600 cars per day. Takt Time = 51 sec
Aircraft Engine Assembly Line; 500 engines per
year. 2 shifts X 7 hrs => 14 hrs/day X 250 day/year
= 3500hrs.
Takt time = 7 hrs.
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
32
Engines shipped over a 3 month
period at aircraft engine factory “B”
12
mont h 2
mont h 1
mont h 3
engines shipped per week
10
8
6
4
2
0
7-Jun
15-Jun
23-Jun
30-Jun
7-Jul
15-Jul
24-Jul
31-Jul
7-A ug
15-Aug
24-Aug
31-Aug
We e k s
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
33
Engines shipped over a 3 month
period at aircraft engine factory “C”
7
6
engines shipped
5
4
3
2
1
0
may
june
jul y
august
weeks
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
34
On-time performance of
engine plants
100%
80%
engines delivered
late
late
60%
on
time
40%
on
time
20%
on
time
0%
A
2.810
B
C
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
35
Push and Pull Systems
Machines
1
2
Parts
2.810
3
4
Orders
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
36
Push Systems –
Order arrives at the front of the system and is produced in the
economical order quantity.
Q. How long did it take for the order to go through the system?
Time = 0
Time = 1
Time = 2
Time = 3
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
Time =37 4
Pull Systems-
The order arrives at the end of the line and is “pulled” out of the
system. WIP between the machines allows quick completion.
Pros and Cons;
Pull can fill small orders quickly, but
must keep inventory for all part
types. Design can help here but not
in all cases.
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
38
Comparison in delivery times
If the process time per part is “t”, and the
batch size is “n”, it takes “Nnt” time to
process a batch through “N” steps. To
deliver one part it takes;
“Nnt” time from a push system plus
setup and transportation delays, and
“t” for a pull system.
See HP Video
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
39
HP Video Results
Push system (6)
Pull (3)
Pull (1)
Space
2 Tables
2 Tables
1 Table
WIP
20
12
4
CycleTime
3:17
1:40
19 sec
Rework Units
26
10
3
Quality prob.
hidden
visible
visible
Production Rate
L=W
6.1 parts per
minute
7.2
12.6
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
40
HP Video Results Revisited
Push system (6)
Pull (3)
Pull (1)
Space
2 Tables
2 Tables
1 Table
WIP = L
20
6X =24
12
3X =12
4
1X =4
CycleTime = W
3:17
6t(3:20 or 2:00)
1:40
3t(1:40 or 40)
19 sec (say 20)
1t (50 or 20)
Rework Units
~WIP
26
10
3
Quality prob.
hidden
visible
visible
Production Rate
L=W
6.1 parts per
minute
7.2
12.6
4/50/60=4.8
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
41
So what are the advantages of
the pull systems?
continuous (synchronous) flow
single piece flow capabilities
observable problems
(if stopped = problem)
sensitive to state of the factory
(if no part = problem)
possible cooperative problem solving
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
42
The Toyota Production System
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
2.810
Historical View
Performance measures
Elements of TPS
Six Eras of Manufacturing Practice
Difficulties with Implementation
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
43
Six Eras of Manufacturing
Practice, Ken McKay
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
2.810
Pioneering
Systemization
Technology and Process
Internal Efficiency
Customer Service
Systems Level Re-engineering
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
44
Ken McKay – 1, 2
1. Pioneering sellers market,
competition is not
by manufacturing
large margins
emphasize
throughput not
efficiency
2.810
2. Systemization - firm
grows and system gets
complex gross
inefficiency becomes
apparent, competition
begins to make its
presence felt. Need for
standard operating
procedures, demand
still high, inventory
used to buffer against
instabilities.
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
45
Ken McKay – 3, 4
3. Technology and
4. Internal Efficiency Process – competition
competition “cherry
pickers” enter the market
is increasing, sales are
they don’t offer all of the
softening,
options and parts service but
manufacturing is still in
focus on the 20% which
early maturity and
yields 80% of the revenue
competition is limited
stream. Internal plant is put
into order, problems are
to firms in similar
pushed outside to suppliers,
situation. Focus shifts
best in class, bench marking
from increasing
identifies the silver bullet.
production rate to
Still using inventory to
increasing the amount
cushion production support
variety, and maintain
of product per unit
functional features.
time.
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
46
Ken McKay- 5, 6
5. Customer Service talk to the
customer, identify
core competency,
outsource, be
responsive, reduce
lead time, eliminate
feature creep,
focused factory etc.
2.810
6. System Level Reengineering firms
have addressed the
internal system and
factory – no more to
squeeze out – look to
improving indirect and
overhead, era of “mass”
customization, supply
chain development.
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
47
The Toyota Production System
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
2.810
Historical View
Performance measures
Elements of TPS
Six Eras of Manufacturing Practice
Difficulties with Implementation
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
48
TPS Implementation
Physical (machine placement, standard
work etc) part
Work practices and people issues
Supply-chain part
Corporate Strategy
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
49
Work practices and people
issues
Failed TPS attempts; GM Linden NJ,
GM-Suzuki, Ontario Canada. Successes
GM NUMMI, Saturn. see MacCoby art
“Innovative” Work Practices Ref; C.
Ichniowski, T. Kochan et al “What Works
at Work: Overview and Assessment”,
Industrial Relations Vol 35 No.3 (July
1996)
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
50
Examples of “Innovative”
Work Practices
Work Teams
Gain Sharing
Flexible Job Assignments
Employment Security
Improved Communications
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
51
“What Works at Work:
Overview and Assessment”,
Conclusion 1; “Bundling”
Innovative human resource management
practices can improve business productivity,
primarily through the use of systems of
related work practices designed to enhance
worker participation and flexibility in the
design of work and decentralization of
managerial tasks and responsibilities.
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
52
“What Works at Work:
Overview and Assessment”,
Conclusion 2; “Impact”
New Systems of participatory work
practices have large economically
important effects on the performance of
the businesses that adopt the new
practices.
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
53
“What Works at Work:
Overview and Assessment”,
Conclusion 3; “Partial Implementation”
A majority of contemporary U.S. businesses now
have adopted some forms of innovative work
practices aimed at enhancing employee participation
such as work teams, contingent pay-for-performance
compensation, or flexible assignment of multiskilled
employees. Only a small percentage of businesses,
however, have adopted a full system of innovative
work practices composed of an extensive set of these
work practice innovations.
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
54
“What Works at Work:
Overview and Assessment”,
Conclusion 4; “Barriers to Implementation”
The diffusion of new workplace innovations is limited,
especially among older U.S. businesses. Firms face a number of
obstacles when changing from a system of traditional work
practices to a system of innovative practices, including: the
abandonment of organization change initiatives after limited
policy changes have little effect on performance, the costs of
other organizational practices that are needed to make new
work practices effective, long histories of labor-management
conflict and mistrust, resistance of supervisors and other
workers who might not fare as well under the newer practices,
and the lack of a supportive institutional and public policy
environment.
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
55
Barriers to Implementation
Early abandonment
Costs
History of conflict and distrust
Resistance of supervisors
Lack of supportive infrastructure
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
56
Summary
High quality and low cost ( and originally low
volumes)
Relationship to previous systems (see McKay
paper), yet new,………. in fact revolutionary
Many elements



2.810
Overall, see ”The Machine that Changed the
World”
Cells, next time
People, see Maccoby Article
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
57
Summary …….. continued
“Autonomation” automation with a
human touch
Worker as problem solver
TRUST
2.810
T.G.Gutowski 10/29/01
58