The 30-Inch View

Are you a Whack-A-Mole-Management Expert?

Think about the responsibilities of Health and Safety Manager/Technician/Team in an ergonomics process. Its typically answering the call of the people on the shop floor about an issue or following up during an injury investigation. Classic "Whack-a-Mole-Management"!

Douglas Ross writes in a recent blog post "Whack-a-mole is a popular carnival game in which you try to hit moles that pop up randomly on a board using a rubber mallet. Every time you hit a mole, you get a point. The objective is to get enough points to qualify for a prize. Its fun and people experience a high as pent-up energy is released by whacking the moles. The challenge of not knowing where the next mole is coming from adds to the excitement. Business whack-a-mole management is based on the same principles. The challenges are the 'moles'. As each challenge presents itself to managers, they hit it hard and fast with the hammer of position and conventional wisdom. Slam! They get one. Slam! They get another one. It requires lightning-quick decision making in a fast moving game called 'survival of the fittest'. It's exhausting, but it's also fun. Each night the players go home, knowing their job remains intact because they have successfully 'whacked' enough organizational problems to stay for another day."

Mr. Ross calls it excitement and H&S people may call it job security, but the financial people call it cost. Does it have to be this way, does H&S have to continually fight these fires (ok, moles), new product after new product? If the Health and Safety managers funneled these issues back to engineering and were involved in best practice sharing upstream, companies (YOUR Company) would begin to eliminate the engineering issues that result in ergonomic injuries.

It's up to you. Continue to whack the moles or start whacking your engineers and get involved early so they stop creating work environments that cause undo job stress and increased cost!

Hazardous design, silver bullets, and big bears...Oh My!

Last month, Shaun Sayers of the capable blog asked a question:

Do you have a "safe system of work or (are you) hazardous by design?"

  What spurred his thought was some whistle blower activity that suggests the volume of air traffic at London Heathrow is such that they are trying to land planes as close together as legally possible. He goes on to ponder that if a key to health and safety is to reduce risk, wouldn't you want to create a system that allowed planes to land as far apart as possible with the same volume?

That leads us to an article in yesterday's New York Times. David Pogue debates a solution to our own air traffic mess, the proposed ADS-B air traffic control system (dubbed NextGen) scheduled to be introduced in 2020. In the article, David quotes one of his readers (succinctly):

"David: I read your article on ADSB with great interest, as I have been an air-traffic controller for nearly 30 years. But please: before you encourage the spending of $20 billion, ask the F.A.A. to let you go to the Newark or LaGuardia towers any weekday from 3-6 p.m. You will quickly discover that providing more space in the air is not what is needed: it's concrete.

New York, Chicago, LA...they all need concrete. A runway can only have one airplane on it at a time. The backup is at the runways. It is very rare that aircraft have to hold in the air for any reason other than weather or airport capacity."

So, as we too often see, a Big Modern Technology Silver Bullet is thrown at a supposed problem, while the root cause is left unaddressed. No matter how many planes you can fit in the air (by the way, the three mile seperation mandated between aircraft is under a minute at 160 knots) you can only land one at a time.

What we're talking about is The Efficiency Conundrum (Thanks to Ron from LSS Academy). Apparent Efficiency is getting more planes safely in the air. True Efficiency is getting more planes safely on the ground at their destination. Another effect of apparent efficiency is often times it is the employee (in this case the air traffic controller) that gets the blame when the "fix" doesn't work.

Furthermore, after spending $20 billion (or some other ridiculously high number) management starts to feel confident while the real problem is still out there ready to bite!

Do you yell "BEAR!" or do you watch the carnage? Remember, you could be next!

airstrip photo credit: dweekly

Band-Aid or Inoculate?

This morning, I got my regular email from Get to the Point (from MarketingProfs - a marketing information source) and the article got me thinking. It's focus was a study from the Georgia Institute of Technology on how companies should respond when they receive negative online feedback.

It suggested two approaches:

Invite and Engage Strategy: "entails giving customers and employees a forum where they can air their grievances, be heard, and reach a resolution."

While this works, its reactive. Another problem with it is that you probably only hear one/tenth of the complaints.

Inoculation Approach: "endeavors to put in place the sorts of systems that prevent the injustices that lead to disgruntled employees and customers."                               

What does this have to do with The 30-Inch View?

It seems that most companies take the Invite and Engage Strategy when it comes to workplace injuries. So, not only are companies allowing people to get hurt, they're missing the people that are partially hurt and don't complain.

Hurt people = High Costs

Bad Work Designs = Hurt People, Poor Quality, Low Productivity

Wouldn't it be better to take the Inoculation Approach and look for high risk situations before they hurt people and drain productivity? Even better, design the risk out in the first place.

Is your company treating sick patients or are you inoculating your workforce against injury?




photo credits:  zmxncbv.com,  ninjapoodles

Lighting the Way to Lean

One of the main reasons that we started this blog was that it would be a central place for people with different backgrounds to meet and discuss how the workplace can be improved by concentrating on the intersection of people, work and the work environment; in other words, by taking a 30-Inch View. Last week we found Josh Kerst commenting on Lean in the field of pharmaceutical manufacturing. Today, we came across an article from late last year that has application well beyond the audience of the publication.

The article discussed an often over-looked factor when it comes to workstation design: lighting.

Josh pointed out that 85% of the information that humans gather comes through our eyes.

Poor lighting not only affects the quality of work and overall productivity, but inadequate lighting forces the worker to adopt awkward positions that may lead to back pain, eyestrain, fatigue, headaches, and other ailments.

Click HERE to read more on the subject.   

Check out the latest from Pharmaceutical Technology Magazine

While most of you aren't in the Pharmaceutical sector, Josh Kerst's recent article in Pharmaceutical Technology's online newsletter speaks broadly to anyone interested in Lean.

Manufacturing Improvements Begin with the Operator

By Josh Kerst

When seeking to increase productivity, companies must consider worker–machine and worker–materials interactions. These factors are easy to overlook, but they affect workers’ performance and health and a company’s bottom line.

Click here for the full text.

TSA and the Double-Diamond Lane: Are Behavioral Solutions Enough?

Recently, the TSA announced that it would be trying a new system to speed up the security check-in process at airports. The process will use different lines for travelers with varying degrees of travel expertise; similar to the labeling of ski runs. So, if you are an experienced business traveler that has already designed a system to  pull your laptop out with one hand while simultaneously kicking off your slip-on shoes, flipping them into the air and catching them in a bin with the other hand, and then adding your baggie of 3 ounce toiletries, you can enter the double diamond line. This will free you from having to sit on line behind the family vacationers who cannot fold their stroller to fit through the x-ray machine and whose children are afraid to walk alone towards the friendly screener (many of you have fit both of these profiles at one time or another).

Everyone in our company travels a lot, so this is a welcome improvement, if it works. I say IF because this strategy has a flaw as it will depend solely on people's choices and behaviors to speed things up.

If you travel as much as we do, you've had a lot of opportunities to observe the security process and have probably come to the same conclusion as I have; the lines aren't caused by behavior - they are a product of the poorly designed equipment that screeners and travelers have at their disposal.

Since the flow of people through that system is no different than products through a manufacturing plant, the application of ergonomic and industrial engineering principles could help immensely to minimize the cycle time required for each traveler and screener to complete their duties.

• Have a post-screen assembly area - how many times have you had to wait until someone finishes getting dressed before you can grab your bag and go? Removing assembly from processing (screening) allows those that need less assembly (dressing/bagging/etc.) to get through in real time.
• Have a pre-screen prep area that has a constantly replenished supply of bins - how often do you find yourself rushing to get all your stuff into bins because the table in front of the screener is too short? How easy is it to forget to remove something in that short period of time and therefore needing a rescreen (rework)?

Any other improvement thoughts?

Ford links good ergonomic job design to improved quality

A recent article in Industrial Engineer magazine highlighted that Ford has found a tremendous impact of good ergonomics job design on quality performance - 11% improvement versus an industry average of 2%.

Ford used human modeling software in the virtual manufacturing process to design jobs that are less physically stressful. The impact of ergonomic redesign at the project level has been documented many times, such as the case study from Corning Goose Creek, but this is a major finding on the impact good ergonomic job design can have at the enterprise level.

The link between good ergonomic job design - at the point where people, work, and environment intersect - is well understood but not well documented. We've compiled six ergonomic success stories that have resulted in quality impacts in What to Expect form a Successful Ergonomics Initiative - with an average impact of over $900,000. This is far higher than the average improvement project impact on either injury costs (nearly $200,000) or labor costs (over $300,000).

Average Dollar Impact of Ergonomics Improvement Projects

According to the article, Ford is the only North American automaker to use human modeling technology in this way. Sounds like it might be a great investment for companies that routinely replace their tooling as products are updated.

Live from AEC: Ergo Cup

One of the truly unique aspects of the AEC is the International Ergo Cup Competition. Each year, ergonomics teams from around the world put their innovative workplace ergonomics solutions head-to-head to claim the coveted Ergo Cup.

The goal of this competition is to recognize and encourage the development of innovative ergonomics solutions and education in the workplace. From training programs to engineering solutions, the competition comes from all sectors and includes companies both large and small. Any organization that can demonstrate an effective ergonomics project that took place in the preceding 24 months is eligible.

    Who does Josh like so far?

Hammering to Hydraulics: GE Energy - Bangor ME
This motivated group faced the problem of routinely hammering buckets (i.e., blades) into place around a turbine with incredible force and high precision and then ring the process to move them around the entire circumference of the unit. They were wearing out people and even the brass hammers couldn't keep up. One of the team members talked about a process they call "Try Storming" where they didn't just suggest ideas, they tried them. They tried tooling from the concrete leveling world to vibrate the buckets in place. No luck. Then they modified the tooling on a second try and still no dice. Finally, the team came up with a simpler answer. Use a sliding wedge plate attached to a hand pump hydraulic pack to move the buckets. Bingo! No more hammering and the ring process was eliminated. Just a few hand pumps and the work is done. How did the team feel about their effort? Scott's response was classic Maine, "Pretty wicked cool, eh?" One twentieth the physical effort in a third of the time...pretty cool!

Center Panel Fixture: Honda of Canada Manufacturing - Alliston, Ontario Canada
While people love their car entertainment systems, the line associates at HCM didn't feel quite the same way.  The Civic in-dash systems required multiple handling of the 20 pound units while working on all four sides of the product during sub-assembly prior to installation (and don't scratch the LCD face or finished surfaces or its scrap). Two line leaders (Mark and James) described their improvement project. A five-access gyro fixture was made in-house to support the unit during assembly. They then used roller mechanisms and nylon guides to support part entry and exit and a brilliant cam action tilting mechanism ensured correct posture when the part is rotated. The results are impressive:

• 67% reduction in part rejections
• 100% associate acceptance
• 70% reduction in line side space for the workstation
• 8 second cycle time reduction
• Under $10k in development costs, nearly $100k in annual savings

Who were the key players according to Mark and James? "If this project were a hockey game (spoken like true Canadians), our 3 stars would be:

1. The line associates - they knew the process best and gave real world feedback
2. Line supervision - At HCM supervisors are shoulder to shoulder with the associates and this was critical as the team tried out new ideas. Quality concerns  communicated directly to line management led us to the problem and ergonomics assisted us in developing the right countermeasures to mitigate the solution
3. Senior Management - they kept the faith in the team as we learned from the process and developed. Now we can put these learnings to work in this Honda, the next Honda, and all new Hondas.

More tomorrow....