Having problems with message search?
(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)
(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+) S.M.I.L.E(sm)
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+) Setup Minimization Improves Line Efficiency
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+) The Lean Changeover e-letter
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+) Published monthly by Changeover.com
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+) Written by John R Henry, CPP
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)
(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)
###############################
###############################
###
### DECEMBER 2005
###
###############################
###############################
============================================================
This newsletter is a free service of Changeover.com. Visit our website at
http://www.changeover.com or contact us at
john@...
Please feel free to forward this newsletter to anyone you think might be
interested
To subscribe send a blank e-mail to: quickchangeover-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To unsubscribe send a blank e-mail to:
quickchangeover-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Past issues are indexed and archived at www.changeover.com/newsletter.htm
=============================================================
SOME THOUGHTS ON...
EFFECTIVE TRAINING
The most wonderful changeover reduction program will accomplish nothing unless it is successfully implemented. As Peter Drucker says in "The Effective Executive": "Unless a decision has 'degenerated into work' it is not a decision; it is at best a good intention". This holds true of a changeover program as well, until it has been put into action, it is only a good intention.
A quick changeover program will generally be implemented, in large part, by the line operators and mechanics. In order for them to do this, they must be trained. They must know what they are supposed to do and how they are supposed to do it. They do not get this knowledge by osmosis, it must be taught.
One good way of training on changeover is by having the mechanics and operators involved in developing the improvements. In this way, they will be in on the ground floor and will understand the reasoning behind the improvements. Two other advantages are that they usually have a lot of knowledge that can useful in developing the program and, by being on the development team, they get a feeling of "ownership".This will translate into improved motivation when it comes time to implement.
Even if they are involved in the program development, additional training will probably be required.
One of the key areas of training is to be sure that the training fulfilled it's purpose of implementing changes in the way things are done. Donald Kirkpatrick, in 1979, developed a 4 level model for evaluating training:
Level 1-Reaction-This is the most basic and can be defined as how well the attendees liked the training. One might say that whether they liked it or not is unimportant. In one sense, this is right, we are paying people to be trained. If they don't "like" the training, in the sense that they find it interesting and useful, there will be several negative effects. The most important of these is that they will simply turn their minds off. No learning will take place. In the worst case, they may form a strongly negative view of the entire reason behind the program. Eg; They don't "like" the trainer, thus the whole concept of changeover has to be a dumb idea. This negativity can have a terrible effect not only on the person themself but on those around them.
It is important that training programs be developed in such a way that they catch and hold the interest of the attendee.
Level 2-Learning-Did the attendee actually learn anything new from the training? Are they more knowledgeable coming out that they were going in? If we are training them on a new way to set up a filling machine, for example, do they understand how it is supposed to be done?
Level 3-Behavior-Ok, so they went to the training and it was interesting enough to keep them awake. We have interviewed or tested them and find that they actually assimilated the knowledge. We are satisfied that they now know the new and improved method of filling machine set-up. This knowledge, in and of itself, does not do us much good unless it is put into practice. The question we must answer is "Is the trainee using the new technique?" If not, the training may have been a waste of time.
There are a number of reasons why, although they know and understand the new method, they stick with the old one. These reasons may include internal ones such as simply being resistant to change or not believing that the new method is better or they may be external. If we do not supply the tools to implement the new techniques, the trainee will be forced to continue as before. When we find that training has not resulted in a change in behavior, we must find the reasons for this and correct them.
Level 4-Results-When we train people on new techniques, it is because we believe that the new techniques will be better in some way. Continuing with the example of setup of the filler, we have developed a new technique which should reduce the amount of downtime. There will be cases where, the trainee has gone through the training, understood and implemented it, and yet we find that downtime was not reduced by the expected amount.
This is probably not the trainee's fault. They are doing just what we trained them to do. The problem is that our ideas were wrong for some reason. Naturally, the thing to do in this case is to find out why the techniques we developed are not giving the results we expected.
What I really want to point out, which I think people sometimes lose sight of, is that we do not train for the sake of training. We train to achieve a certain goal, i.e.; reduced set-up time. We must "close the loop" on the training cycle by assuring that we have achieved the results we expected.
For more on Kirkpatrick's 4 levels model, there is an interesting article at
http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/Articles/k4levels/index.htm
TIP OF THE MONTH
EMACHINESHOP.COM
I love the Internet. It is truly a world changing technology. It changes the world in many ways that are so mundane that we often don't even notice them. This newsletter is only one example. There are almost 2,000 people in at least 50-60 countries reading this every month. I correspond with some of them and we exchange ideas. (And don't be shy about writing. I love discussing manufacturing in general and changeover in particular) Ten or fifteen years ago it would not have been possible to even imagine this.
It seems like every day I find a new, innovative, service that could not exist except on the web. One that I found a month or two ago is a company that does custom machining and fabrication over the web. Emachine shop is located at www.emachineshop.com At their site you will download a small, custom, CAD program in which you can design your part. Once it is designed, you select the material and quantity, hit "Price" and it will calculate and display prices in real time. Play with materials and quantities to get the best deal.
Go to Wired Magazine at http://wired-vig.wired.com/wired/archive/13.09/fablab.html to read an article about building a custom electric guitar through the shop.
John R Henry CPP
Best,
John R Henry CPP
Send Email