1 / 20

Enhancing GM Shipping Processes: Six Sigma Implementation for Improved Efficiency and Quality

This project, developed and presented by Reginald Fuller, focuses on the Six Sigma initiative aimed at optimizing GM's shipping and pick/pack processes. It addresses key factors such as on-time delivery, product availability, and shipment quality by implementing effective methodologies. Through the analysis of performance metrics like waste reduction and employee productivity, the project successfully increased process efficiency, reduced labor costs, and improved quality outcomes. The application of waste management strategies resulted in substantial annual savings and sustained process improvements via revised SOPs and enhanced employee training.

whitley
Télécharger la présentation

Enhancing GM Shipping Processes: Six Sigma Implementation for Improved Efficiency and Quality

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. GM Shipping Pick / Pack Process Improvement Developed, Implemented, & Presented by Reginald Fuller

  2. Defining the Six-Sigma Project

  3. Listen to the Voices • Voice of the Customer (VOC) • On-Time Delivery • Product Availability • Product Selection ( IP & IQ) • Quality of Shipment (Damages) • Pricing • Voice of the Business (VOB) • Productivity • Responsiveness to Customers • Quality • Cost

  4. SIPOC • Suppliers • GM Processing Centers • Parts Manufacturers • Inputs • Inventory • Customer Ordering • People • Equipment • Process • Dispatch Assignments • Picking • Sorting • Staging • Loading • Shipping • Output • Material Staging • Inventory Verification • Customer • Auto Dealers

  5. The CT Tree

  6. FishboneSatisfaction Wastes: Corrective, Overproduction, and Process Training Experience Utilization Wastes: Motion & Waiting Productivity Methods People Satisfaction Delivery Information Systems Inventory Batching Work Assignments Availability Selection On-Time Route Departure & Delivery

  7. Process Map Information Services Batch Customer Orders in Queue Picking Area Sort Dispatch Work Assignments Pick Parts Employee Picking Yes No Inventory Control Replenishment Dock Operations Customer Staging & Validation Shipping Flow disruptions in the process

  8. Measuring the Gaps

  9. Performance Metrics

  10. Employee Utilization A typical employee walks x miles per night in dense warehouse area.

  11. Pick Density / Cycle Times A typical work assignment takes 22.04 minutes to complete averaging 16.06 lines.

  12. Location Redundancy Employees consistently select from redundant locations. Redundancies account for 17.9% of total bin selections.

  13. Additional Measurements • Sorting Employees waiting an average of 22 minutes per 8 hour shift waiting to sort materials. • Leveling Additional delays incurred from failure to complete entire batch cycle of work assignments prior to beginning next cycle. • Load Departure On time departure is 77.2 with a goal of 98% for on time delivery.

  14. Analyzing Data

  15. Wastes(COMMWIP) • Corrective • Availability compromised by shifting manpower from receiving department to close productivity gaps. • Selection process without built in validation and error proofing. • Damages incurred from expedition material handling to redeem wasted time. • Overproduction • Incomplete batch cycles warrant beginning of new cycle. • Employees wait excessively in sort aisle to complete picking process • Motion • Employees engaged in excessive walk due to redundant bin trips and inefficient batches of work assignments. • Waiting • Employees waiting in aisles to sort materials. • Pickers waiting in bin locations to pick out of redundant bins. • Dock personnel waiting on materials from packing area. • Process • Current process restricts optimal productivity.

  16. Improving the Process

  17. Implementation • Work Assignment Batching (Motion Waste) • Batch two routes together by area rather than single routes according to dealers. • New batches yield 2 hours over time labor savings per employee. • New batches improve pick density to 25 lines per 20 minute assignment. • Productivity (Process Waste) • Employee walking reduced to an average of 3.7 miles per night • Increased productivity allows realignment of personnel. • Personnel relocated to receiving operations to preserve availability. • Plant lines per hour increased to 27 with plant goal of 21.9.

  18. Implementation Cont. • Quality (Corrective Waste) • Availability improved from 89.7% to 97 percent • Sort quality improved after installing Poke Yoke in sort aisles • Selection improved from 91.2% to 98.7% after installing pull system for sorting materials. • Quality savings = $275.410 • Pull System (KanBan) • Pick carts staged for quality checks and sort by dedicated sorters. • Leveling (Heijunka) • Consistent load planning • On time route departure and delivery improved to 96.2% • Cost • Overtime labor costs reduced from 27% to 3%. • Total labor savings = $435.711 per annum. • Total project savings = $711.121 per annum.

  19. Sustaining the Process

  20. Controls • Revise SOP’s • Modify and document revised processes. • Training • Train employees on new processes. • Campaign • Share and post project successes on communications boards per A3 and corporate intranet. Post SOP’s in workplace. • Audit • Develop and conduct process audits to sustain modifications.

More Related