Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations TugboatEng on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Establishing standards
- Thread starter Ven80
- Start date
The first step in time study or process analysis is understanding the process. Start with the raw materials where they come into the process, there may be one point of entry or many points of entry. Understand what processes are done to the raw materials including inspections, storage and movement. Understand how each raw material reachs the final assembly. Understand the final assembly and the quality requirements of the assembly. After you understand the process now you can start the standards for the individual processes and improve the overall process. Talk with the people doing the processes and listen. DO NOT JUDGE!! Try also not to be fooled. Talk with the old timers they are usually willing to help.
The importance of any standards system is to recognise that nothing is perfect. Any standard that doesn't have a mechanism for change will preserve everything, good and bad alike.
A sad drawback to many standards doumented within industry is that that took a lot of time and trouble to establish and that actively discourage alteration i.e. improvement.
Your standard should therefore have a mechanism to encourage study each of each operation and a means to impliment improvements.
JMW
Eng-Tips: Pro bono publico, by engineers, for engineers.
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
A sad drawback to many standards doumented within industry is that that took a lot of time and trouble to establish and that actively discourage alteration i.e. improvement.
Your standard should therefore have a mechanism to encourage study each of each operation and a means to impliment improvements.
JMW
Eng-Tips: Pro bono publico, by engineers, for engineers.
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
A standard system is a poor way to improve overall processes substantially. An example would be an assembly made of (5) steel components bolted together with 20 bolts. The first standard is based on using a hand wrench, the IE says we should use better tooling to bolt them together and a rachet and socket is then used and then another improvement is an impact wrench is used and a final improvement is a air torque wrench is used. Each of these improvements could be driven by the standard system but the ultimate improvement of changing the assembly to a ductile iron casting eliminating the bolts the machining for the bolts and the assembly process. This change cannot be driven from the standard system.
Change must be driven by management. Management must allocate resources for improvements and follow through with implementation resources to complete the improvements. Even in the improvements using the impact wrench and torque wrench, if management does not supply the funds for the impact wrench or the torque wrench the improvements cannot occur.
Change must be driven by management. Management must allocate resources for improvements and follow through with implementation resources to complete the improvements. Even in the improvements using the impact wrench and torque wrench, if management does not supply the funds for the impact wrench or the torque wrench the improvements cannot occur.
Bill PSU,
You are absolutely right in that the standard system by itself will not assist in improving standards. Nothing will except a comitment by all that that is an objective.
I have witnessed standards schemes where it was as if they were carved in stone. Once written, never changed.
The tool must be capable of the job and there must be a willingness to use the tools.
Alignment is what is required. As you say, there must be a top down commitment to continuous improvement.
In some cases this means anticipating what is required and making sure that the standard does refelect this even in some simplistic way.
No matter how simple or complex the operation, recognised quality standards are a critical part of how a company operates and often subject to independant audit.
I am simply suggesting that changing the procedures is easier if the standard has that facility written into it otherwise even a small change can cause a problem because the standard itself is imutable.
This is an increasingly specialised area. There are many good web sites to visit on ISO 9000 and similar. If you don't have an ISO 9000 approval you may wish to anticipate it.
JMW
Eng-Tips: Pro bono publico, by engineers, for engineers.
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
You are absolutely right in that the standard system by itself will not assist in improving standards. Nothing will except a comitment by all that that is an objective.
I have witnessed standards schemes where it was as if they were carved in stone. Once written, never changed.
The tool must be capable of the job and there must be a willingness to use the tools.
Alignment is what is required. As you say, there must be a top down commitment to continuous improvement.
In some cases this means anticipating what is required and making sure that the standard does refelect this even in some simplistic way.
No matter how simple or complex the operation, recognised quality standards are a critical part of how a company operates and often subject to independant audit.
I am simply suggesting that changing the procedures is easier if the standard has that facility written into it otherwise even a small change can cause a problem because the standard itself is imutable.
This is an increasingly specialised area. There are many good web sites to visit on ISO 9000 and similar. If you don't have an ISO 9000 approval you may wish to anticipate it.
JMW
Eng-Tips: Pro bono publico, by engineers, for engineers.
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
Standards are more of an accounting tool in that they create a labor "bucket" in which to record relative cost. From this initial anchor point, you can review the efficiency of individuals (their output vs the "standard") and see the effects of efficiency improvement efforts such as those indicated in BillPSU's second post. A big "jump" such as changing from a bolted together assembly to a single casting provides the impetus to create a "new standard".
While I agree that a standard labor system is a poor vehicle for driving efficiency improvement, it is a useful way to account for and document the actual effectiveness of process improvement efforts.
Regards,
While I agree that a standard labor system is a poor vehicle for driving efficiency improvement, it is a useful way to account for and document the actual effectiveness of process improvement efforts.
Regards,
Time standard systems are generally non-value added activity. I've never heard of an end cutomer willing to pay for a time standard system.
Time standards used to set standard cost and for line balancing are important activities however measuring efficiency is a waste of resources if taken to the detail level. An example is a laser, plasma or flame cutting operation using nesting. I have seen plate nests which have contained 20 different components per sheet and each sheet having a different nest. Logging time to each part and each work order is worthless. You can at the end of the day log the quantity of each part produced and calculating the standard earned hours and the actual worked and come up with and overall efficiency.
Direct labor for most U.S. companies makes up less than 10% of the manufacturing costs. The last company I worked it was between 6-7%. Maintaining and updating small standard variations is not value added.
Quality standards are very important however ISO 9000 is not a quality standard. ISO 9000 is a paperwork standard. A company creates its individual quality manual which must contain certain ISO 9000 documented processes and then the company is audited on how it performs to its own quality processes. An example is an approved vendor list. An ISO 9000 auditor will veryify the list exists and is current and any changes have been proformed per the quality manual.
Time standards in general are management tools which if used incorrectly can add cost to your product. They are necessary to cost your product and for overall goal setting for the manufacture of a product.
Time standards used to set standard cost and for line balancing are important activities however measuring efficiency is a waste of resources if taken to the detail level. An example is a laser, plasma or flame cutting operation using nesting. I have seen plate nests which have contained 20 different components per sheet and each sheet having a different nest. Logging time to each part and each work order is worthless. You can at the end of the day log the quantity of each part produced and calculating the standard earned hours and the actual worked and come up with and overall efficiency.
Direct labor for most U.S. companies makes up less than 10% of the manufacturing costs. The last company I worked it was between 6-7%. Maintaining and updating small standard variations is not value added.
Quality standards are very important however ISO 9000 is not a quality standard. ISO 9000 is a paperwork standard. A company creates its individual quality manual which must contain certain ISO 9000 documented processes and then the company is audited on how it performs to its own quality processes. An example is an approved vendor list. An ISO 9000 auditor will veryify the list exists and is current and any changes have been proformed per the quality manual.
Time standards in general are management tools which if used incorrectly can add cost to your product. They are necessary to cost your product and for overall goal setting for the manufacture of a product.
I agree with BillPSU that time standards are generally a non-value added activity. They do however establish a benchmark for performance and improvement efforts. If I recall correctly, they fit one of the requirements for a goal in that they are simple and easily understood by all.
Some people maintain that the fact that a company establishes standards and consistently uses them can influence the overall performance by thirty percent or more.
Our company does not require continual updating of standards but adopted the guideline that updating is only necessary if it changes process time of a PRODUCT by ten percent or more. This gives me considerable latitude in deciding when to update standards.
This said,have we answered Ven's original question?
Griffy
Some people maintain that the fact that a company establishes standards and consistently uses them can influence the overall performance by thirty percent or more.
Our company does not require continual updating of standards but adopted the guideline that updating is only necessary if it changes process time of a PRODUCT by ten percent or more. This gives me considerable latitude in deciding when to update standards.
This said,have we answered Ven's original question?
Griffy
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question