1 / 26

NE Process Industry Productivity Benchmark 2009

NE Process Industry Productivity Benchmark 2009. 10 th March 2010. Companies Involved. Benchmark Process. Word Models Performance “Change” Since 2006 Personal Interviews. Sectors Covered. Unit Cost Energy Cost OEE Quality Performance Engineering Productivity. Safety Performance OTIF

Download Presentation

NE Process Industry Productivity Benchmark 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. NE Process Industry Productivity Benchmark 2009 10th March 2010

  2. Companies Involved

  3. Benchmark Process • Word Models • Performance “Change” Since 2006 • Personal Interviews

  4. Sectors Covered

  5. Unit Cost Energy Cost OEE Quality Performance Engineering Productivity Safety Performance OTIF Stock Turns Supplier OTIF Areas Investigated

  6. Orientation !

  7. Minimum Maximum Lower Quartile Upper Quartile Median Outputs • Word Model Pie Chart • Performance … Box and Whisker Plot

  8. A Unit cost is not used as a metric by the business to improve the total cost of manufacture. B Unit cost is calculated and tracked by Accounts department but not widely available or used. C Management track unit cost and use the metric to align all departments. Emphasis is on achieving the correct balance between cost and plant performance. D All employees understand the concept of Unit Cost and are actively involved in activities that are focused on total control of manufacture. Unit Cost Performance

  9. Unit Cost Performance

  10. A The company has informal systems to monitor energy usage. Ad hoc monitoring occurs usually in response to high / low values often flagged up by Accounts Group. B The company actively manages its energy usages and takes steps to minimise losses at all levels of manufacture. C The company can demonstrate an ‘Energy Balance’ approach to the use of energy with usages fully identified and measured. D The company works both with Suppliers and Customers to reduce the overall environmental impact of the Supply Chain by optimising energy usage and recycling materials. Evidence of shop floor led teams leading energy reduction activities. Energy Cost Performance

  11. Energy Performance

  12. A There is limited formal monitoring of the key plant performance against “Best Achieved” B There is formal monitoring of the key plant performance metrics but the information is not widely circulated or briefed within the plant. C The formal data is monitored and circulated within the plant and is used by management to identify opportunities to take the business forward in line with the business strategy. D The data is generated and owned by the shop floor teams, displayed at their workstations and used by them to improve plant performance and eliminate defects in line with the business strategy. OEE Performance

  13. OEE Performance

  14. A No formal systems are used to monitor supplied quality rate. Ad-hoc monitoring occurs usually in response to customer issues. B There is a formal quality procedure is used for monitoring quality. C A quality system with regular external auditing is used for capturing issues and uses internal management review and action plans. D The business uses an appropriate quality system with regular external auditing as part of its business strategy. The operation uses appropriate tools with work groups capturing and using data and information to improve performance. Quality Performance

  15. Quality Performance

  16. Safety Performance 2009/2008

  17. Positives Measurement and control Alliance and Gain share contracts In-house Teams Commitment to improve Negatives Getting worse Poor investment at planning stage Poor quality leadership and supervision Skills shortage (still) Engineering Productivity

  18. OTIF Stock Turn Supplier OTIF 80% uptake. Little differentiation Low in Speciality and Pharma Sector NPIs skew data 20% uptake Improves when measured Others

  19. Engagement with the Public Sector • 70% productivity support • 40% energy support + Engagement leads to Improvement! - Resource …

  20. Overall Performance

  21. Overall Performance

  22. Conclusions - Strengths

  23. Conclusions - Weakness

  24. Conclusions - Opportunities

  25. Conclusions - Threats

  26. Next Steps • Workshops …

More Related