An extreme focus on impact and flow to optimise the production process.
The pilot project was an overarching project covering the two major tracks: 1) enabling sales and development to calculate true costs and evaluate fair market prices as well as 2) establishing a baseline in production in order to start building true performance management capabilities.
On the sales side, the project aimed at refining pricing models to go from cost plus pricing to value-based pricing, as well as refining the understanding of the cost base to evaluate more precisely the investment cases of new products and profitability of existing products.
On the production side, the aim was to establish the grounds for a more efficient production with higher Overall Equipment Efficiency (OEE) across products and machines. In order to measure and improve OEE, a crucial part of the project became buying and installing an IT system called Visiolog. The objective of Visiolog was to improve the productivity by enabling better communication across the company, between sales and production planning as well as internally in the production team. Several issues between sales and production planning were of concern, as sales orders kept being delayed due to a wide range of problems - including misalignment of available capacity, allocation of machines and operators, and raw material supply.
Impact case: To achieve the highest potential impact, the project was kicked off with an impact case workshop where four key deliverables were selected from a wide selection of potential areas of interest. The four deliverables were selected based on the on-hand issues of productivity and lack of clarity regarding product portfolio profitability. The final target was aimed at laying the foundation for a continuous improvement culture in the organization to allow the short-term impacts to be integrated into the day-to-day work and to ensure future improvements.
Impact Solution Design: The project took the most critical issues and sought to resolve them as early as possible in the project. Starting with pricing and cost calculation models, clarifying the processes between sales and production planning as well as starting data collection on particular machines and working on Supplier, Input, Process, Output and Customer (SMED) for the most critical product.
Pulse Check: To keep the project on track and have the key stakeholders on board, extensive workshops were planned every two weeks. Here the key stakeholders were updated on the result of the previous sprints. Also the workshop was used as a workday to initiate the next two-week sprint.
Allocate core team +50%, assure co-location with visual plans and heartbeat: Due to resource constraints, the core team was not available +50%; however, on days that could be cleared in the schedule, the project team was co-located and worked together from the same room, bringing the project members into a shared space from their usual offices. The project plan was updated for each meeting and printed on large posters to track progress. The heartbeat of the project was the two weeks between the workshops.
Active project owner: The project owner was actively involved from project launch and the key resource in half of the project focusing on cost calculations and pricing. Being key responsible for the overall project, potential issues would be presented to the project owner for swift resolution, and to keep the project moving forward.
Local translation of ownership: To get the Half Double approach to kick in, the project owner was actively engaged in the project and the local team owned the responsibility for the project – including decision-making and executing the joint decisions made by the management team at the bi-weekly workshops.