Case Studies

Welcome to our Case Studies page, where we showcase some real-world examples of how our solutions have made a positive impact on businesses just like yours. Dive into these success stories to discover how we've helped our clients overcome challenges, achieve their goals, and drive meaningful results.

Index

1 / Major Modular Building Supplier: Cornwall depot

2 / Major Modular Building Supplier: UK and Europe 18-month Programme

3 / Truck final drive axel assembly line Detroit. 8 Weeks

4 / New Marine Diesel engine build Colchester: 16 Weeks

5 / Aircraft seat manufacturing: 16 Weeks

6 / Aircraft Aerostructure Assembly: 15 Weeks

7 / Aerospace fuselage and wing spars manufacturer North Carolina USA: 14 Weeks

Major Modular Building Supplier: Cornwall depot

Challenge

The total annual refurbishment and fitout cost of hiring modular buildings across +/- 50 service depots in the UK and Europe steadily increased over several years. Output had increased due to growth in market share but costs per unit increased significantly.

Root cause

After a 1-week diagnostic at a busy depot, several contributing factors were identified. A major gap was a total lack of planning and there was just not enough data to understand what the problems were.

Solutions

Make the depots safe by installing a 5S process.
Create an organisation structure to ensure all tasks are performed by capable staff. (create minimum job roles for key personnel)
Create a process to plan and measure daily activities for cabin refurb and fitout personnel.
Install a Shop Floor management system focusing on following standard work, creating firm measures for success, identifying problems, and solving them through a structured formal process.
Create a standard Operations planning process that looks ahead for at least a quarter.

Outcome

Here are some of the verified benefits achieved and in brackets, the solution attributed to it:

“Near miss “incidents reduced by 7% (5S activity)
Labour efficiency improved and costs down by 21% (daily and weekly planning, Problem solving, focus on correct measures)
Throughput increased by 18% (Planning, Problem solving, focus on correct measures)
Lead times reduced by 23% (Planning, Problem solving, focus on correct measures)
Inventory holding reduced by 32% (5S activity, Planning)

Major Modular Building Supplier: Cornwall depot

Major Modular Building Supplier: UK and Europe 18-month Programme

Major Modular Building Supplier:
UK and Europe
18-month Programme

Challenge

Show similar improvements made in pilot depot across all the +/-50 service depots of this major modular building hire division. (+/- 1700 employees including manufacturing facility)

Root cause

After a 2-week diagnostic programme visiting various depots, data pointed out that most of the depots operated as stand-alone sites, had different organisational structures, varying skill levels, did not make use of the groups systems and procedures, and had little or no daily, weekly, monthly labour and operations planning. (See Case study on Cornwall depot)

Solutions

Create a 16-week deployable operating system (alternating weekly coaching support between 2 depots) based on the single depot success. Focussed on the following.

2. Create a web-based, companywide, problem escalation system (3C) to ensure ALL problems identified at depot level are solved by group support and group supply functions. Train staff at all levels across the entire business in the use thereof.

3. Ailing organisation structures at depots, regions, and divisions to develop skills and support regions effectively.

4. Create 3 tier lean operations training system.

Outcome

This is an ongoing programme. The client is still developing their capabilities and capacity, so benefits are improving. Here are some of the verified benefits achieved during Velocity Green Lean involvement.

“Near miss “incidents reduced significantly reduced (5S activity)
Labour efficiency improved and cost down by 17% (daily and weekly planning, Problem solving, focus on correct measures)
Throughput increased in one division by 40% and the remaining divisions by an average of 14% (Planning, Problem solving, focus on correct measures)
Lead times to supply standalone buildings reduced by 15% and modular by 8% (Planning, Problem solving, focus on correct measures)
Inventory holding reduced, Turns improved (5S activity, Planning)

Truck final drive axel assembly line Detroit. 8 Weeks

Challenge

New product automated assembly line not achieving planned output. Planned volume of 125 per day. Achieving an average of 75.

Root cause

Findings from main task on total process capability

Process ML180, ML190 did not achieve Takt ML190 (potential sequencing prob)
Current manning able to achieve Takt but very inefficient. (ML130 and ML140 SWIP dependant starving ML190)
Operators following own work cycle (no man / machine combo)

Additional observations during study

Many starved processes due to lack of SWIP (no catch-back)
Testing failures and rework accounts for large number of missed cycles.
Basic hour by hour SFM and reacting to equipment and part stoppages are not visible and/or effective. (see the following slide)
Andon rules are not always followed (part supply on historical knowledge rather than andon)

Solutions

Man

Roles and responsibilities for all and std work for leaders, resource management
Man / Machine combination tables for operators.
Structured training. (TWI)

Machine

Adjust calibration / testing equipment Cpk (too many successful re-tests)
Robot picking and placing accuracy improved
Robot operation / transition sequence reviewed and adjusted (especially ML190)
Installed an Audible Andon

Method

Create a schedule to consider model mix (High workload followed by low workload)
Changed ML130 / ML140 flow direction.
Added SWIP. Locked into process with flow simulation study.
Created an effective trouble shooting and problem-solving system (hour by hour including support functions)
Planned stops for part shortages etc. (to prevent out of sequence operations

Material

Sorting of component parts and containment until countermeasure in place
Focus on part handling care and cleaning.

Outcome

Here are some of the verified benefits achieved and in brackets, the solution attributed to it:

Planned volume of 125 units achieved in 6 weeks
Operator workload redistribution (new Yamazumi) removed 1 operator from the process.
Right first time figures achieved up from 71% to 93% (and improving)

New Marine Diesel engine build Colchester: 16 Weeks

Challenge

Create the capability to assemble a newly built engine in under 500 man hours with 100% OTIF, RFT, and customer satisfaction. Volume increase of 35% over previous requirements. Supply chain out of scope. Historic build hours ranged from 750 – 1200 man hours with many arrears having to be fitted at the client. Rework hours contributed as much as 25% of total hours.

Root cause

A great deal of quality defects were detected in the process. This is seen from the QIR process with a high-level split of about 50% due to supply issues and 50% due to assembly issues. It is also possible that all quality problems aren’t recorded. This makes it impossible to work on route cause analysis and finding countermeasures for problems.
Part shortages. This is a subjective comment from Alison the material handler as OTIF measures aren’t available now.
Scheduling is not sequenced based on the best build sequence but rather on part availability and requirements and individuals available. I could not find any evidence of schedule adherence measurement or corrective action measures that stem from it.
Batch building of sub-assemblies based on what parts are available.
Process build rate standards are not known and build timing is not challenged
No evidence of formal or informal problem solving other than QIR process managed by the quality department.
The operations structure is undefined and incomplete. There is no clear definition of roles and responsibilities. It is neither departmental nor Matrix

New Marine Diesel engine build Colchester: 16 Weeks

Solutions

Man

Create a manning plan for the current volume.
Create a manning plan for increased volume.
Roles and responsibilities for all support staff and management teams.

Machine

Redesign Factory layout for increased volume and new parts kitting system.
Design and order engine assembly stage trolleys.
Crank washer design and order
pressure test screen design and order

Method

Create detailed work instructions, "build books" with labour split (yamazumi) for all volume ranges.
Develop a firm forecast and Shop floor scheduling (how to) system.
Install Quality gates system.
Design and appropriate Visual management system with relevant measures and daily problem solving.

Material

Create Kitting process.
Supplier quality and delivery measures.

Outcome

Here are some of the verified benefits achieved and in brackets, the solution attributed to it

Planned volume achieved in 10 weeks with average hours per unit 480.
Rework hours reduced by 75%.
89% Right first-time figures achieved (and improving)

Aircraft seat manufacturing:
16 Weeks

Challenge

Support the Recovery Program at Thompson Aero Seating’s facilities in NI, to increase the output from the current levels of ca 8-10 seats per day, to the targeted 24 seats per day by end of April 2019.

Root cause

Lack of “depth” in capability of key management and support structure
Very little standardized process at all levels and no clear understanding of real capacity
Data recording ad-hoc and inaccurate.
Need for cross functional problem resolution at all levels.

Aircraft seat manufacturing: 16 Weeks

Solutions

Process capability and capacity improvement to facilitate average 25PAX per day.
Data driven Shop floor management system (level3) for all Value streams.
Problem solving process created and all support staff trained in the use of it.
5S process installed in All value streams,
Standard work for Leaders (Supervisors, Value stream managers and Business unit managers)
Standard work for Support functions (Quality Engineers, Manufacturing Engineer, Logistics support, Planner, Production controller.
Coaching of key value stream staff to increase “capability / skills matrix” to an average of 3.5
Kaizen workshops to “unbottle neck” value streams. Lean tools targeted: One piece flow, line balancing, material pull systems, JIT.

In order to achieve this, a dedicated Coach was assigned to each of the 12 Value Streams of the business in order to de-bottleneck and problem-solve in these together with the Value Stream Management team.

Outcome

Here are some of the verified benefits achieved:

Manufacturing lead time reduction 7 days to 5 days
Process Value Added work increased from 53% to 79%

3. Massive increase in staff capability and Lean Skills

4. Total cost savings from Kaizen more than £1 600 000.

Aircraft Aerostructure Assembly: 15 Weeks

Challenge

Prepare the ramp up and new model introduction at a first tier aerostructure assembly facility in Saint Nazaire France to increase the quality and the output from the current levels of 6 aircraft per month, to the targeted 8 aircraft per month by June 24.

Root cause

Huge amount of non-managed Travelled Work (uncompleted work) from sister company supplier in USA leading to de-organization of activities.
Very little planning activities (no Production Control) leading to delays, loss of capacity and overtime costs.
Shopfloor management span of control too large and unclear responsibilities.
No structured shopfloor management routines and follow up.
Limited teamwork between functions.
Need for cross functional problem resolution at all levels.

Aircraft Aerostructure Assembly: 15 Weeks

Solutions

Restructured shopfloor management organisation with appropriate span of control and responsibilities.
Tiered Visual Management system at all levels (0,1, 2, 3, 4), all departments and all shifts.
Data driven Shop floor management system (level3) for all Value streams.
Problem solving process created and all support staff trained in the use of it.
Standard work for Shopfloor management (Team leaders, Quality Inspectors).
Creation of Production Control function with appropriate tools and processes.
Line balancing for achieving rate and allocate resources.
To achieve this, a team of 3 Coaches supported re-organization and problem-solving together with the Value Stream Management team.

Outcome

Here are some of the verified benefits achieved.

a) A consistent planning process Slide planning.

b) Leadtime stabilization

Down from 24 days to 21 days (to date)

c) Quality improvement

Quantity of non-conformities at customer reduced from 70 to 40 per aircraft (to date)

d) Coaching to Management routines

Aerospace fuselage and wing spars manufacturer North Carolina USA: 14 Weeks

Challenge

A prime Aerospace manufacture is increasing its manufacturing rate from 7 to 10 over the next couple years. Our client, the first-tier supplier has had difficulty achieving good quality, delivery, and cost targets for several years and needs to cope with rate changes and the insertion of 2 additional models to the existing manufacturing assembly facility.

Root cause

Findings from initial assessment on process capability
Span of control of operator to Team Leader was very high.
Shift patterns and support staff numbers inadequate.
Operators following own work sequencing with only high-level engineering drawings available as build guides.
Total lack of tiered management structure with no formal problem solving and escalation process visible.
Additional observations during study
Lighting in assembly area below acceptable levels. (assembly staff wearing tinted safety eyewear)
Panel move teams only available on one shift.
Staff onboarding training, and refresher skills training inadequate.
Discipline in start and end of shift poor.

Aerospace fuselage and wing spars manufacturer North Carolina USA: 14 Weeks

Solutions

Man

Create 2 equally manned and supported shifts. Span of control from 30-40: 1 improved to 15: 1. Cross functional support (QE, ME, SC) on both shifts.
Roles and responsibilities (Minimum Job Roles) for all and std work for leaders, support functions, resource management.
Structured training. (TWI)

Machine

Install improved task lighting at fixture level.
Ensure Robot programmes are available 1 shift prior to use.

Method

Installed a 5-tiered visual management system per shift. Leading, lagging and Pareto KPIs with a 3C (Concern, Containment, Countermeasure) formal problem solving and escalation process.
- Tier 0. (50 sets) Operators work instructions and single point lessons and quality alerts.
- Tier 1. (18 sets) Team leader with operator meeting per shift. Detailed feedback and instruction on quality alerts and performance concerns.
- Tier 2. (5 sets) First line managers with theirs support personnel (Team leaders, Quality Engineer, Manufacturing Engineer, Supply chain Engineer.)
- Tier 3. Ops. (1 set) Operations lead with First Line Managers.
- Tier 3. Support (4 Sets) Department lead visual management system. (Human Resources, Quality control, Engineering, Supply Chain)
- Tier 4. Walk About Review (WAR) Factory leader with department leads. As a team walk to each of the Tier 3 processes each morning to provided senior management focus and receive escalations. This walk ends in the factory KPI room (OBEYA)

Created a jig level workload schedule and tracking bar chart system.
Material: Improved kitting and line-side parts delivery system

Outcome

Here are some of the verified benefits achieved and in brackets, the solution attributed to it

Improved Quality performance with improving trends. (single point lessons, Work instructions, quality alerts)
Takt achieved at all the assembly Jigs. (Shift balancing, span of control improvement, team leader development, Start / end of shift planning. Tired management systems)
Panel assembly process is not the bottleneck in the system anymore. (Tiered management system, Jig level workload scheduling, Problem solving. Team Leader development)
Direct labour cost reduction. (Balanced shifts, span of controls improvements.)