The Lens of Reliability

During some of our recent reliability improvement implementations, I have noticed a phenomenon that I think might add some perspective and help with your implementations. I call it the "Lens of Reliability" but it could really effect any big deal change to an organization that is being made from within.
It is most obvious to me in the first 3-4 months of the improvement project. It is two ways of seeing your world. The first is from your current lens or as I will refer to it, your reactive lens. The second is the future lens or as I will refer to it the proactive lens. Why do these lenses matter? They matter because they effect your ability to create a best practice future state business processes. They matter because they effect your teams ability to see a clear future state. They matter because once you know they are there, you can call them out and deal with them and move forward more effectively.
Let me explain them in the context of a business process re-engineering session. You as the facilitator or leader are discussing that we need failure codes for all emergency work orders and a team member says "we cant do that. It will take to long to put that on all the work orders". That individual is looking through the reactive lens and they are seeing the problem from the current state. In their world they know that they have 100s of emergency work orders and they will never "get all the paper work done". We need them to look at it from the future perspective and see that if we do this, the system will reduce the number of emergency work orders through tools like root cause analysis, preventive (PM) and predictive maintenance (PdM). The data will drive the improvement and will get us to the new point where the systems supports the proactive lens. Here are some examples through each lens:

Reactive lens:

• I need a technician standing in every area waiting on a break down
• I need every spare part in the store room for the emergencies
• I need to limit time collecting data so I can get all the real work done.  

Proactive lens:

• Technicians work on planned and schedule work and don't just stand in the area waiting for a failure to happen and on top of that, more improvements and repair get completed reducing emergency and unplanned failures for the future.
• The storeroom inventory can be lower because we identify failures early with PM and PdM giving us time to order the parts for the planned and scheduled repairs.
• The data we collect allows us to identify reoccurring failures and eliminate, reduce or mitigate the failures reducing emergency work in the future. 

I hope this perspective helps with your implementation. When you see someone looking through the reactive lens don't be afraid to call it out, discuss it, and then determine the best path forward.  It will be hard at first but if you do not address it you will end up with sub-optimized processes and practices that do not support the future.

Choose the right lens!

You Can Implement Organizational Change without a Project Plan...

You can implement big deal organizational change without a project plan but experience tells us your implementation will be slower, it will meander off track, and it will include false starts all that will create what I call "change friction" or future resistance. No one wants more change friction than is already present naturally in a project.
As you are starting any implementation of a larger organizational change most sites or companies start with a gap assessment of some type then they look to close the gaps. It is a fairly simple process to get started. What happens next is where people diverge down different paths. Some build a comprehensive plan including all the task required to get from one level of performance to the next, others use the list of gaps as a check list and go after them one by one or in parallel. Some create a detailed plan but do not manage the implementation with it after the kick off and at least one organization believes you take off on your journey to increased performance and just discover your path along the way.
I will be honest and tell you that I don't enjoy Microsoft Project and Gantt charts and managing projects at the task level, but that does not mean that I don't (A.) see the value (B.) demand it with in the projects I am involved in, including the projects that are my personal responsibility. It comes down to dollars and cents, projects that have good project plans that are used consistently though out the implementation are less expensive to implement, provide results sooner, and have substantially less drama. I do hate drama.
So how do we build a good project plan to manage with? The Project Management Institute provides some great advice but here is a simple plan for creating plans:

First, take the gap assessment and list out the findings that you intend to address

Second, list any elements or task that will need to be in place before you can take the steps to close the gaps list. These are fundamental steps.

Third, add in the people and change management elements like a project risk identification exercise and then the risk and communication planning steps.

Fourth, look for natural order. What has to happen in what order to most effectively make the change occur. Link the task that must occur in a certain order.

Fifth, add in project management tools like metrics, resource requirements, and schedule them at appropriate points.

Last, be ready for change as this is a live document. You will add tasks as you discover them and you will change order of implementation due to unforeseen developments.

Now you are ready to manage the project. Stay on it! Track completion percentages. Share progress with the teams and the sponsors. Show project creep and time line extensions.

If you do even this simple level of project management you will see a faster project, with better results and less drama. If you still aren't sure you want to use a plan, then call me and I will share a few horror stories.

Laser Focused Turbo Implementation: Throwing the BS flag again

We live in a world where we are constantly sold silver bullets, magic pills, and laser focused turbo implementations. When in reality it takes focus, time, knowledge, and grit to implement organizational change. If someone promises you instant implementation, throw the BS flag. (If you don't have one let us know, we have plenty.) Real change takes more than a few weeks; no matter how many consultants you throw at it. Let's take a look at a traditional manufacturing reliability improvement initiative in each of these four areas.
First Focus: You need a vision to focus on and a plan to get you there. Chances are it will not be laser focused because reliability is a broad topic with may interdependent elements. For example, predictive maintenance without work processes is a fool's errand. 
Second Time:You need the time to train on the concepts and soak then train and soak again. You need the time to communicate the vision, focus, and the plan and then time for that to soak. You have to give the site the time to digest what is wrong with their current process before you can ask them to change to a new process. It all takes time. If anyone says they can generate meaningful organizational change in less than 6 months grab a flag.
Third Knowledge: Knowledge and "know how" speeds up the change process. You want to find it, consume it, and share it quickly. But even with a library of knowledge you need time to help the organization to absorb it and the others to put it to use.
Fourth Grit: Grit is the desire and fortitude to get things done even when it is hard. Organization change is hard. Really hard. Few are successful and a big reason is grit and gumption. If you have a vision, knowledge, and time but you don't have grit you will fail. It is that simple.
So in the end, don't look for silver bullets they are like seven day diets and 5 minute work outs, someone ends up fat and someone else ends up happy. If you are promised a quick fix or a turbo implementation throw that flag because you know that what is worth doing is worth doing right.

What Is In and Out In 2018: The Maintenance and Reliability Edition

As James Kovacevic and I sat around and talked about trends in Maintenance and Reliability going into 2018 we noticed that we could see some elements that had fallen out of favor in 2017 (at least in North America) and others that have become the hot new thing. Out of that became the list you see above. Many of the decisions have been driven by the return of manufacturing demand and the need to meet customer orders. For example, many organizations have lost focus on Mean Time Between Failure and have instead decided to focus on Mean Time To Repair. In other words, they are focused on getting the asset back up and running quickly and not preventing the failure from happening to start with or preventing it from reoccurring. Others have given up on truly planning jobs and PM task and instead are just guessing at a schedule or “filling” the hours available. Many organizations are driving toward the more reactive choices “in order to meet demand.” With the exception of the items with an asterisk above, the items on both sides are the right choices if they are applied at the right time. You need all of them working in concert as part of a comprehensive plan to increase up time, reliability, and throughput. If you would like help building a plan for your organization reach out to us and let us show you how others are progressing with all of the elements in the right order and at the right time and avoiding the temptation to chase the shiny new silver bullet.

Starting 2016 On A Course To Profitability: 8 "P" Processes that Produce Progress

Once again, it is that time of the year, when according to Forbes, 40 percent of us set off on a journey to change our lives with New Years Resolutions. Only 8 percent of us will be successful according to the same article. Ouch! So many of the companies that we interact with need profitability growth as their New Years Resolution. In today's post I have documented what we have seen from past successful growth companies.  I have referred to it as the Profitability Cycle. Take a quick look at each of the eight "P words" that drove their profitability process.
Starting with Probe, where they looked into past results and practices and measured their gaps through metrics and process checks. 
Once the probe phase is complete, they then Prioritized the principles and gaps using business case thinking. 
Next, they began to review the priority and they sequenced and linked the task to create a Plan for execution. They considered resources available and the relationships between the prioritized items. In some cases, they identified key items that must be completed in a certain order for success for the larger project. 
After the plan was ratified, they began to Promote the plan and explain the value to the larger population. They were very careful to explain both how it affects the individual as well as the benefits that should be expected. 
The made up word "Passionize" is there to convey how that now that the plan had been promoted. The leaders selected a group of people that had demonstrated a passion for each of the improvement areas within the plan. These selected people with passion were then given power to execute the principles of the plan and implement the results.  
As the passionate began to Progress with the plan, the site leadership measured progress against the plan and worked to remove barriers that could impede progress.
As barriers are identified by the leadership team or the passionate people, they go through a Problem Solving Process. Here, the passionate are looking for root causes while also looking at the business case for each of the solutions. 
Once the processes are pressure tested and problem solved, they are put into the full implementation phase known as Perform.  Here, the balance of the plant or facility is implemented, and they closely watched things like adoption and results. 
These results lead to the data that that could be used to probe and start another improvement cycle. 
The process based nature of the Profit Cycle helped to combat the enemy of improvement, which is referred to in the graphic as Pressure. Pressure existed in many forms all trying to keep the improvement from occurring. It could have been pressure to stay with the status quo or pressure to give in to political or emotional forces. 
This eternal spiraling process led to increased profitability and performance and more passionate people progressing. 
Does your improvement project have the points and processes presented? 
 

5 Questions for Making Financial Decisions within a Project

Guest Post: Making Financial Decisions within a Project is an exert from Darrin Wikoff book Centered on Excellence Return on Assets (ROA) is the indicator that supports the decision making process to determine which locations will receive capital investment from the Corporation, or additional market share as a result of their demonstrated efficiency. ROA is a very dynamic metric and works like a pendulum swinging from a fixed point based on fluctuations in net income or net assets. The idea is to create a balance by increasing revenue to offset the cost of consuming fixed assets (operating and maintaining), or reducing costs to improve margins per unit produced while reducing your net asset value through depreciation. When developing your Financial Strategy you need to ask yourself a few questions:

• At what point will capital improvements impact my ability to maintain costs at an economical level?
• At what point do my current costs overcome my ability to depreciate assets effectively?
• At what point is it no longer economical to maintain existing plant assets, therefore causing me to invest capital? 
• How much additional production volume is required to offset the impact of capital investment, assuming that the cost of maintaining these assets will remain constant or certainly not increase above current cost ratios? 
• At what point does market value impede my ability to offset costs and eliminate the possibility of capital investment as a viable solution?

 Two fundamentally bad financial models are those that focus narrowly on “cost cutting to prosperity” or “buying your way to success”. Neither of these strategies will sustain long-term benefits for your company.

Your Master Plan Meets My Needs! Let me tell you how.

Master planning our change initiatives is not always our favorite part of a new project but today I am going to show you why it is crucial to success when people are involved. You can forget this blog if your project does not affect people... which is approximately nearly never.
So the master plan or project plan is simple a list of task that need to be done to complete the project and reach the goals identified at the times required. To the left I have shown a performance change curve that I plan to use to show you how important it is to have this master plan and keep it up to date with progress and completion information. If you want to learn more about the curve click here. The basics are as follows:

1. Area I on the graphic is the area where people are excited about the "new" change and they typically produce a positive change in performance due to the Hawthorne Effect. Think of it as "What is important to my boss is important to me" so they get energized and do more. Those affected by this new change will need to know what the change is and how it is going to affect them. In this area the plan provides many of the answers around what this project is, what I need to do, and how it will affect me.  
2. Area II is the region that is the least fun. It is a valley of frustration and can be characterized as overwhelming. At this point you are trying to create and do the new way while still working with and in the old system. Everyday below the curve represents lost return on investment opportunity but this phase is a necessary part of the change process. At this point the affected people need the project broken down into small bite sized steps that are less overwhelming. A good project plan provides these small task and the sequence to keep them moving forward. 
3. Area III is where you return to the original level of performance but have not seen the real return on investment because of the time below the initial performance line.In this area the affected individual needs to be able to see concrete examples of their progress since the project is doubtfully generating large economic returns. Here we go back to our master plan and look at and celebrate all the small task that have been completed. The plan should have many completed items at this point and those become the results needed to drive the individual forward. 
4. Area IV is the area where you meet your performance goals and the return on investment really begins to build. At this point the master plan becomes a trophy of sorts. It shows what we have accomplished and can be used to show others how to follow in your path. This meets the needs of a person in this phase of change.
5. Area V is all about sustaining your progress and there the completed master plan highlights the areas that were big changes for the organization and need constant reinforcement through leadership and measurements. It also can be used by a person in this phase of the change to build an audit of sorts to sustain the change.

Five areas and Five ways to use the master plan to make your next project more successful. Good luck!