How to make production efficient
Efficient production (and indeed the enterprise) satisfies four simple requirements:
I will focus here on two of the four requirements:
Both these questions are brilliantly answered by Goldratt's Theory of Constraints, the study and implementation of which I have devoted to the last few years . This is such an enterprise management system. Primarily a manufacturing enterprise. The effectiveness of which is noted even by such “gurus” of production management as Toyota.
')
Laying the entire system in one post is impossible, but I will tell you about the principles. And if someone finds it necessary to study it more deeply, he will read the books of both Goldratt himself (“the very goal”) and the same Schragenheim (“production at an incredible speed”). I am sure that reading these books will give you the answer to the seemingly rhetorical question "How to make production efficient."
Why does it turn out that the “pure” time of production of a product and the actual period of production yield vary tens or even hundreds of times? Obviously, because there is a waste of time. They are of three types:
Imagine a production site. For example, a painting site. At the site always come some workpieces that need to be painted. The key question that needs an answer is: “what to paint now, and then what ?”
If this is not understood, then the blank that needs to be painted right now will, as luck would have it, lie at the bottom and remember about it when the customer beats hysterically that his product has already expired a week.
And it will be exactly the same at each site.
This is the expectation of the resource. The stock is waiting for the resource until it is free. But ... he is constantly busy with something else.
A system that clearly defines the sequence of tasks, must be literally at each production site. It must unambiguously determine which task should be carried out first of all, which one in the second, etc.
The order of tasks is determined by the complexity of the task and the date of the final product from the production. As the release date approaches, the importance of the task grows, and it moves up in priority.
Here you have a product. It consists of three nodes (which also consist of something): U1, U2, and U3. I will not draw, the artist from me is so-so. Especially since in the video I did depict him on the board. The product should be made 10.02.2013. On its final assembly need an hour. This means that 08-09.02.2013. (the exact date is determined by the combination of labor intensity and production factors) all three nodes must be on the final assembly section.
The presence on site of the final assembly of node U3 a month before is an absolutely undesirable phenomenon. This is worse than being late. Because, firstly, it does not affect the deadline for delivery of the finished product (there are no two other nodes), and secondly, it means that:
The ingenious Theory of Constraints not only speaks about what needs to be done at every moment, but also about what should NOT be done.
The production of node U3 should be linked to the date of its delivery. That is, from 08.02.2013. Depending on the complexity of this node, the date is set before which this node cannot be produced. And starting from this date, the node changes its color as the date X approaches. First, it is green, then yellow, then red. If 08.02.2012 has already arrived, and it has not yet been made, then it will be black.
At each site, all tasks must be performed in the reverse order. First black, then red, then yellow, then green. White tasks do not do at all.
Waiting for components is an even more unpleasant situation that can completely break all deadlines.
Take our notorious knots. Morning 08.02.2013 The collector is in place. U1 and U2 too. Y3 no. Where is he stuck - no one knows. The trial begins. It turns out that he is somewhere in the initial stage ... For the reason described above. So it will run the master of production, plugging such holes.
But waiting for nodes is not so scary. Much worse than the expectation of purchased components. Because, as a rule, the purchase takes much longer than the production itself.
I will not go deeper into procurement management, because I somehow wrote an article about it and even made a video . The main thing in procurement is to strictly observe the principles of priorities laid down in the Theory of Constraints. Always buy what you need and THEN when you need. Saving, thereby precious working capital.
I mentioned the loss in logistics in the video, and I regularly describe such things in my LJ . Genius Henry Ford in order to avoid these losses, for example, came up with a conveyor belt. A hundred years ago. To avoid losses in logistics, it is necessary to minimize the loss of time during the transfer of products from site to site.
There is another nuance. Production management system should be simple and sustainable. Resistant to external changes in the first place. I wrote about such changes here . Simplicity (external, of course) of the Theory of Constraints is that you always have to perform the top task, that is, the highest priority. You can not top, do the second above. Everything.
- Produces what the market needs
- Produces it well
- Produces it quickly and on time.
- Produces it with minimal effort.
I will focus here on two of the four requirements:
- how to produce quickly and on time
- how to produce with minimal cost
Both these questions are brilliantly answered by Goldratt's Theory of Constraints, the study and implementation of which I have devoted to the last few years . This is such an enterprise management system. Primarily a manufacturing enterprise. The effectiveness of which is noted even by such “gurus” of production management as Toyota.
')
Laying the entire system in one post is impossible, but I will tell you about the principles. And if someone finds it necessary to study it more deeply, he will read the books of both Goldratt himself (“the very goal”) and the same Schragenheim (“production at an incredible speed”). I am sure that reading these books will give you the answer to the seemingly rhetorical question "How to make production efficient."
Why does it turn out that the “pure” time of production of a product and the actual period of production yield vary tens or even hundreds of times? Obviously, because there is a waste of time. They are of three types:
- waiting for a resource
- waiting for components
- loss in logistics
Imagine a production site. For example, a painting site. At the site always come some workpieces that need to be painted. The key question that needs an answer is: “what to paint now, and then what ?”
If this is not understood, then the blank that needs to be painted right now will, as luck would have it, lie at the bottom and remember about it when the customer beats hysterically that his product has already expired a week.
And it will be exactly the same at each site.
This is the expectation of the resource. The stock is waiting for the resource until it is free. But ... he is constantly busy with something else.
A system that clearly defines the sequence of tasks, must be literally at each production site. It must unambiguously determine which task should be carried out first of all, which one in the second, etc.
The order of tasks is determined by the complexity of the task and the date of the final product from the production. As the release date approaches, the importance of the task grows, and it moves up in priority.
Here you have a product. It consists of three nodes (which also consist of something): U1, U2, and U3. I will not draw, the artist from me is so-so. Especially since in the video I did depict him on the board. The product should be made 10.02.2013. On its final assembly need an hour. This means that 08-09.02.2013. (the exact date is determined by the combination of labor intensity and production factors) all three nodes must be on the final assembly section.
The presence on site of the final assembly of node U3 a month before is an absolutely undesirable phenomenon. This is worse than being late. Because, firstly, it does not affect the deadline for delivery of the finished product (there are no two other nodes), and secondly, it means that:
- consumed parts that could be spent on something really necessary.
- place occupied.
- You have wasted money (on the production of this site). They should have been spent much later.
- resources were in vain (for the production of this node), and some NECESSARY node was waiting.
The ingenious Theory of Constraints not only speaks about what needs to be done at every moment, but also about what should NOT be done.
The production of node U3 should be linked to the date of its delivery. That is, from 08.02.2013. Depending on the complexity of this node, the date is set before which this node cannot be produced. And starting from this date, the node changes its color as the date X approaches. First, it is green, then yellow, then red. If 08.02.2012 has already arrived, and it has not yet been made, then it will be black.
At each site, all tasks must be performed in the reverse order. First black, then red, then yellow, then green. White tasks do not do at all.
Waiting for components is an even more unpleasant situation that can completely break all deadlines.
Take our notorious knots. Morning 08.02.2013 The collector is in place. U1 and U2 too. Y3 no. Where is he stuck - no one knows. The trial begins. It turns out that he is somewhere in the initial stage ... For the reason described above. So it will run the master of production, plugging such holes.
But waiting for nodes is not so scary. Much worse than the expectation of purchased components. Because, as a rule, the purchase takes much longer than the production itself.
I will not go deeper into procurement management, because I somehow wrote an article about it and even made a video . The main thing in procurement is to strictly observe the principles of priorities laid down in the Theory of Constraints. Always buy what you need and THEN when you need. Saving, thereby precious working capital.
I mentioned the loss in logistics in the video, and I regularly describe such things in my LJ . Genius Henry Ford in order to avoid these losses, for example, came up with a conveyor belt. A hundred years ago. To avoid losses in logistics, it is necessary to minimize the loss of time during the transfer of products from site to site.
There is another nuance. Production management system should be simple and sustainable. Resistant to external changes in the first place. I wrote about such changes here . Simplicity (external, of course) of the Theory of Constraints is that you always have to perform the top task, that is, the highest priority. You can not top, do the second above. Everything.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/168347/
All Articles