Is Your Documentation Lean?
Organizations that want to become and/or maintain successful must continually evaluate all of their processes to assure alliance with their objectives in an increasingly competitive business environment. However, most of the time, process documentation is neglected and is left to be reformed later.
We know of organizations that have ignored proper process documentation and, as a result, have lost more than $1,000,000 in business and/or have incurred more than $1,000,000 in Cost of Poor Quality (Rejections, Sorting, Rework).
The purpose of any document should be defined in terms of its intended use, such as:
- Training (handouts)
- Set-up
- Manufacturing Process
- Human Resources/Legal
When created, the documents should be clear and user-friendly, such as:
Visual Documents/Charts
Flow Charts
Check Lists
Text
The level of knowledge and education should be taken into consideration when developing a document. Successful organizations recognize the role of documentation and proper training in reducing the costs of variability and rework. However, most organizations fall into some of the same traps, time and time again.
 |
Documents (manuals, forms, work instructions)
that are wordy and hard for the user to understand and use. |
|
Documents which are missing critical information |
|
Document which fail to meet requirements |
|
| Documents which are either unknown or ignored |
There are times when your people know exactly what to do, but the creation of a document (such as a checklist) would be considered a safeguard - thus ensuring that proper procedures are followed.
There is a direct correlation between the level of education and training to the level of documentation needed. The higher the level of education and training of the employees - less documentation is needed. The premise is applicable throughout the organization. For example, Tool Room Technicians seldom need any documentation, but rather they need a print, which gives them the necessary details of the proposed tool.
Ford's New Tooling Policy Shifts Burden...
Ford Motor Company's new tooling policy is shifting the burden to suppliers to do a better job of sourcing the molds, dies, fixes and other specialized equipment used to make commodity-type auto parts.
Beginning January 1, 2000, the policy will cover all tooling orders and repairs less than $20,000. Suppliers will be able to recover the cost of tooling in the prices they receive for those parts. The Supplier Owned Tooling Strategy is set to begin with the 2003 model year.
"We think the suppliers will buy the tools smarter than us and reduce our costs and theirs." a Ford spokesman said.
One upshot of the new tooling strategy is likely to be a scramble by suppliers to find the cheapest tooling possible - since they won't be able to simply break out tooling costs and pass them on directly to Ford.
In an internal memo, Ford suggests that suppliers may "get the benefit of procuring their tools from countries with weaker currencies and leverage this opportunity to achieve piece price targets." "That sounds fine on paper, but shifting tooling sources offshore can add risk and cost to a supplier's business" said Louis Papp, a consultant to the Canadian Association of Moldmakers in Winsor, Ontario. "Currency fluctuations alone can remove any cost advantage on some jobs," he said.
Traditionally, suppliers charged Ford for tooling by passing on the direct cost to the auto maker. Ford then retrained ownership of the tools and carried their value on its books. Retaining ownership of tooling - and control over parts production - has been viewed as something akin to a birthright by auto maker executives for decades.
Under the new policy, tooling costs for certain parts (mostly commodity-type components) will be shifted to the supplier, which will fold these expenses into engineering-related overhead. The suppliers will own the tools and production because of the labor strike or some other interruption of business.
Ford will retain ownership of tooling for parts it views as critical to the design or function of its vehicles. These include tools built to produce body panels and moldings, instrument panels, engine castings and wheels.
Source: Rubber & Plastics News, March 8, 1999
QS-9000 Survey
1998
Conducted by AEC International, Inc.
AEC International, Inc. recently conducted a survey of QS-9000 registered companies. The chart below reflects the responses on the question of hours spent on documenting their system (policy, procedures, work instructions, forms). Note that companies have spent between 1,000 to 8,000 hours in developing the same.
More than 50% reported that current documentation is bureaucratic, not user friendly, collecting dust & unused by the staff. It was created simply to meet QS-9000 requirements. The data indicates companies have spent between $20,000 and $250,000 developing their documentation.
