|
|
|
07/09/2012 02:18 PM
|
|
|
Hello Message Board,
I just started working for a company whose Lean Manager retired a few years ago. Since that time, some of the Lean programs, including 5S have slipped a bit.
As I look to re-implement the program, I've spent some time researching the different stages of 5S and some case studies on how other companies have taken on the challenge.
What I noticed, is that there is a portion of people who feel that 5S audits (or audits in general) are not the most effective way for sustaining and measuring the program. Some point to the way the audits are set up (one size fits all), or the scoring system (are we driving the right behavior). Some don't like audits and scores at all and look to measure effectiveness through reduced cycle time or variation, or scoring the number of times an operator looks for a tool.
Do any of you forum members have any experience with alternatives to audits that may (or may not) have been successful? I would be interested in hearing different approaches and why they did or didn't work.
Thanks in advance,
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
07/10/2012 09:27 AM
|
|
|
Joe,
Good question, our company has performed 5S audits for about 4 years and could find another option that maintains the same level of sustainably. We have made the auditing process easier by continually removing unnecessary items and performing the audits on a less frequent basis.
I'm also curious on the feedback...
Regards,
Rick
|
|
|
|
|
07/10/2012 12:31 PM
|
|
|
One thing I always convey is even though we do assessments to confirm 5S scores, it's really not about 5S. It's about running the business better. 5S is just one of the many Lean tools that we use to help get us there.
|
|
|
|
|
07/13/2012 11:33 AM
|
|
|
Good Day Unibrow,
In response to ur post, I have been doing 5S audits for about six months directly on the shop floor, unfortunately I did not see the results I was hoping for. After doing some thinking about the auditing process i was following I saw some crutial mistakes I was making, firstly my audit check sheet was too broad thus took a long time and restricted the frequency of auditing to once a week.
Also I focused on to too large a area to be effective.
Thirdly I was holding the shift team leader responsible while conducting the audits with her, and hoping that she would motivate the team members.
Please note that no lean projects had ever been attempted before so culture change is still a huge factor... I had to make some drastic changes to the audit process.
1. I condensed the audit to 5 simple questions and assigning 2 points per question, thus operators can get a score out of 10.
2. I audit each team member individually, thus holding each person accountable for thier own space, and creating fierce competions not only between shift but also within the shift.
3. Becuase the audit is so simple it takes roughly 20-30 min which increase frequency of audits.
The results have been tremendous (please note that shift sizes range between 15-20 people, thus this solution might not be feasible in larger companies).
|
|
|
|
|
07/13/2012 02:33 PM
|
|
|
I'm sure there is a catch all answer to your question. I do beleive we do have to measure ourselves as to the affectiveness of the program and there are many ways to do this. As lean leaders and decision makers we need to have close understanding to the current state of our lean culture environment. For example, if you are just starting 5S in a culture in which 5S is new, frequency of auditing should be the norm as you instill the correct behaviors and expectations. Start-up 5S programs need audit frequency to set in place consistancy and sustain our standards. It keeps everyone sharp, on task, and sends a consistent message of expected performance. On the other hand, as our 5S programs develop and mature for the better, I see no problem pulling back on frequency or changing our audit/scoring methods as long as our 5S standards are being met (change can be good). As I said, it really depends on how developed your program is. A couple of other words: Keep the system simple and practical. Also remember there isn't a right or wrong way to do this....it really comes down to what works you and your company and at the end of the day are you meeting the standards you have set for yourselves.
|
|
|
|
|
07/17/2012 11:49 AM
|
|
|
Hi Everyone,
My philosophy when it comes to 5S audits is that they shouldn't take more than 5 minutes to complete. If they take longer than that either the audit area is too large or the 5S was flawed in the first place. A quick glance is all the area should need to know if something is missing or out of place.
Perhaps we put too much emphasis on paper audits, could we not allow operators in that area simply to colour a square on a whiteboard to show their area was all good? I guess the answer to this depends on the culture in the workplace, we are not quite there yet but maybe one day. In the mean time I take time to lead and coach 5Sers so the areas are easily organised and hence easily audited. If an audit takes too long the likelihood is it won't get done properly or even at all.
Woudl love to hear of a more holistic approach to ensuring 5S areas stay looking good.
|
|
|
|
|
07/17/2012 03:01 PM
|
|
|
Hi Joseph
Personally I feel that the 5S Audit never disappears, but overtime it should become part of every shift change, and should be performed by the worker coming on duty. These 5S audit though shorter and quicker rarely even 5 minutes, do more to ensure the sustaining 5S than do occassional audit by outsiders. Just like with financial audits results can be explained away. But repeated daily results reveal real quickly if someone is trying to take advantage of the system, and who is failing to pull their weight.
I have seen dozens of comopanies that hold 5S audits weekly and monthly, and yet they never manage to stop the shift supervisor that push off cleaning the machines to the next shift to pad their production numbers. Yet with the short every change audit these guys get caught within the first week. One day can be explained, but everyday is just plain failure.
Trying shifting who handles the audit first and making it simple enough to do between each shift change. At some distant future point in time when culture within the industry maintains and demands 5S be done maybe then audits will not be needed, but utopia doesn't currently exist, so work to move them and design them to do the most good.
Good Luck
Robert Drescher
ELSE Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
07/17/2012 03:01 PM
|
|
|
I have to disagree with Nicola on this one.
5S isn't just about neat and tidy, it's really about Standard Work. If someone knows how you can go into an area (especially an office area) and confirm that Standard Work is at a certain 5S level, please share it with us.
|
|
|
|
|
07/17/2012 04:28 PM
|
|
|
I forgot the "in 5 minutes" part. My bad.
|
|
|
|
|
07/18/2012 12:46 PM
|
|
|
In an ideal world 5S audits wouldn't exist or have to exist, because as problems (waste) surfaced the employee(s) would tackle the problem immediately applying a countermeasure that ultimately made some improvement to the standard. This takes a solid level of self-discipline to be successful.
I believe audits are clearly not value added, but necessary until the above level of self-discipline is attained and a culture of continuous improvement inherently exists. This is no easy task and is why my company still performs audits. To lead employee(s) to that level of discipline requires ground work in learning, understanding and applying the basics of the 5S theorem. The audits that my company performs attempt to drive that type of behavior, but admittedly don't seem to be accomplishing the goal as fast as most would like. We constantly revisit our audit practices and look for improvements that will get us closer to the dream state.
I haven't seen a method other than audits that drive toward that desired behavior.
From my experience the leadership aspect of the 5S theory is paramount. I've seen work areas where management took the 5S theory seriously and they have excelled beyond expectations. Why? Because if it's important to the leaders, it's important to their crews. If the management ranks have a nonchalant attitude about 5S, they will instill that behavior into their crews and lose their most valuable asset toward improving their business. This is a hard concept to get across to managers because it takes time to develop employees and they typically want results right now.
Now, thinking out loud, I could see audits disappear rather quickly from 'non-advocate' or 'outside' auditors if management were willing to take on the role of teaching their employees 5S, ensuring their employees understand 5S and helping them apply the 5S principles everyday. This would be one step closer to the dream state of performing the improvements at the lowest possible level of the organization with the guidance of a teacher using the scientific method.
This isn't meant to be a bash on management. It's not easy to manage, teach and guide a crew on a 5S journey while constantly worrying about your production numbers. But, if done properly would make the managers job much easier and allow even more time to focus on other improvement activities.
Just some food for thought. I don't think I have an answer for your question.
|
|
|
|
|
07/19/2012 10:01 AM
|
|
|
I totally agree Mark. You descirbe our current 5S situation to a T. I'm new here and I have found that up until now the 5S audits dangled over the associate's head like a large knife on a tiny string. If their department recieved 2 audit scores under 90% within a 4 week period they would get a 10% pay reduction.... As a result the auditors fudged the audit scores to avoid the penalties and the 5S condition continued to suffer as a result. I have my work cut out for me.
|
|
|
|
|
07/19/2012 12:01 PM
|
|
|
Patrick,
You are right, you do have your work cut out for you. To me docking pay for not meeting a number is a morale killer, and it encourages behavior like you have described.
Unfortunately, unless your leadership understands what 5S is REALLY about (see my previous post), then this will probably continue. Lean is about respect for people, and the beating your associates into submission on the part of your leadership is certainly not showing respect.
Good Luck,
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
07/23/2012 01:47 PM
|
|
|
Thank you for all of the input.
It sounds like audits are going to be necessary as I look to measure our 5S system for effectiveness. Perhaps when 5S isn't an effort and instead is part of our culture I can look for alternatives to auditing.
Thank you all again.
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
07/23/2012 05:00 PM
|
|
|
Like Ken I would like to see a realistic way to check 5S in an office setting, since today most of the office mess is neatly hidden on computers. If you have every looked at any computer file systems the mess you find even on very neat ones is tremendous. And offices also have all those drawers and files and it would surpirse people just how bad they really can be.
Last time I went through and 5Sed a computer it took 4 days, and we cleared 30% of the used memory, and all we did was eliminate duplicate files and useless garbage from the file system.
Anyone got any good ideas for 5S Audits in offices please share them.
Robert Drescher
ELSE Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
08/06/2012 11:19 AM
|
|
|
Scanning through the postings for this topic, I noticed that almost everyone use the term "audit"; only Ken saw it as an "assessment". This may sound like linguistic pickiness but there is a world of difference between the two. I was an auditor in a previous life, and I can remember how much people feared what I was doing and what I would discover. Yes, when I was part of a Lean team we did measure progress, but I made sure that the people who had done the hard work new I was assessing their progress not auditing it. In this way you are more likely to gain their cooperation, and they are more likely to sure you both their progress and any shortcomings. Trust is extremely important!
I may be wrong, but the term audit also suggests, to me, that the leadership has not fully understood the true spirit of Lean. When 5S progress is measured through audits there is a whiff of Command & Control. It also suggests that the "leaders" have not done their homework, nor have they explained why 5S is a win-win for both the individual and the organisation. There were some post that suggested that the main purpose of 5S was to present a neat and tidy workplace to any passing CEO, Royalty, or local dignitary. I could accomplish this by having an enforcing a "clean-desk" policy but this would have a huge impact on the efficiency of the people and the process.
5S works best when the people who are being assessed appreciate that its goal is making the workplace work for the worker, and not the other way round. Lean leaders should also accept that any lack of progress, or slipping back from progress made, is a reflection on their capabilities as true Lean leaders. It does take time for all of us to shed our old bad habits and to grow and nurture the new good (hopefully) ones. Any supervisor, manager, CEO who does not understand this should not be put in charge of a whelk stall, let alone a Lean journey.
|
|
|
|
|
08/09/2012 10:36 AM
|
|
|
I actually toured a company where 5S audits were performed by peers in another department (rotating, I believe) and audit results were coupled with assignments given to specific associates, not just leaders. Results were posted large and clear on radar diagrams with the finding and plans for improvement. Weekly I believe. If you do not take time, it will never happen.
This all HAS to be coupled with the attitude that there will always be room for improvement so tying this with pay or performance is damning, and what goes around comes around, so be fair and honest in both giving and receiving feedback. The goal is improvement. Its all about how the program is implemented by the management.
The suggestion of NOT auditing I will disagree with - we need the Check in the PDCA cycle for any learning to take place, here and everywhere.
PS this company was a clear quality leader in the power train business, with a wall full of awards from customers and journals alike.
|
|
|
|
|
08/09/2012 10:36 AM
|
|
|
I completely agree with the different view on the two words, although by definition they are very similar.
I have also been an 'auditor' and it's amazing how people put up a brick wall when that word comes out. It sparks an immediate defensive stance on their position, even if you have very good intentions of providing them positive, constructive feedback on a process or whatever else you're auditing/assessing.
I used the word audit in my previous post because that's what the original topic was titled and inquiring about. However, in my work area we use the term '5S assessment' for the exact reason you brought up. An assessment tends to be more passive and less aggressive, whereas an audit tends to be more aggressive in the view of the people involved in the process/area you're looking at. I think this stems from audits typically being associated with punishment or corrective action for failures while assessments just provide feedback on how to improve any noted failures.
Owen makes a great point. Definitely take Owen's advice about using the words carefully. Even if you call it an assessment, but treat the situation as an audit you will immediately lose face with those employees and that is near impossible to gain back in my experience.
|
|
|
|
|
08/09/2012 07:10 PM
|
|
|
lean is all about continual improvement and need coaching rather than audit. By coaching learner will improve , learn and adapt. As mike rother explains in his book 'Toyota Kata" improvement routines and coaching routines with short PDCA cycles are very important for adaptativeness and superior results.
VN
|
|
|
|
|
08/10/2012 05:24 PM
|
|
|
When I took over my operation, its 5S was non-existent - I had to implement a plant wide 5S system as my core mission. I gave my shop leaders a brief education and introduction to 5S, and then gave them an initial checklist with the ability to self audit once per week, a weekly performance board, and I included a short presenation they could give to their teams as a process of educating the shop floor. I met with the shop leaders quarterly to make adjustments to the checklist and make other changes as required. We evolved the system to expand the self-audit role to workers on the shop floor to conduct the audits in a bottom up approach and give them an opportunity to identify concerns and to make recommendations for improvements to the shop leaders in the form of corrective action reports. The other change is we established a rotation so the auditors would audit a different area every two weeks. It allowed the shop leaders to take a leadership role, it allowed the workers to have a voice and make meaningful changes, and it really started having an impact on the shop floor overall, as the auditors improved at their roles, they started seeking out opportunities for improvement beyond just cleanliness such as labeling, floor striping, secondary containments, use of PPE, build up of excessive queues. And the shop leaders started launching Kaizen events - mini Kaizens at first on their work cells and areas. I would include these acheivements in their performance reviews. In this fashion, I made the audit a part of the system, less threatening and a method for the shop lead to build their team's knowledge and skill in Lean, and an opportunity to "empower", the worker in making meaningful change.
|
|
|
|
|
08/10/2012 05:24 PM
|
|
|
To answer Joseph's questions,
My company has been on the LEAN journey for 8 years and counting. It all started with 5S and a skeptical work force (400+ employees). Our 5S efforts involved 93 different events with 398 different employees utilized in these events. We started to see the culture change during these 22 months of 5s'ing. The goal was to give ALL in the organization a stake in the game. To continue this goal, we developed our sustain "audit" system to include as many people as possible at one time. People included means from the CEO/owner to the individual sweeping the floor every night, all shifts.
Currently we audit 33 different areas (this includes the entire building, manufacturing and office) and utilize 2 auditors and one contact person for each area. Neither auditors are from the functional area they are auditing and the contact person is a team member from the area being audited. These roles area rotated (new people in) approximately every 15 weeks.
Audits are done once every 3 weeks (for the 15 week cycle). Each audit takes 20 minutes or less. Audit sheets are posted in the areas (showing good and not so good results). Audit scores are turned into the LEAN office. All scores are posted every 3 weeks to the entire company. Race results are posted and a winning team is crowned every audit race.
This all comes down to PDCA. We have found over the past 8 years, that if we do not check on a regular basis, our results get worse. If we checked more often that 3 week intervals there was no change. We make adjustments to our system every 16 weeks as needed.
Our results speak for themselves. Our building is more organized (not just clean and tidy) than ever before. We are always visit and tour ready. When areas are below the average, it is apparent to everyone that walks through that area. Our safety numbers have improved and are at an all time high. We clean the building with 1/3 the personnel in 1/3 the time required from 8 years ago.
Bottom line, we involve as many employees as possible each year in this process and it has helped changed the culture. Each team wants to win the race everytime out. We don't pay incentives any more to the winning team. Pride in winning seems to be the motivator.
Sounds simple, but simple works. The results speak for themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
>
Community >
Forums
Send to a Friend
