Lean Conversion of An Assmbly Line - A Case Study

LEAN CONVERSION OF AN APPAREL ASSEMBLY LINE
- A CASE STUDY
S. M. RUSSEL
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING

BANGLADESH UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
DHAKA, BANGLADESH
APRIL 2012

LEAN CONVERSION OF AN APPAREL ASSEMBLY LINE
- A CASE STUDY
by
S. M. Russel
A thesis submitted to the Department of Industrial and Production Engineering, Bangladesh

University of Engineering and Technology, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Master of Engineering in Industrial and Production Engineering.

DHAKA, BANGLADESH
APRIL, 2012

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
The thesis titled “LEAN CONVERSION OF AN APPAREL ASSEMBLY LINE - A CASE

STUDY” submitted by S. M. Russel, Roll Number: 100708003 P, Session October, 2007 has
been accepted as satisfactory in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of
Engineering in Industrial and Production Engineering on April 2, 2012.
BOARD OF EXAMINERS
Dr. Abdullahil Azeem Chairman

Professor (Supervisor)
Department of Industrial and Production Engineering
BUET, Dhaka
Dr. M. Ahsan Akhtar Hasin Member

Professor
BUET, Dhaka
Dr. A. K. M. Masud Member

Professor
BUET, Dhaka

DHAKA, BANGLADESH
APRIL, 2012
ii

CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION
It is hereby declared that this thesis or any part of it has not been submitted elsewhere for the
award of any degree or diploma.
_________________
S. M. Russel
iii

ACKOWLEDGEMENT
All praises to Allah, the most benevolent and the Almighty, for his boundless grace in the
successful completion of this thesis.
I would like to express my sincere respect and gratitude to my thesis supervisor, Dr. Abdullahil
Azeem, Associate Professor, Department of Industrial and Production Engineering (IPE),
Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), for his encouragement,
thoughtful suggestions, proper guidance and cooperation throughout the progress of this research
work.
I also express my profound thanks and gratitude to respected teacher Dr. M. Ahsan Akhtar Hasin
and Dr. A. K. M. Masud, Professor, Department of Industrial and Production Engineering
BUET, Dhaka for their support and cooperation in this thesis work.
I am very much thankful to Mr. David Hasanat, CEO & Chairman, Viyellatex Ltd. for giving me
the opportunity to work in his factory. I also express my gratitude to Mr. Saiful Islam (COO),
Mr. Arif Islam Bhuiyan (COO), Mr. Didarul Alam (Lean Team), Mr. Dipankar Roy and workers
and staff of Viyellatex Ltd. for their all out support and time. I also express my gratitude to my
collogues in Productivity Improvement Cell, BKMEA for their support and cooperation in
completing the thesis work successfully.
Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to my parents and wife whose continuous supports
and inspiration encouraged me to complete the thesis successfully.
iv

ABSRACT
To be competitive and meet ever increasing demand of apparel buyers to reduce cost, supply
smaller quantity order at shorter lead time as well as increasing labor cost in the local market has
forced the local manufacturers of Bangladesh to improve labor productivity, quality, to reduce
lead time and produce small order quantity efficiently. Tools and techniques of Lean
manufacturing may play an important role in their quest for meeting ever increasing demand of
customers profitably. Lean manufacturing requires keeping far less than half the needed
inventory on site, results in many fewer defects, and produces a greater and ever growing variety
of products. Lean consists of best practices, tools and techniques from throughout industry with
the aims of reducing waste and maximizing efficiency to achieve the ultimate customer
satisfaction.
The present study focuses on improving line efficiency, throughput time of an assembly line
through identifying wastes using value stream mapping and other analyses, identifying
opportunities for improvement and required tools and techniques of lean manufacturing and
industrial engineering to implement. An assembly line in an apparel factory is considered to
implement this study as well as line efficiency, throughput time, machine utilization, space
utilization, WIP and other performance parameters are compared before and after implementing
the tools and techniques of lean manufacturing and industrial engineering. Though outcomes of
5S and visual management are difficult to quantify, these tools are foundations for lean
implementation.
v

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Certificate of Approval ii
Candidate’s Declaration iii
Acknowledgement iv
Abstract v
Table of contents vi
List of Tables x
List of Figures xi
Chapter One: Introduction
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Rationale of the Study 2
1.3 Background of the Thesis 2
1.4 Problem Statement 2
1.5 Objective of the Study 2
1.6 Methodology 3
Chapter Two: Literature Review
2.1 Introduction 4
2.2 Historical Background 4
2.2.1 Ford System 6
2.2.2 JIT & Toyota Production System 8
2.2.3 Lean Manufacturing 10
Chapter Three: Lean Manufacturing
3.1 Introduction 11
3.2 Principles of Lean Manufacturing 11
3.3 Value and Waste 12
3.3.1 Types of Wastes 12
3.4 Pull and Push Production 14
3.5 Workplace Organization-5S 15
3.5.1 First pillar: Sort (Seiri) 15
3.5.2 Second Pillar: Set in Order (Seiton) 15
3.5.3 Third Pillar: Shine (Seiso) 15
3.5.4 Fourth Pillar: Standardize (Seiketsu) 16
3.5.5 Fifth Pillar : Sustain (Shitsuke) 16
3.6 Visual Management 16
3.7 Kanban 17
3.8 Quick Order Changeover 18
3.9 kaizen 18
3.10 Value Stream Mapping 20
3.10.1 Steps of Value Stream Mapping 20
vi

3.10.2 Value Stream Mapping Icons 20
3.10.4 Current State Mapping 21
3.10.3 Future State Mapping 23
3.10.4 Importance of Value Stream Mapping 24
3.11 Cellular Manufacturing- A team based work 24
3.11.1 Concepts of Cellular Manufacturing 24
3.11.2 Multi-process Handling and the Development of U-shaped Cell 24
3.11.3 One Piece Flow 25
3.11.4 High Variety Product 25
3.11.5 Benefits of Team Based Work 25
3.11.6 Team Based Approach- Zero Waste 26
3.11.7 Team Based Approach- Better Material Flow 26
Chapter Four: Lean Assessment –Current State
4.1 Introduction 27
4.2 Formation of Porject Mangement Team 27
4.3 Lean Forum 27
4.3.1 Roles and Mandates of Lean Forum Members 27
4.4 Champion 28
4.5 Core Implementation Team 28
4.6 Company Profile 29
4.7 Manufacturing Stages of the Factory 30
4.8 Data Collection 30
4.9 Data Analysis 30
4.9.1 Changeover Analysis 30
4.9.2 Quality Rework Analysis 31
4.9.3 Line Balancing Analysis 31
4.9.4 Line Efficiency Analysis 34
4.9.5 Excess Motion Analysis 34
4.10 Lean metrics- Labor Under- utilization 35
4.10.1 Work Practices Analysis 35
4.10.2 Results of Current State 36
4.11 Value Stream Mapping- Current State 36
4.11.1 Product Family Analysis 36
4.11.2 Data Collection 37
4.11.3 Drawing Current State VSM 37
Chapter Five: Designing Future State
5.1 Introduction 40
5.2 Drawing Future State VSM 40
5.3 Future State VSM 41
5.4 Kaizen Events List 41
5.5 Lean Forum Approval 41
vii

Chapter Six: Achieving Future State- Kaizen Events
6.1 Introduction 44
6.2 Event -1: Visual communication-Team Status Board 44
6.2.1 Defining Performance Measures 44
6.2.2 Designing Status Board 45
6.2.2.1 Changeover Information Details 46
6.2.2.2 Kaizen Story Board 47
6.2.3 Designing SQNP Board 47
6.2.4 Define SOP for Maintenance of Status Board 48
6.2.5 Lean Forum Approval 48
6.2.6 Training on Maintenance of Status Board 48
6.2.7 Installing Status Board and Coaching 48
6.2.8 Review and Adjusting Status Board 49
6.2.9 Recommendation to lean Forum 49
6.3 Event -2: Workplace Organization- 5S in Sewing 49
6.3.1 Awareness Training for Lean Forum & Core Implementation Team 49
6.3.2 Brief Lean Forum & Approval 49
6.3.3 Briefing workers on 5S 50
6.3.4 Taking Photographs of Current Workplaces. 50
6.3.5 Implementing the First 3S in the Pilot Sewing Line 50
6.3.6 Set Requirements 51
6.3.7 Implement 4th & 5th S 51
6.3.8 Design and Launch Scoring System 51
6.3.9 Implement 5s in the Entire Floor 51
6.3.10 Coaching Employees 51
6.3.11 Taking Photographs after Implementation 51
6.3.12 Develop Reward System for 5S Excellence 53
6.3.13 Implement Reward System 53
6.3.14 Present Results to Lean Forum with Recommendations 53
6.4 Event -3: Team Concept in Sewing 53
6.4.1 Lean Forum Briefing 53
6.4.2 Selecting Product for Pilot Run 54
6.4.3 Designing & Assignment of Operations 54
6.4.4 Designing U-shaped Layout 60
6.4.5 Set Pre-requirements for Implementation 63
6.4.5.1 Team Structure 63
6.4.5.2 Tools Requirements 63
6.4.5.3 Clean Up Activities 63
6.4.5.4 Practices 64
6.4.5.5 Information 64
6.4.6 Identify Performance Measures 64
6.4.7 Training of Core Team on Measurement of Performance Measure 64
6.4.8 Map performance Measures 65
6.4.9 Schedule Implementation 67
viii

6.4.10 Develop Guidelines for Pilot Team 67
6.4.10.1 In-Team Quality Procedures & Responsibilities 67
6.4.10.2 WIP Status 68
6.4.10.3 Supervisor’s Responsibilities 68
6.4.12 Developing Skill of the Workers 69
6.4.13 Implementation with Follow Up 69
6.4.14 Map Improvement 70
6.4.15 Present Results to Lean Forum 71
6.4.16 Recommendations for Further Improvement 72
6.4.17 Roll out Plan 72
6.5 Event -4: Design and Installation of Incentive system 72
6.5.1 Lean Forum Briefing 73
6.5.2 Designing Incentive System with Core Team 73
6.5.2.1 Guidelines 73
6.5.2.2 Incentive for QI & QC 74
6.5.4 Review Performance of the Model Line after Implementing Incentive 75
System
Chapter Seven: Conclusion & Recommendation
7.1 Conclusion 77
7.2 Recommendation 78
References 79
Appendices
Appendix-1 Product Family Analysis 81

Appendix-2 VSM Data Log Sheet 88
Appendix-3 Information Flow 94
Appendix-4 Reject and Rework Analysis in Sewing 97
Appendix-5 Reject and Rework Analysis in Finishing 98
Appendix-6: Status of Model Line-After Incentive System Implementation 99
Appendix-7: 5S Audit Sheet 100
Appendix- 8: Safety Cross 101
Appendix- 9: Rework & Reject Graph 102
Appendix-10: Efficiency Graph
ix

LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1: Core Implementation Team 29

Table 4.2: Company profile 29
Table 4.3: Changeover Analysis 30
Table 4.4: Rework 31
Table 4.5: Line Balancing Analysis 31
Table 4.6: Productivity Analysis 34
Table 4.7: Excess Motion Analysis 34
Table 4.8: Work Practice & Process Analysis-Summary 35
Table 4.9: Key Result of Current State 36
Table 6.1: GSD Layout 53
Table 6.2: Machine Requirements 53
Table 6.3: Operation Bulletin 55
Table 6.4:Re-sequencing Combining Operation 58
Table 6.5: Team Requirements 59
Table 6.6: Requirements of Machines 64
Table 6.7: Status of Traditional Line 64
Table 6.8: Status of Traditional Line -Summary 66
Table 6.9: Status of Pilot Team-After Conversion 70
Table 6.10: Status of Pilot Team-After Conversion (Summary) 71
Table 6.11: Comparison- Traditional Line VS Model Line 71
Table 6.12: Breakeven Efficiency 73
Table 6.13: Breakeven Efficiency for Style Running more than 15 Days 74
Table 6.12: Breakeven Efficiency for Style Running more than 30 Days 74
Table 6.15: Comparison- Traditional Line VS Model Line After Implementing 75
Incentive System
x

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Materials Flow in Push and Pull Systems 14
Figure 3.1: Value Stream Icons 21

Figure 3.2: Example of Current State VSM 22
Figure 3.3: Example of Future State VSM 23
Figure 4.1: Communication & Decision channel in PMT 27
Figure 4.2: Graph Based on Cycle Time & Takt Time Depicting Line Balancing 33
Figure 4.3: Current State VSM 38
Figure 5.1: Future State VSM 42
Figure 6.1: Design of Status Board 45
Figure 6.2: Design of Changeover Information 46
Figure 6.3:Design of Kaizen Story Board 47
Figure 6.4: Design of SQNP Board 47
Figure 6.5: Before Pictures (5S) 52
Figure 6.6: Pictures of ‘Sorting’ Phase 52
Figure 6.7: After Pictures (5S) 52
Figure 6.8 Rewarding Workers for 5S Excellence 53
Figure 6.10: Process Flow Chart- Traditional 57
Figure 6.12: Process Flow chart- Pilot Run 60
Figure 6.12: Linear layout-1 61
Figure 6.13: Linear Layout-2 62
Figure 6.14: U-shaped layout 63
Figure 6.15: Comparison Graph- Traditional Line Vs. Model Line 72
Figure 6.16: Comparison Graph- Traditional Line Vs. Model Line After Implementing 76
Incentive System
xi

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
Bangladesh earns around seventy five percent of its foreign currency through exporting apparel
products. Apparel sector employs more than two million people directly and indirectly. Most of
the workers in apparel sector are women. Apparel sector has huge socio-economic impacts on
the country.
The apparel sector of the country has been facing challenges for reducing cost, improving quality
and reducing cost to remain competitive in the global competition and on the other hand labor
costs are increasing in the local market. To survive in the age of globalization where buyers are
free to choose from any apparel sourcing country as there are no quota restrictions at this point,
the local apparel industry has no other options but reducing cost, improving quality and reducing
manufacturing lead time.
After the World War II, Japanese manufacturers faced acute shortage of raw materials, financial
and human resources and fierce competition from their western counterparts. Eiji Toyoda and
Taiichi Ohno of Toyota motor company developed a discipline and process focused
manufacturing system to produce cars at lower cost, higher quality and short lead time and
different models of car in the same production line which was known as Toyota Production
System (TPS).
TPS was termed ‘Lean’ by John Krafcik is because it uses less of everything compared with
mass production- half the human effort in the factory, half the manufacturing space, half the
engineering hours to develop a new product in half the time. Also, it requires keeping far less
than half the needed inventory on site, results in many fewer defects, and produces a greater and
ever growing variety of products [1].
Lean consists of best practices, tools and techniques from throughout industry with the aims of
reducing waste and maximizing efficiency to achieve the ultimate customer satisfaction. Lean is
defined as a systematic approach to maximizing value by minimizing waste, and by flowing the
product or service at the pull of the customer demand. The key concepts of “value,” “flow,” and
“pull,” align with the ultimate Lean goal: “perfection,” or a continuous striving for improvement
in the performance of the organization [2].
The local apparel industry can also be benefitted through applying tools and techniques of Lean
Manufacturing in a systematic method based on their unique challenges and opportunities not
only implementing tools as a piece meal basis.
1
1.2 Rationale of the Study
The challenges faced by local apparel manufactures can be addressed by the systematic analysis
of the manufacturing system and link their problem with the lean tools and techniques to create
value for customers.
The application of Lean manufacturing in a business or manufacturing environment, describes a

philosophy that incorporates a collection of tools and techniques into the business processes to
optimize time, human resources, assets, and productivity, while improving the quality level of
products and services to their customers. If the application of lean manufacturing produces
positive impact on productivity, quality and lead time, it may have snow ball effects on the
whole apparel sector of the country.
1.3 Background of The Thesis
The application of Lean manufacturing in the apparel sector of the country is new. Some
factories which are trying to be lean are applying tools and techniques as a piece meal basis
without focusing on the overall system approach. This study focuses on creating an improved
model of Lean apparel assembly line which will improve line efficiency and throughput time
which in terms may improve the competitiveness of local apparel manufacturers.
1.4 Problem Statement
The ever increasing demand from buyer’s side to reduce cost, improve quality and shorter period
of lead time as well as smaller quantity orders as well as increasing of labor cost has forced the
local apparel manufactures to search for improving labor productivity, quality and reducing lead
time to stay competitive in the business and thrive. In this scenario, application of tools and
techniques of Lean manufacturing and industrial engineering could benefit the local apparel
manufacturers tremendously.
1.5 Objective of the Study
The specific objectives of this project work are:
1. Improving line efficiency of an assembly line

2. Improving throughput time of the assembly line
The possible outcomes of the proposed work are the development an improved model of
assembly line that can reduce wastes from flow of works, work practices and processes.
2
1.6 Methodology
The methodology of the study will be as follows:
1. Collecting information from the company’s ERP system and data from the shop floor
2. Developing a current state map using the collected information
3. Analyzing the current state map to identify potential areas for improvement
4. Developing a future state map identifying potential improvement opportunities to
improve
a. line efficiency through line balancing, team based approach, process razing and
designing incentive system and 5S and visual management etc.
b. improving throughput time through reducing waiting time, excess processing, bundle
size reduction and process razing etc.
5. Conduct Kaizen events based on future state map

6. Analyzing improvement as a result of kaizen event
3
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
Many of the concepts in Lean Manufacturing originate from the Toyota Production System
(TPS) and have been implemented gradually throughout Toyota’s operations beginning in the
1950's. By the 1980’s Toyota had increasingly become known for the effectiveness with which it
had implemented Just-In-Time (JIT) manufacturing systems. Today, Toyota is often considered
one of the most efficient manufacturing companies in the world and the company that sets the
standard for best practices in Lean Manufacturing. The term “Lean Manufacturing” or “Lean
Production” first appeared in the 1990 book The Machine that Changed the World. Lean
Manufacturing has increasingly been applied by leading manufacturing companies throughout
the world.
2.2 Historical Background
The industrial revolution began in the 1860’s, one of the first challenges for manufacturing was
how to manage a machine with its enormous product output. The major issue of management
within these industries was still the productivity of the workers.
After 1885 the Henry Ford model of assembly line production caused a manufacturing
transformation from individual craft production to mass production. This helped to create a
market-place based on economies of scale and scope. This dynamic reduced unit costs.
Ford also made contributions to mass production and consumption in the realm of process
engineering. The hallmark of this system was standardization of components, manufacturing
processes, and a simple, easy-to-manufacture standard product.
By the 1930s, Ford's standardized product, with his direct planning and control systems, was
made obsolete by innovations in marketing and organization at General Motors. Just as Ford
made history of the horse and buggy, so too did GM's Alfred P. Sloan make history of the Model
T. Sloan repositioned the car companies to create a five-model product range from Chevrolet to
Cadillac.
The demand for utility transportation, upon which the Model T was founded, was increasingly
being served by the rising tide of used Model Ts. Many consumers had grown beyond just
wanting utility transportation. They had more money, they wanted cars in different colors, cars
with roofs, cars with more powerful engines, etc. and they were willing to pay a slightly higher
price than Ford was asking for the Model T [3].
The challenge in manufacturing during the 1930s shifted to product variety.
4
While manufacturing through the 1930s and 1940s was still driven by large-quantity production
runs, the huge production runs enjoyed by the 17 years of the Model T were no longer possible.
Consumers were more and more the drivers of change in a product life cycle. As the 1950s
began, demand for specialized products started to take hold. Not only were products more
specialized, but they also had limited life cycles.
Batch manufacturing methods had arrived! In Batch manufacturing had allowed machines to
become productive when large quantities of a product were built. Conversely, batch processing
created problems for manufacturing when trying to build a dissimilar mix of products. What is
the optimum amount? How much is too much?
During the 1950s, the commercial availability of computers began to have a profound effect on
business information processing. Until the advent of the computer, the functions of logistics,
inventory management, and production planning constituted a chronic, intractable problem for
any discrete manufacturer engaged in multiple-stage production of products from raw material to
finished product.
Around the early 1960s, as computing power began to be more cost effective, early pioneers
began the development and installation of the early computer-based MRP systems. From the
original handful, the number of systems grew to 150 installed systems by 1971.
Since that time and with the help of the American Production and Inventory Control Society
(APICS), the number of MRP installations approaches the total number of manufacturing
companies. Today, the MRP system is the primary tool used for production planning, inventory
control, shop floor control, costing, and capacity planning by the modern manufacturer.
While an MRP system is a valuable weapon in the manufacturing arsenal, practitioners continue
to grapple with the still conflicting objectives of batch manufacturing and optimizing inventories.
Confronted with the conflicting policies, it is often the MRP system itself that takes the blame
for disappointing results. Unless filtered as a system parameter, the MRP solution will solve for
the smallest inventory and shortest manufacturing lead time. If followed precisely, MRP
recommendations will yield the expected results. Modifications, and work rules put in place to
optimize efficiency and utilization of individual work centers, generally degrade the output of the
MRP system. Compromise is the culprit of a diminished MRP system.
During the 1950s and 1960s Toyota contended that the standard thinking of Cost + Profit = Sales
Price was incorrect. It believed that Profit = Sales Price − Costs. From this premise, Toyota
concentrated on the management of costs means wastes and wastes of all varieties were targeted
for elimination.
Key areas targeted were work-in-process inventory and safety stock. While many companies in
the United States and Europe were attempting to calculate the optimum batch sizes for
5
production, Toyota worked toward the goal of being able to build a mix of products in a one-
piece flow. Having the capability to build a mix of products in a one-piece flow (mixed-product
Lean line) satisfied many key objectives for Toyota, raising productivity and reducing costs and
inventory while simultaneously creating rapid customer response.
Through the 1960s and into the 1970s, these two models of manufacturing developed down
separate paths. One sought better ways to manage batch production by making ongoing
improvements to the MRP planning model, while the other concentrated on finding and fine-
tuning ways to allow a one-piece flow of a mix of products. Soon, the benefits achieved by these
two disparate strategies made themselves apparent.
Into the 1980s, many product markets in the United States and Europe started to come under
pressure from foreign manufacturers. Products were being brought to market with higher quality
and lower price. The days of planned obsolescence were over. Consumers came to expect higher
quality and lower prices as a requisite for purchase. Western manufacturers began to lose market
share. Some manufacturers faded away while others began to look diligently for better ways to
compete. Many abandoned the old batch manufacturing models in favor of the more responsive
method of Lean manufacturing in pursuit of the goals of faster response, fewer inventories,
higher quality, and reduced costs [4].
2.2.1 Ford System
And then there was Henry Ford. Around 1910, Ford and his right-hand man, Charles E.
Sorensen, fashioned the first comprehensive manufacturing strategy. They took all the elements
of a manufacturing system – people, machines, tooling and products – and arranged them in a
continuous system for manufacturing the Model T automobile. No one person actually invented
the assembly line, but Ford’s sponsorship of its use would lead to the explosive success of the
system in the 20PthP century [5].
When Ford first introduced the Model T in 1908, it cost $825 but because of his innovations in
efficient manufacturing, that price would drop every year to only $360 in 1916. By 1918, half
the cars in America were Model T’s, and before production was terminated, some 15mn units
had been produced, a record which was to stand for 45 years. The practice of moving work from
one worker to another until it became a complete unit, then arranging the flow of units at the
right time and right place to a moving final assembly line from which came a finished product
was the basis of Ford production. By the time the system was perfected in 1914, a Model T
would come off the assembly line every three minutes, necessitating one-and-a-half man-hours,
an eight-fold improvement over the previous 12.5 man-hours required.
There was only one hitch with the dramatically enhanced productivity: slow paint drying time for
every color except black. That was why after 1914, Ford was obliged to limit Model T’s to only
black until as late as 1926 when faster drying paint was finally perfected. Also instrumental to
Ford’s success was his decision in 1914 to offer workers an astonishing wage of $5/day, more
6
than double the previous going rate. Overnight, crippling worker turnover was eradicated, and
with the best mechanics flocking to Detroit, greater expertise and improved morale raised
productivity and lowered training costs. The goal of every Ford worker was to earn a Model T:
in 1914, the average Ford worker could buy one with just four months’ wages.
Ford's success inspired many others to copy his methods. But most of his imitators did not truly
understand the fundamentals of his strategy and often used his assembly line system for products
and processes which would prove unsuitable. It is even doubtful that Henry Ford himself fully
understood what he had done and why it was so successful. In fact, as conditions in the world
began to change, the Ford system started breaking down because Ford refused to change his
methods.
For example, Ford production depended on a labour force that was so desperate for money and
jobs that workers would sacrifice their dignity and self-esteem for a steady paycheck. The
growing prosperity of the 1920s and the advent of labour unions created great strains on the Ford
system. Ford factories were also unable to cope with product proliferation – annual model
changes, multiple colours, other options – which customers invariably began demanding. Under
the Ford chain system, product moved from station to station in a sequential order. Layout
changeovers were considered simply too costly and Ford was reluctant to introduce new models.
At General Motors, Alfred P. Sloan took a more pragmatic approach by developing business and
manufacturing strategies for managing very large enterprises and dealing with a variety of
products. Sloan is also credited with establishing annual styling changes, thereby inventing the
concept of planned obsolescence. He set a pricing structure whereby the different models in the
GM stable did not compete with each other, instead insuring that as a family gained purchasing
power, they could successfully trade up the GM product ladder without having to look
elsewhere. By the mid 1930s, General Motors had passed Ford as the dominant automotive
producer in the world, a position it would retain until the end of the 20PthP century.
Yet even in the new competitive era, many elements of Ford production remained sound,
including his focus on reducing waste and improving the arrangement of the workplace. He also
put great emphasis on ensuring that designs could be efficiently manufactured as well as strict
specification and quality criteria. In fact, Ford methods were to prove instrumental in ensuring
efficient productivity of wartime equipment during World War II. , Henry Ford hated war and
refused to build armaments even after it became clear that the U.S. would be entering the war.
However, when Ford plants finally retooled for wartime production, they did so on a fantastic
scale as epitomized by the Ford Willow Run bomber plant. When the plant became operative in
1943, it went from producing one B-24 bomber a day to a peak of 600 a month, with the factory
operating on 24-hour shifts.
7
2.2.2 JIT & Toyota Production System
The Allied victory and the impressive American manufacturing capacity inevitably caught the
attention of Japanese industrialists. Several Americans would be instrumental in helping the
country to rebuild and improve on its post-war manufacturing capabilities. W. Edward Deming
was an American statistician best known for his work in Japan. Working under Gen. MacArthur,
from 1950 onwards, Deming taught senior managers in Japan how to improve design, service,
product quality, testing and sales through various methods, including statistical application. He
is widely credited with making a significant contribution to Japan’s economic resurgence and
reputation for innovative, high-quality products. Joseph M. Juran, known for his work on quality
and quality management, would also do important work in Japan. Prior to WW II, although
consumer goods in Japan were competitively priced, they were known for their poor quality.
Juran’s work on quality control would attract the attention of Japanese companies where he
worked regularly for four decades. Juran is credited with adding a human dimension to quality
management, pushing for the education and training of managers, an idea that had not been
initially accepted in the U.S. He also believed that resistance to change was the root cause of
quality issues.
Among Japanese working in the field was Kaoru Ishikawa who pioneered quality management
processes in Japanese shipyards. Ishikawa’s fishbone (because of its shape) or cause-and-effect
diagram was first used in the 1960s and designed to illustrate the causes of a certain event. It
became one of the seven basic tools of quality management. But it was American automotive
production methods, particularly Ford practices, which most caught the attention of Japanese
productivity experts.
The Toyota Motor Company’s first Lean practices may have started at the end of the 19th century
when they were still a textile factory known as Toyoda with the development of looms which
stopped themselves whenever a thread broke. By 1934, the company had moved into cars where
founder Kiichiro Toyoda dealt with poor quality by intense study of each process leading to the
advent of “Kaizen” improvement teams.
It was Kiichiro’s plan to switch over entirely to a flow style of operations from batch production,
which was being followed in Toyoda Auto Loom, at the new car manufacturing facility. Doing
this would stop the buildup of parts and the storage warehouse would no longer be needed. The
amount of inventory would be reduced and this would decrease the amount of excess capital
being consumed. In other words we would be able to sell our finished products before we would
have to pay for the supplied material. With this method in place we would require less operating
capital. The summary the style of production that Kiichiro thought of back then it boils down to
“Everyday makes the necessary items in the necessary quantity”. In order to make this a reality
all the operations had to be converted over to his notion of flow production. The words Kiichiro
used to describe this in 1937 were a sort of Japanese English phrase he coined called “just-in
time.” In other words it means it is good if you are right on time [6].
8
After WW II, Toyota engineers Taichii Ohno and Shigeo Shingo began to incorporate Ford
production methods and other techniques into an approach which would eventually be known as
the Toyota Production System (TPS). But Japanese manufacturers rebuilding after the war faced
drastically reduced human, material and financial resources and low levels of demand. To focus
on mass production, low prices and economies of scale in order to reap profits made no sense in
Japan and over-production would be fatal for any Japanese company. On an early post-war visit
to the Ford plant in Detroit, the Japanese were reportedly unimpressed by the assembly line and
appalled by the vast amounts of working capital tied up in inventory. On a visit to an American
supermarket, Piggly Wiggly, the delegation found inspiration in an automatic drink supplier
where, as soon as a drink was purchased, it was immediately replaced by another. The same
supermarket only reordered and restocked goods once they had been bought by customers. Thus
was born the idea of Supermarket and Kanban in TPS [7].
The Toyota people also realized that the Ford system had contradictions and shortcomings,
particularly with respect to workers. With Gen. Douglas MacArthur actively promoting labor
unions during the post-war U.S. occupation period, Ford's harsh attitudes towards workers and
demeaning job structures would have been unacceptable in Japan. In fact, they were also
unacceptable in the American context, but those who lived through the grim Great Depression
years and the generation immediately following would continue to make the system work despite
its defects because they had no other choice.
As a result of the early work by Ishikawa, Deming and Juran, Toyota already knew that factory
workers had far more to contribute than just muscle power. Another key Toyota discovery
involved product variety. The Ford system was built around a single, never-changing product
and did not cope well with multiple or new products [5]. Japanese managers rejected the
American Ford practice of having specialized jobs for factory workers. Instead, they trained
factory workers to handle several types of jobs, now referred to as multi-process handling, which
was applied to machine lines in Japan. The combination of multi-process handling and the
recognition of the greater potential of workers would lead to the development of U-shaped team
cells, one of the three essential principles of early JIT production.
Shingo also worked on the problems of set-up and changeover. Reducing set-ups to minutes and
seconds allowed small batch production and an almost continuous flow just like in the original
Ford concept. This is known in TPS as One-Piece Flow and is the second of the three JIT
essential principles. The Toyota methods would allow for product flexibility that Henry Ford
simply refused to believe he needed. The third essential JIT component was Pull Production, the
production of only what is demanded or consumed by the customer.
All of these developments took place between 1949 and 1975 and spread, to some extent, to
other Japanese companies. As Japanese cars and electronic products began flooding the west
and their productivity and quality gains became evident to the outside world, American
executives began traveling to Japan to see how things were done. In the early days, they brought
9
back reports related mostly to superficial aspects of concepts such as Kanban and quality circles.
Most initial attempts to emulate TPS failed because adopted practices were not integrated into a
complete system and because few westerners truly understood the underlying principles.
2.2.3 Lean Manufacturing
The origins of the ‘lean approach’ can be traced to US fears that the newly emerging Japanese
vehicle assemblers held a competitive advantage over their established Western counterparts.
These fears prompted benchmarking studies of the global automotive industry to test these fears
and to find the causes of any such advantage. The results of these studies are reported in the
publication, The Machine that Changed the World by Womack, Jones and Roos (1990). For
Western manufacturers, this text provided the first data, drawing from the automotive industry,
that Japanese manufacturers enjoyed a 2:1 productivity and a 100:1 quality advantage over the
West. These gaps were huge and clearly showed that high speed was attributable to excellent
levels of quality performance by the Japanese manufacturers and all its suppliers [8].
The term “Lean Manufacturing” was actually first coined by Prof. James P. Womack of the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology who spent years studying Japanese companies after WW
II and who summarized their accomplishments in works such as Lean Thinking (1989) and The
Machine that Changed the World (1991). The latter book was a straightforward account of the
history of automobile manufacturing combined with a study of Japanese, American and
European automotive assembly plants. It attributed the superior performance of the Japanese
companies to their use of less human effort, capital investment, floor space, materials and time in
all aspects of their “Leaner” operations. By eliminating unnecessary steps, aligning all steps in an
activity in a continuous flow, recombining labour into cross-functional teams dedicated to that
activity, and continually striving for improvement, companies can develop, produce, and
distribute products with or less of the human effort, space, tools, time, and overall expense [9].
The new catchphrase – and its principles – caught the imagination of manufacturers throughout
the world. Lean implementation everywhere, including in the garment industry, is now
commonplace.
10
CHAPTER THREE
LEAN MANUFACTURING
3.1 Introduction
Lean thinking focuses on value-added flow and the efficiency of the overall system. A part
sitting in a pile of inventory is waste and the goal is to keep product flowing and add value as
much as possible. The focus is on the overall system and synchronizing operations so that they
be aligned and produced products at a steady pace.
3.2 Principles of Lean Manufacturing:
Key principles behind Lean Manufacturing can be summarized as follows:
1. Recognition of waste – The first step is to recognize what does and does not create value
from the customer’s perspective. Any material, process or feature which is not required
for creating value from the customer’s perspective is waste and should be eliminated.
2. Standard processes – Lean requires an the implementation of very detailed production

guidelines, called Standard Work, which clearly state the content, sequence, timing and
outcome of all actions by workers. This eliminates variation in the way that workers
perform their tasks.
3. Continuous flow – Lean usually aims for the implementation of a continuous production
flow free of bottlenecks, interruption, detours, backflows or waiting. When this is
successfully implemented, the production cycle time can be reduced by as much as 90%.
4. Pull-production – Also called Just-in-Time (JIT), Pull-production aims to produce only

what is needed, when it is needed. Production is pulled by the downstream workstation
so that each workstation should only produce what is requested by the next workstation.
5. Quality at the Source – Lean aims for defects to be eliminated at the source and for
quality inspection to be done by the workers as part of the in-line production process.
6. Continuous improvement – A continuous improvement mentality is necessary to reach

the company's goals. The term "continuous improvement" means incremental
improvement of products, processes, or services over time, with the goal of reducing
waste to improve workplace functionality, customer service, or product performance.
Lean requires striving for perfection by continually removing layers of waste as they are
uncovered. This in turn requires a high level of worker involvement in the continuous
improvement process.
11
7. Customer Focus - A lean manufacturing enterprise thinks more about its customers than
it does about running machines fast to absorb labor and overhead. Ensuring customer
input and feedback assures quality and customer satisfaction, all of which support sales.
8. Value - In lean production, the value of a product is defined solely by the customer. The
product must meet the customer's needs at both a specific time and price. Identifying the
value in lean production means to understand all the activities required to produce a
specific product, and then to optimize the whole process from the view of the customer.
9. Perfection - The concept of perfection in lean production means that there are endless
opportunities for improving the utilization of all types of assets. The systematic
elimination of waste will reduce the costs of operating the extended enterprise and
fulfills customer's desire for maximum value at the lowest price [10].
3.3 Value & Waste
Waste is anything that does not contribute to transforming a part to the customer’s needs. The
aim of Lean Manufacturing is the elimination of waste in every area of production including
customer relations, product design, supplier networks, and factory management. Its goal is to
incorporate less human effort, less inventory, less time to develop products, and less space to
become highly responsive to customer demand while producing top quality products in the most
efficient and economical manner possible. Essentially, a "waste" is anything that the customer is
not willing to pay for [11].
3.3.1 Types of Wastes
a. Overproduction:
Producing more material than the customer demand or produce it before it is needed is termed as
overproduction. Overproduction means making more than is required by the next process,
making earlier than is required by the next process, or making faster than is required by the next
process. The corresponding Lean principle is to manufacture based upon a pull system, or
producing products just as customers order them. It is visible as storage of material. It is the
result of producing to speculative demand.
b. Waiting:
Material waiting is not material flowing through value-added operations. This includes waiting
for material, information, equipment, tools, etc. Lean demands that all resources are provided on
a just-in-time (JIT) basis – not too soon, not too late [12].
Waiting for a machine to process should be eliminated. The principle is to maximize the
utilization/efficiency of the worker instead of maximizing the utilization of the machines.
12
c. Inventory or Work in Process (WIP):
Work in Process (WIP) Inventory is material between operations due to large lot production or
processes with long cycle times. Material sits taking up space, costing money, and potentially
being damaged. Related to Overproduction, inventory beyond that needed to meet customer
demands negatively impacts cash flow and uses valuable floor space.
d. Processing waste:
Extra processing not essential to value-added from the customer point of view is waste. Some of
the more common examples of this are reworking (the product or service should have been done
correctly the first time), debarring (parts should have been produced without burrs, with properly
designed and maintained tooling), and inspecting (parts should have been produced using
statistical process control techniques to eliminate or minimize the amount of inspection
required).
Techniques such as 5 why’s, SPC and mistake proofing are available to help identify and
eliminate causes of quality defects [12].
e. Transportation:
Moving material does not enhance the value of the product to the customer. Material should be
delivered to its point of use. Instead of raw materials being shipped from the vendor to a
receiving location, processed, moved into a warehouse, and then transported to the assembly
line, Lean demands that the material be shipped directly from the vendor to the location in the
assembly line where it will be used. The Lean term for this technique is called point-of-use-
storage (POUS). Instead of improving the transportation, it should be minimized or eliminated
(e.g. forming cells).
f. Motion Waste:
Any motion that does not add value to the product is waste. Motion of the workers, machines,
and transport (e.g. due to the inappropriate location of tools and parts) is waste. Unnecessary
motion is caused by poor workflow, poor layout, housekeeping, and inconsistent or
undocumented work methods.
g. Making Defective Products:
Making defective products is pure waste. Have to prevent the occurrence of defects instead of
finding and repairing defects. Defective products impede flow and lead to wasteful handling,
time, and effort. Production defects and service errors waste resources in four ways. First,
materials are consumed. Second, the labour used to produce the part (or provide the service) the
13
first time cannot be recovered. Third, labour is required to rework the product (or redo the
service). Fourth, labour is required to address any forthcoming customer complaints [12].
3.4 Pull & Push Production
In converting the manufacturing floor, there is a basic difference between a push production
system (upstream to downstream) and a pull system (downstream to upstream). In a push
system, management typically issues directives – based on sales projections – that push goods
from upstream to downstream. For example, in the cutting department, management would
provide a fixed master cutting plan for workers to continuously spread and cut materials and to
supply the sewing floor on a daily basis regardless of fluctuations in productivity within the
sewing assembly lines. Pull production systems, on the other hand, are those where start of one
job is triggered by completion of another [13]. In a pull production system, workers are
considered to be the closest process to customer demand and synchronize their productivity to
the pace of customer demand. In the same cutting department example used above, in a pull
system, the downstream sewing team would signal to the upstream cutting department to replace
at the appropriate time any cut-piece quantity that has been withdrawn. For any garment factory
aspiring to go Lean and adopting Quick Response/Just in Time principles, pull production is the
obvious choice.
PUSH SYSTEM
Supplier Customer
Cutting Sewing Finishing Packing
Upstream Downstream
PULL SYSTEM
Supplier Customer
Cutting Manufacturing
Upstream Downstream
Fig. 1.1 Materials Flow in Push and Pull Systems
14
3.5 Workplace Organization- 5S
5S is a system to reduce waste and optimize productivity through maintaining an orderly

workplace and using visual cues to achieve more consistent operational results. Implementation
of this method "cleans up" and organizes the workplace basically in its existing configuration,
and it is typically the first lean method which organizations implement.
The 5S pillars, Sort, Set in Order, Shine, Standardize, and Sustain, provide a methodology for
organizing, cleaning, developing, and sustaining a productive work environment. In the daily
work of a company, routines that maintain organization and orderliness are essential to a smooth
and efficient flow of activities. This lean method encourages workers to improve their working
conditions and helps them to learn to reduce waste, unplanned downtime, and in-process
inventory [12]. The basis of kaizen are constituted by 5S concept, defined by Japanese specialists
as a set of good customs and manners, deriving from the traditional manner of behaviour in
house and school [14].
3.5.1 First pillar: Sort (Seiri)
Sort, the first S, focuses on eliminating unnecessary items from the workplace that are not
needed for current production operations. An effective visual method to identify these unneeded
items is called "red tagging", which involves evaluating the necessity of each item in a work area
and dealing with it appropriately. A red tag is placed on all items that are not important for
operations or those are not in the proper location or quantity. Once the red tag items are
identified, these items are then moved to a central holding area for subsequent disposal,
recycling, or reassignment.
3.5.2 Second pillar: Set in Order (Seiton)
Proper arrangement -place things in such a way that they can be easily reached whenever they
are needed [12].
Set in Order focuses on creating efficient and effective storage methods to arrange items so that
they are easy to use and to label them so that they are easy to find and put away. Set in Order can
only be implemented once the first pillar, Sort, has cleared the work area of unneeded items.
Strategies for effective Set in Order include painting floors, affixing labels and placards to
designate proper storage locations and methods, outlining work areas and locations, and
installing modular shelving and cabinets [14].
3.5.3 Third pillar: Shine (Seiso)
Shine means sweeping floors, wiping off machinery and generally make sure everything on the
floor stays clean. However, maintenance tasks must be taking daily through defined checkpoints.
Once the clutter that has been clogging the work areas is eliminated and remaining items are
organized, the next step is to thoroughly clean the work area. Daily follow-up cleaning is
15
necessary to sustain this improvement. Working in a clean environment enables workers to
notice malfunctions in equipment such as leaks, vibrations, breakages, and misalignments. These
changes, if left unattended, could lead to equipment failure and loss of production. Organizations
often establish Shine targets, assignments, methods, and tools before beginning the shine pillar.
A well maintained workplace creates a healthy environment to work with [15].
3.5.4 Fourth Pillar: Standardize (Seiketsu)
The first three pillars are activities to organize and maintain the workplace. But standardize is the
method you use to maintain the first three pillars Sort-Set in order and Shine. Standardize is
related most of the time to shine.
Once the first three 5S's have been implemented, the next pillar is to standardize the best
practices in the work area. Standardize, the method to maintain the first three pillars, creates a
consistent approach with which tasks and procedures are done. The three steps in this process are
assigning 5S (Sort, Set in Order, Shine) job responsibilities, integrating 5S duties into regular
work duties, and checking on the maintenance of 5S. Some of the tools used in standardizing the
5S procedures are: job cycle charts, visual cues (e.g., signs, placards, display scoreboards),
scheduling of "five-minute" 5S periods, and check lists. The second part of Standardize is
prevention - preventing accumulation of unneeded items, preventing procedures from breaking
down, and preventing equipment and materials from getting dirty [14].
3.5.5 Fifth Pillar: Sustain (Shitsuke)
Sustain making a habit of properly maintaining correct procedures. The first four pillars can be
implemented without any difficulty if the workplace is where employees commit to sustain the
5S conditions Without Sustain the others four pillars will not last longer. 5S is not a technique
and different than the other four pillars, result cannot be seeing [14].
Sustain, making a habit of properly maintaining correct procedures, is often the most difficult S
to implement and achieve. Changing entrenched behaviors can be difficult, and the tendency is
often to return to the status quo and the comfort zone of the "old way" of doing things. Sustain
focuses on defining a new status quo and standard of work place organization. Without the
Sustain pillar the achievements of the other pillars will not last long. Tools for sustaining 5S
include signs and posters, newsletters, pocket manuals, team and management check-ins,
performance reviews, and department tours. Organizations typically seek to reinforce 5S
messages in multiple formats until it becomes "the way things are done."
3.6 Visual Management
The intent of a visual factory is that the whole workplace is set-up with signs, labels, color-coded
markings, etc. such that anyone unfamiliar with the process can, in a matter of minutes, know
16
what is going on, understand the process, and know what is being done correctly and what is out
of place [16].
There are two types of application in visual factory: displays and controls.
A visual display relates information and data to employees in the area. For example, charts show
monthly revenues of the company or a graphic depicting a certain type of quality issue that group
members should be aware of.
A visual control is intended to actually control or guide the action of the group members.
Examples of controls are readily apparent in production: Inventory limits, goals, allowances of
production delays, etc.
Visual controls describe workplace safety, production throughput, material flow, quality metrics,
or other information.
The most important benefit of a visual factory is that it shows when something is out of place or
missing.
Visual displays and controls help keep things running as efficiently as they were designed to run.
The efficient design of the production process that results from lean manufacturing application
carries with it a set of assumptions.
Visual management is an important support for cellular manufacturing. Visual management

techniques express information in a way that can be understood quickly by everyone.
Sharing information through visual tools helps keep production running smoothly and safely.
Shop floor teams are often involved in devising and implementing these tools through 5S and
other improvement activities.
Visual information can also help prevent mistakes. Color coding is a form of visual display often
used to prevent errors used for sizes, part of the product.
Thus, visual management is the type of system that will enable even person who know very little
about the factory, to apprehend a certain amount of important information related to 6 categories
of Control. Visual Control ranks alongside the 5S depending on the plant as a main stay of
factory management [17].
3.7 Kanban
“Kanban” is a pull-based material replenishment system that uses visual signals, such as color-
coded cards, to signal to upstream workstations when inputs are required at a downstream
workstation. In effect, Kanban is a communication tool for pull-based production. A Kanban
could be an empty bin, a card, an electronic display or any suitable visual prompt.
17
Typically there are two main kinds of Kanban:
1. Production Kanban – A signal from the internal customer to the internal supplier that
something is required from the internal supplier.
2. Withdrawal Kanban – A signal from the internal supplier to the internal customer
that the supplier has produced something which is available to be withdrawn by the
internal customer. In such case the internal supplier doesn’t produce more until the
withdrawal is made by the internal customer [18].
.
There are many variations on the Kanban system and in fact there are many books dedicated to
the topic of how to best apply Kanban.
3.8 Quick Changeover
Customers today want a variety of products in just the quantities they need. They expect high
quality, a good price, and speedy delivery. Producing to customer requirements means getting
batch processes to produce in small lots. Doing this usually creates a need to reduce setup times.
The goal of setup reduction and changeover improvement should be to develop a production
system that gets as close as possible to making only what the customer wants, when the customer
wants it, throughout the production chain. The result being a strong, flexible manufacturing
operation that is adaptable to any manufacturing environment [19].
Many companies produce goods in large lots simply because long changeover times make it
costly to frequently change products.
3.9 Kaizen
Kaizen (rhymes with 'dry pen') is a Japanese term meaning "to change for the better."
Traditionally, kaizen has meant making small, incremental improvements over a long period of
time.
A "blitz" is an intense and lightning-quick version of the kaizen process used to implement a
variety of Lean techniques - in a hurry - usually three to eight days in length. It is also sometimes
called a Kaizen Event.
It's easy to understand why Lean manufacturers are embracing the kaizen blitz. Improvement in a
Lean organization must be an ongoing process and the structure of a kaizen blitz is one of the
surest ways to augment continual change, increase efficiency and generate savings.
In a traditional manufacturing setting, it could take weeks - even months - to identify a problem,
propose a change to management, get their approval and get employees to change old habits.
18
A kaizen blitz shifts the change process into high gear. People working in a Lean Enterprise
often need to change their mindset. They need to be always thinking about what they can do
today, right now, to make things better. Most important, they need to believe that is possible. A
Kaizen Event makes them believers.
Unless you've seen a kaizen blitz in action, it's hard to understand just how flexible and effective
it can be. Kaizen blitz is, no doubt, a powerful tool. It has a great effect on people buying into the
benefits of structured problem-solving and being methodical.
Kaizen blitzes been approved through many and many assignment related to work on set-up
reduction, work place organization, point of storage, pull systems and cell design. Some
operations see improvements of as much as 80-100% or more, quickly and without major capital
investments [20].
It works virtually in any company - the size of the organization is less of an issue than its
attitude. It works in companies that are progressive - no matter what their size. Leading
companies that know they must change to keep their market share. Other manufacturers may
take a wait-and-see attitude. If their competition is doing it, they will too.
Hiroyuki Hirano states ten basics principles for Improvement:
1. Throw out all of your fixed ideas about how to do things.
2. Think of how the new method will work-not how it won’t.
3. Don’t accept excuses. Totally deny the status quo.
4. Don’t seek perfection. A 50-percent implementation rate is fine as long as it’s done on
the spot.
5. Correct mistakes the moment they’re found.
6. Don’t spend a lot of money on improvement.
7. Problems give you a chance to use your brain.
8. Ask “why” at least five times until you find the ultimate cause.
9. Ten people’s ideas are better than one person’s.
10. Improvement knows no limit [21].
19
3.10 Value Stream Mapping
Value Stream Mapping is a method of visually mapping a product's production path (materials
and information) from "door to door".
VSM can serve as a starting point to help management, engineers, production associates,
schedulers, suppliers, and customers recognize waste and identify its causes.
The process includes physically mapping your "current state" while also focusing on where you
want to be, or your "future state", which can serve as the foundation for other Lean improvement
strategies in shorten process and lead time to market.
A value stream is all the actions (both value added and non-value added) currently required to
bring a product through the main flows essential to every product [22].
There are three areas of the value stream that overlap and flow together:
• Concept to Launch (Administrative area)
• Raw materials to finished products (Manufacturing area)
• Order to cash (Administrative area) Each area contains multiple processes and activities
3.10.1 Steps of Value Stream Mapping
Value stream mapping is done in two steps.
1. Current state: The first step is to draw the current state value stream map to take a
snapshot of how things are being done now.
2. Future state: The second step is to draw the future state map to show how things ought
to be done.
Value stream mapping provides both a picture of the current state of affairs as well as a vision of
how we would like to see things work. Identifying the differences in the current and future states
yields a roadmap for improvement activities [23].
3.10.2 Value Stream Mapping Icons
For visual presentation of value stream mapping, some icons are used in drawing current and
future state. These are standard icons to draw a vsm. Some examples of these icons are shown
20
below:
Figure 3.1: Value Stream Icons
3.10.3 Current State Mapping
Each step has some stages to make it possible. It involves the following steps,
Step 1: Select a product family.
Step 2: Understand the customer demand.
Step 3: Form a team.
Step 4: Walk the flow and collect data on the value stream.
Step 5: Calculate total product cycle time.
21
Step 6: Draw the current state map (material flow and information flow).
Figure 3.2: Example of Current State VSM
A value stream is all the actions (both value added and non-value added) currently required to
bring a product through the main flows essential to every product:
The production flow from raw material into the arms of the customer
The design flow from concept to launch
Taking a value stream perspective means working on the big picture, not just individual
processes, and improving the whole, not just optimizing the parts [23].
Value Stream Mapping is a pencil and paper tool that helps you to see and understand the flow of
material and information as a product makes its way through the value stream. The meaning is
simple: Follow a product's production path from customer to supplier, and carefully draw a
visual representation of every process in the material and information flow. Then ask a set of key
questions and draw a "future state" map of how value should flow [24].
22
3.10.4 Future
F Statte Mappingg
Figure 3.3: Exxample of Future

F Statee VSM
Within the producttion flow, thhe movemen nt of materiial through the

t factory is the flow that usuallyy
comes tot mind. Buut there is another
a flow
w - of inform
mation - thaat tells eachh process wh
hat to makee
or do neext. You muust map botth of these flows.
f
Value Stream
S Mappping can be b a comm munication tool,
t a businness planniing tool, an
nd a tool too
managee your channge processs. The firstt step is drrawing the current staate, which is done byy
gatherinng informattion on the shop floor.. This proviides the infformation nneeded to map
m a futuree
mplementatiion plan thaat describes,
state. The final stepp is to prepare and beggin actively using an im
on one page,
p how you
y plan to achieve thee future state
More and
a more orrganizations with succcessful shopp-floor leann efforts are also appllying Valuee
Stream Mapping m methods annd lean prinnciples to aadministrativve areas. VValue Stream m Mapping g
providees a simple, yet thoroug gh methodoology that reelies on releevant data aanalysis andd display. Itt
links reporting requuirements, metrics,
m peoople, and lean tools to sustain impprovement anda promotee
processs learning. Itt gives man
nagers and employees
e thhe same toool and languuage to commmunicate.
23
3.10.4 Importance of Value Stream Mapping
• It helps you visualize more than just the single-process level, i.e. assembly, welding, etc.
• It helps you see more than waste it helps you see the sources of waste in your value
stream
• It provides a common language for talking about manufacturing processes
• It makes decisions about the flow apparent, so you can discuss them
• It ties together lean concepts and techniques helps you avoid "cherry picking"
• It forms the basis of an implementation plan
• It shows the linkage between the information flow and the material flow
It is much more useful than quantitative tools and layout diagrams that produce a tally of non-
value added steps, lead time, and distance traveled, the amount of inventory, and so on.
3.11 Cellular Manufacturing-A Team Based Work
3.11.1 Concept of Cellular Manufacturing
Cellular manufacturing is an approach that helps build a variety of products with as little waste
as possible. In cellular manufacturing, production work stations and equipment are arranged in a
sequence that supports a smooth flow of materials and components through the production
process with minimal transport or delay. Implementation of this lean method often represents the
first major shift in production activity, and it is the key enabler of increased production velocity
and flexibility, as well as the reduction of capital requirements [26].
3.11.2 Multi-process Handling and the Development of U-shaped Cell
Japanese factory managers rejected American idea of having specialized jobs for factory
workers. Instead, they trained factory workers to handle several types of jobs, now referred as
multi-process handling. This method was applied to machining lines in Japan. The development
of U-shaped cells evolved from the application of multi-process handling.
• A cell consists of the people and the machines or workstations required for performing
the steps in a process or process segment, with the machines arranged in the processing
sequence.
• Arranging people and equipment into cells helps companies achieve two important goals
of lean manufacturing one-piece flow and high-variety production.
24
Team Design and Placement is a crucial part of the process. Employees must work together in
cell teams and are led by a team leader. This team leader becomes a source of support for the cell
and is often responsible for the overall quality of the product that leaves his/her cell [27].
3.11.3 One Piece Flow
One-piece flow is the state that exists when products move through a process one unit at a time,
at a rate determined by the needs of the customer. The goals of one-piece flow are to make one
part at a time all the time, without unplanned interruptions, and to achieve this without lengthy
queue times.
One-piece flow (also commonly referred to as continuous flow manufacturing) is a technique

used to manufacture components in a cellular environment. The cell is an area where everything
that is needed to process the part is within easy reach, and no part is allowed to go to the next
operation until the previous operation has been completed.
The goals of one-piece flow are: to make one part at a time correctly all the time to achieve this
without unplanned interruptions to achieve this without lengthy queue times.
3.11.4 High-Variety Production
Given the fact that customers expect variety and customization, as well as specific quantities
delivered at a specific time, it is necessary to remain flexible enough to serve their needs.
Cellular manufacturing offers companies the flexibility to give customers the variety they want.
It does this by grouping similar products into families that can be processed on the same
equipment in the same sequence. It also encourages companies to shorten the time required for
changeover between products. This eliminates a major reason for making products in large lots
that changeovers take too long to change the product type frequently [28].
3.11.5 Benefits of Team Based Work
1. Increase productivity.
2. Add Flexibility to high product variety and Improve balancing.
3. Monitor WIP.
4. Eliminate feeding Factor.
5. Eliminate Handling (Excess motions).
6. Improve tremendously Quality.
7. Eliminate lines Time setups.
8. Controle absenteeism and be motived to reduce labor turnover.
9. Standardize work method for consistensy and stability.
10. Assure deliveries on time.
11. Quick response.
25
3.11.6 Team Based Approach- Zero Waste
1. Waste due to line balancing.

2. Waste due to over-production.
3. Waste due to Excess motions.
4. Waste due to Quality.
5. Waste due to Changeover.
6. Waste due to lack of information.
7. Waste due to excesive space.
8. Waste due to machine breakdown and malfunctioning.
3.11.7 Team Based Approach- Better material Flow
1. One- piece flow (Standing operators).

2. Balanced flow between operations.
3. Min/ max WIP( Seated workers).
4. Synchronized production between shared resourcecs.
5. Balanced material pull through supply Chain.
26
CHAPTER FOUR
LEAN ASSESSMENT-CURRENT STATE
4.1 Introduction
Assessment was carried out in a selected apparel factory to identify wastes which are affecting
line efficiency and through put time through VSM and other analyses.
4.2 Formation of Project Management Team (PMT)
To conduct the assessment and improvement activities in the factory project management team
was formed which is consists of
1. Lean Forum
2. Champion
3. Core Implementation Team
Lean Forum Champion
Core Implementation Team
Figure 4.1: Communication & Decision channel in PMT
4.3 Lean Forum
Lean forum role is to monitor and assure project progress in addition to provide support to the
champion and the core implementation team to remove any obstacles, blocks, resistance, and to
provide guidance and assistance. The lean forum consists of all head departments and two
workers representative (president of the employees’ council). Lean forum should select the
champion.
Lean forum is led by the General Manager or Chief Operating Officer or Managing Director.
4.3.1 Roles and Mandates of Lean Forum Members
1. Make strategic decisions related to project implementation.

2. Participate in decision making
3. Develop supportive systems for better run of the project.
4. Coordinate and communicate with supportive departments and personnel.
5. Assure commitment and support from relevant departments is in place.
27
6. Provide assistance to remove conflicts, resistance and roadblocks.
7. Provide technical guidance and assistance for the project implementation.
8. Identify training need and provide training assistance and dissemination of knowledge
required.
9. Prepare and follow up project plan, provide guidance and assistance in implementation.
10. Identify deviation from the plan and take corrective actions as required.
4.4 Champion:
Champion is someone with the authority and the responsibility to allocate the organization’s
resources. In small organization it may be the general manager, the factory manager or the
production manager. In large organization it may be the chief engineer or the Industrial
Engineering in charge.
The champion should possess the following attributes:
• A sense of Project ownership

• Authority to make change happen across functions and departments
• Authority to select the implementation core team
• Authority to commit resources
4.5 Core Implementation Team
Factories lack supportive conditions for improvement activities. An employee suggestion system
must be established. So factories need to build more team enthusiasm. At step one team members
must understand how team activities serve their own desires for personal improvement and self-
actualization.
In addition to the champion, it is important to assemble a core implementation team for

managing and realizing the improvements. The core implementation team follows the directions
of the champion. The team will create plans, communicate to all levels within the organization,
make sure people are trained, and implement the value stream process. It is critical for team
members to work together, because every aspect of the value stream mapping requires a high
degree of collaboration – especially designing the concept or the tool that will lead to the future
state.
Based on the above mentioned roles and responsibilities, factory management formed the PMT
with following personnel:
28
Table 4.1: The selected Core Implementation Team
Position-PMT Name Designation

Chairman-Lean Forum Mr. David Hasanat Chairman & CEO
Member-Lean Forum Mr. Saiful Islam Khan COO
Mr. Md. Matiur Rahman DGM-Planning
Mr. Md. Golam Kibria AGM-Production
Mr. Razzak Manager-Cutting
Champion Mr. Didarul Alam Executive-Lean management
Core Team Member Mr. Imrul kaes Executive-lean Management
Mr. Selimur Rashid Officer-IE
Mr. Mostofa Executive-IE
Mr. Nuruzzaman Khan Production Coordinator
Mr. Dipankar Roy Executive-IE
Mr. Faruque Ahmed Executive
4.6 Company Profile
The selected apparel manufacturing plant is Viyellatex Ltd. Viyellatex is an export oriented knit
garment manufacturing unit established in 1996. Now it is the single largest ISO certified knit
garments in Bangladesh. Main products are Tank Top, T-Shirt, Polo Shirt, Shorts, Trouser, and
Jacket etc. Currently it has 80 sewing lines in which most of the machines has auto trimmer and
mostly oil-free dry head machine with the capacity of 2.50-3.00 million pieces. It is located at
Sataish Road, Gazipura, Tongi, Gazipur, Bangladesh. Viyellatex Ltd. has backward and forward
linkage sister companies.
Table 4.2: Company Profile
Factory name: Viyellatex

Factory address: 297, Khortoil, Tongi
Gazipur- 1712, Bangladesh
Total direct labor: 4789 persons (Cutting, sewing and finishing)
Products range: T-shirt, Polo-shirt, Jacket, Jogger,
Tank top, Children item etc.
Sewing lines: 70 Lines
Sewing operators per line: 33
Helpers per line: 20
Daily working hours: 10
Selected product for mapping: Gamma Product Family (Cutting,
Printing, Sewing, Finishing)
Absenteeism: 5.5%
Days for order changeover: 13
29
4.7 Manufacturing Stages of the Factory
• Knitting
• Dyeing
• Cutting
• Printing
• Embroidery
• Sewing
• Washing
• Ironing
• Packing
• Needle detecting
• Cartooning
4.8 Data Collection
Data were collected from the ERP system of the company, different departments of the company
and through time and motion study of the production system. VSM data were collected through
physically following materials from store to all manufacturing stages to carton.
4.9 Data Analysis
4.9.1 Changeover Analysis
Table 4.3: Changeover Analysis
Changeover Time
Measurement
Waste Time in Minutes Remarks
Keys
Machines
Adjustment
Operators
Order movement 142.5 L.S.T , T Shirt
Changeover
Machines
Movement
Training
Labor min loss/ changeover time (min)/day 10.96
Days for order changeover 13
Labor Minute Lost/day/ worker 10.96
30
4.9.2 Quality Rework Analysis
Table 4.4: Quality Rework Analysis
Quality Rework & Reject Analysis in Sewing

Total Available Labor
Daily Output PCS 38919
in Sewing & Finishing 3710
Rework Percent 13.40% Reject Percent 0.32%
Particulars Daily Average Average Time Total Time Waste Minutes
Mistakes (Cutting) lost per mistake (Minutes) for all lines Waste per
(Minute) Day-Worker
Rework 5215.15 2.65 13,794 3.72

Reject 123.10 11.20 1,379 0.37
Total 4.09
* (Appendix-4 for Rework & Reject Percentage Calculation)
4.9.3 Line Balancing Analysis
Table 4.5: Line Balancing Analysis
Line Balancing Analysis

T
Style Shirt Line 14
Total SMV 7.43 Target SMO 22
Planned Eff % 100% Pieces Helpers & others 17
Minutes Worked 480 Total Workers 39
2520
Mins. Earning as per Eff. 480 Takt Time 0.191
Mins. Earned as per
Expected Quantity
Expected Qty. as
as per Efficiency
Under Capacity
No. of operator
Expected Mins
Dedicated C/T
Over Capacity
per Balancing
Balancing
Operation
Variation
Op. No.
Earned
SMV
1 Back part fold 0.13 1 0.13 3692 201 1548 201 32% 32%
B & F part
1
2 matching 0.31 0.31 1548 480 1548 480 -63% -63%
Care label
1
3 make 0.09 0.09 5333 480 1548 139 53% 53%
Table 4.5: Line Balancing Analysis (Continued)
31
Under Capacity
No. of operator
Quantity as per
Expected Mins
Dedicated C/T
Over Capacity
Expected Qty.
Mins. Earned
Efficiency
Balancing
Balancing
Operation
Variation
Expected
Op. No.
Earned
as per
as per
SMV
4 Sh. Cut 0.25 1 0.25 1920 480 1548 387 -31% -31%
5 Shoulder join 0.21 1 0.21 2286 480 1548 325 -10% -10%
Care label
1
6 join 0.19 0.19 2526 480 1548 294 0%
7 Rib make 0.22 1 0.22 2182 480 1548 341 -15% -15%
8 Rib tack 0.15 1 0.15 3200 480 1548 232 21% 21%
9 Rib rolling 0.25 1 0.25 1920 480 1548 387 -31% -31%
10 Rib join 0.25 1 0.25 1920 480 1548 387 -31% -31%
Scissoring
1
11 Rib 0.17 0.17 2824 480 1548 263 11% 11%
Twill tape
2
12 join 0.34 0.17 2824 480 1548 263 11% 11%
Label position
1
13 mark 0.14 0.14 3429 480 1548 217 27% 27%
14 Label join 0.23 1 0.23 2087 480 1548 356 -21% -21%
Twill tape top
2
15 stitch 0.26 0.13 3692 480 1548 201 32% 32%
Neck
1
16 scissoring 0.19 0.19 2526 480 1548 294 0%
17 Trim 0.15 1 0.15 3200 480 1548 232 21% 21%
Sleeve
1
18 matching 0.16 0.16 3000 480 1548 248 16% 16%
19 sleeve pair 0.17 1 0.17 2824 480 1548 263 11% 11%
20 Sleeve join 0.54 2 0.27 1778 480 1548 418 -42% -42%
0.26
Side seam 2
21 0.53 5 1811 480 1548 410 -39% -39%
Trim &
1
22 Folding 0.2 0.2 2400 480 1548 310 -5%
23 Sleeve Tack 0.16 1 0.16 3000 480 1548 248 16% 16%
24 Trim &fold 0.2 1 0.2 2400 480 1548 310 -5%
Body hem
1
25 tack 0.2 0.2 2400 480 1548 310 -5%
26 Trim 0.17 1 0.17 2824 480 1548 263 11% 11%
27 Folding 0.15 1 0.15 3200 480 1548 232 21% 21%
28 Body hem 0.17 1 0.17 2824 480 1548 263 11% 11%
Blind or
2
29 Churri hem 0.34 0.17 2824 480 1548 263 11% 11%
32
30
Op. No.
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
To
g
32 Triim
Triim
otal
Back part fold
33 Folding
Below graph
B & F part matching Operation
Care label make
31 Seccurity Tack
k
Sh. Cut
based
Shoulder join
Care label join
7.43
0.18
0.17
0.31
0.25
Rib make
1
1
1
2
Ribtack No. of
39
9
Rib rolling 5 operator
Rib join
6.3
Dedicated C/T
0.18
0.17
0.31
0.12
Scissoring Rib
Twill tape join
B
Expected
E t d
Label position mark
Quantity as
2667
2824
1548
3840
Label join
Labor
Twill tape top stitch
per Efficiency
33
Tablee 4.5: Line Balancing
Lost/Work
48
48
48
48
Neck scssoring Expected Mins

A
80
80
80
80
Trim Earned
15561
Figure 4.22: Graph Baased on Cycle Time & Takt

Sleeve matching
ker/Day
sleeve pair Expected Qty.
Cycle time vs Takt time

Line Balanncing Ratio
d on cycle tiime vs. taktt time showss line balan as per

15488
15488
15488
15488
Sleeve join
Analysis (Co
D
Minutees
Side seam Balancing

Trim & Folding Mins. Earned
279
263
480
194
63%
as per
9755
Sleeve Tack
ontinued)
T Time Depicting
161.29
Trim &fold Balancingg

ncing scenarrio.
Body hem tack
Line
6%
Trim Variation
-63%
Folding
Body hem
6%
%
Over
O Capacity
C i
11% 111%
34% 344%
L Balanciing
Blind or Churri hem
Trim
Security Tack Under
-63%
%
Trim Capacity
p y
Folding
4.9.4 Line Efficiency Analysis
Table 4.6: Line Efficiency Analysis
Input Labor Minutes

Assistant Sewing Op.
Input SQF Minutes

Input MC Minutes
Produced Minutes
Sewing Operator
Working Hour
Production
Efficiency
Buyer
SMV
Style
Item
Date
11 Aug. 09 WALMART MM1Q0900 SLV T.S. 9.162 1480 8 34 25 13560 28320 47.88% 16320 480960
DSH982
27 Aug. 09 M&S (9215E) LSV T.S. 9.77 0 8 38 26 0 30720 0.00% 18240 480960
29 Aug. 09 M&S DSH982 LSV T.S. 9.77 0 8 37 27 0 30720 0.00% 17760 480960
DSH982
30 Aug. 09 M&S (9215E) LSV T.S. 9.77 0 5 38 27 0 19500 0.00% 11400 300600
DSH982
31 Aug. 09 M&S (9215E) LSV T.S. 9.77 296 8 38 28 2892 31680 9.13% 18240 480960
Total 19175 175861 591600 29.73% 342720 9619200
4.9.5 Excess Motion Analysis
Table 4.7: Excess Motion Analysis
Excess Motion Analysis

Method Particulars Minutes Remarks
PMTS SMV 7.6
Time study SMV 8.77 As per worker pace
Excess Motion Minutes 1.17 Per piece
34
4.10 Lean Metrics –Labor Under-utilization
Data were collected from the ERP system of the company, different departments of the company
and through time and motion study of the production system.
4.10.1 Work practices Analysis-Waste Related to Work Practices within the Processes.
Table 4.8: Work Practice & Process Analysis-Summary
Methods of
Measurement Keys Waste Current State
measurement
Machines Adjustment
Machines Movement 10.96 mins/

Operators movement day/ worker
Order Changeover (sewing)
Training and others Tracking and Cycle Time

Follow Up
First Bundle Run 4.03 mins/ day/
Feeding worker
Last Bundle Run 4.03 mins/ day/

Cleaning the Line worker
Hesitation in Pick Ups

Unnecessary Motions(sewing)
Excessive Evacuation PMTS vs. Time Studies
1.17 mins/piece
as per Worker Pace
Excessive Bundle
Handling(Cutting)
Stickers (cutting) 0.15 mins/piece
Bundling (cutting) 0.06 mins/piece

Unnecessary Activities
(cutting, sewing, finishing) Marking 0.14 mins/piece
Cycle Time Follow Up &
0.04 VSM Data
Transport
mins/piece
Trimming 2.26 mins/piece
Sorting 0.05 mins/piece
35
Table 4.8: Work Practice & Process Analysis-Summary (Continued)
Measurement Keys Waste Current State Methods of measurement
4.09
Sewing
Quality mins/day/worker Tracking and Rework Time
Rework 4.48 measurement
Finishing
mins/day/worker
Waiting – Materials For next Process 4 mins / day/ worker NPT Report
Waiting – Workers For work (Line 161.3 mins /day

Line Balancing Analysis
(sewing) imbalance ) /worker
*(Appendix-2 & 5)
4.10.2 Key Result of Current State
Table 4.9: Key Result of Current State
Key Result of Current State
Measurement Keys Unit of Measure Value
Line Efficiency (Sewing) Percentage 29.73%
Lack of Line Balancing (Sewing) Percentage 37%
Daily Output Pieces Per Factory 38919
4.11 Value Stream Mapping (VSM) -Current State
Value stream mapping is a visual mapping tool which identifies all the value added and non
value added actions required to make a product along with information flow and breaking of
continuous flow.
4.11.1 Product Family Analysis
To select a product category to draw current state value stream mapping, product family analysis
is required to determine which product routing if improved would affect mostly to the overall
performance of the factory.
36
Based on 220 styles which were being produced by the factory previously was considered for the
product family analysis. From the analyses, it was apparent that most of the product flows
through cutting, printing, sewing and finishing route (Gama Product family) which uses 43.45%
labor minutes of the factory. (Appendix-1)
For VSM, a product was selected which follows the cutting, printing , sewing and finishing
route. The selected product was a T-shirt, Buyer was Puma. . (Appendix-1)
4.11.2 Data Collection
To collect data for VSM, core team was trained on how to collect data and exercise was carried
out to ensure that core team was capable to collect date accurately.
Material flow related data was collected by physically following the material from cutting to
sewing to finishing. The time in printing was tracked but material was not followed as the
product was printed outside of the factory from supplier.
It required 14113 minutes to make a product from store to carton. (Appendix-2)
4.11.3 Drawing Current State
Based in the collected data, it was observed that flow breaks and WIP accumulates which divides
entire flows into 14 processes. Besides collecting material flow information flow required to
make a product also had been tracked.
Based on the data analysis in previous sections, information flow and collected data in VSM data
log sheet, current state VSM was drawn as follows: (Appendix-3, 4 & 5)
37
Figure 4.3: Current State VSM
38
Figure 4.3: Current State VSM (Continued)
39
CHAPTER FIVE
DESIGNING FUTURE STATE
5.1 Introduction
Future state is what is desired to be achieved and the outlook of future material and
information flow. To make a value stream lean, it is desired to create continuous flow
wherever possible first then create pull between processes where continuous flow is not
possible. Future state is designed criticizing current state map based on Lean principle
and thinking.
5.2 Drawing Future State VSM
In current state map, we have breaking in flow between spreading and cutting where
continuous flow can be created by forming team consisting of spreaders, cutters and
numbering and bundling personnel. Lead time can be reduced through reducing the batch
size. Between cutting and printing process, continuous flow cannot be created as cutting
is done batch wise where printing is outsource on which factory does not have control
over. So, smaller batch can be cut and sent to printing in batches. Material returned from
printing can be placed in supermarket where label and accessories will be kept together
as those are used in sewing as per point of use system.
In sewing, continuous flow can be enhanced by flowing one product at a time where in
current state bundles are being moved from operation to operation. Downsizing the team
to reduce handling and create team concept to reduce line balancing lost would impact
positively continuous flow and labor utilization. Reducing changeover time would
facilitate small production run to produce small quantity efficiently as per customer
demand and reduce over production. Between sewing, QC and finishing operation,
continuous flow can be created as each operation can be done on single unit which will
reduce unnecessary processes like re-quality check, counting, sorting processes. This
would reduce tremendously throughput time and labor utilization. Downsizing the team
in sewing and finishing, team can be formed consisting of sewing and finishing worker.
But creating continuous flow from sewing to cartooning is impossible at this point due to
assorted color carton which is yet not possible to produce different color in sewing in
continuous flow due to requirement of changing threads in sewing machine. That’s why
it would be feasible at this point to create a supermarket where inventory will be
accumulated before pulling for carton the products. Due to lower cycle time and
considering utilization of needle detection machine, dedicating a needle detection
machine would not be feasible. So, it can be centralize for several sewing and finishing
team and FIFO principle can be followed.
40
5.3 Future State VSM
Based on the thinking described in the previous section following future state map was
drawn with implementation idea.
5.4 Kaizen Events List
Following are the improvement ideas to achieve in future state
1. 5S in cutting, sewing and finishing

2. Implement visuals
3. Implement team concept in finishing
4. Supermarket pull between printing and sewing
5. Downsize team in sewing and finishing
6. Implement team concept in sewing and finishing
7. Implement Kanban for line balancing in sewing and finishing
8. Implement one piece flow in sewing and finishing
9. Implement quick changeover in sewing
10. Implement quality at the source in cutting, sewing and finishing
5.5 Lean Forum Approval
Lean forum were presented with current state assessment and future state and kaizen
implementation ideas. Lean forum reviewed and investigate deeply the ideas and
suggested that creating continuous flow between sewing and finishing at this point would
be matter of huge structural investment at this point. Rather the forum suggested
focusing on sewing where labor utilization is critical factor for the overall performance
of the factory. Based on the suggestions of the lean forum, following kaizen events were
planned and approved by the lean forum for the first phase and then other decision
regarding other kaizen events would be decided based on the achievements in sewing.
The forum also opined that incentive system could be developed for the sewing and
finishing based on the achievement of team based production.
Event-1: Visual Communication- Team Status Board for Sewing
Event-: Workplace Organization-5S in Sewing
Event-3: Team Concept in Sewing- Downsizing team, Kanban for line balancing and One Piece
Flow, Quality at the Source
Event-4: Design and Installation of Incentive System
41
Figure 5.1: Future State VSM
42

Figure 5.1: Future State VSM (Continued)
43
CHAPTER SIX
ACHIEVING FUTURE STATE-KAIZEN EVENTS
6.1 Introduction
To achieve future state, kaizen events were carried out as approved by the Lean forum. To make
a kaizen event successful, participation of internal stake holder is of paramount importance.
Focus was given to participation of workers in the kaizen events.
6.2 Event -1: Visual Communication-Team Status Board
6.2.1 Defining Performance Measures
Discussing with core team and production management personnel, following performance
measures of a sewing team were selected:
• Efficiency
• Rework & reject percentage
• Changeover time
• Absenteeism
Besides, following general information were decided to make visual:
• Date
• Number of workers in the line/team
• Total number of machine used
• Hourly production, rework (alteration) & rejects
• Hourly production target
• Total allocated quantity to be produced in the line of the given style
• Total standard minute value (SMV) of the current product
• Buyer of the product
• Style number of the product
• Takt time
• Total absent workers and replacement
• Changeover information
• Kaizen story board
It was also decided that other side of the board will be used to keep following information for
one month:
• Safety records:5S graph, safety cross, needle consumptions

• Quality records: Rework & reject graph, pareto analysis (weekly), quality precautions
• Non-productive time: NPT graph, maintenance NPT & Input NPT
44
• Productivity: Efficiency graph, Skill matrix & absenteeism graph
This side of the board was termed as Safety, Quality, NPT & Productivity board or SQNP board.
6.2.2 Designing Status Board
Following design was proposed by the core team:
Team Team No:

Name:
Tot Total
Average Team Skill: Hour 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Remarks
al Allocated qty:
Saturday Target Out put T. Member
Cumulati
Date: T. M/C
SMV ve Output
Takt
Absent
Time Buyer Alter
Style Reject Efficiency
Sunday Target Out put T. Member
Cumulati
Date:
SMV ve Output T. M/C
Takt
Time Buyer Alter Absent
Monday Target Out put T. Member
Cumulati
Date:
Takt
T. Member
Tuesday
Target Out put
Cumulati
Date:
Takt
Wednes
day Target Out put T. Member
Cumulati
Date:
Figure 6.1:Design of Status Board
45
Total
Averagee Team Skill: Hour Allocated qty:
Takt
y
Thursd
ay Target Out put T. Membeer
Cumulaati
Date:
SMV ve Outpput T. M/C
Takt
y
Friday Target Out put T. Membeer
Cumulaati
Date:
SMV ve Outpput T. M/C
Takt
y
Figu
ure 6.1: Dessign of Statuus Board (C
Continued)
6.2.2.1 Changeoveer Informattion Detailss
Changeover Inforrmation
Previoous Staarting Starting Endingg Endiing Tootal New
N
Style Timme Date Time Datee Hoours S
Style
6 Design of Changeoover Inform

Figure 6.2: mation Boardd
46
6.2.2.2 Kaizen Story Board Details
Kaizen Story Board
Trouble Shooter ID
Who's reported to
Recommendation
Trouble Shooter
Waste/ Problem
Who reported
Reporter ID
Root cause
Date/time
Solution
Ref. No
Future
Status
Color
Style
Figure 6.3: Design of Kaizen Story Board
6.2.3 Designing SQNP (Safety, Quality, Non-productive time & Productivity) Board
Following format of SQNP board was designed by the core team:
Needle Recognition
5S Graph Safety Cross Consumption Board
Safety
Rework & Reject Pareto Analysis Quality

Graph (Weekly) Precautions
Quality
SQNP Board
NPT Graph Maintenance NPT Input NPT

NPT
Absenteeism
Efficiency Skill Matrix Graph
Productivity
Figure 6.4: Design of SQNP Board
47
6.2.4 Define SOP for Maintenance of Status board
Team name: will be proposed by the members of the team and suitable name from those
proposals will be selected by the management.
Team no.: a numerical no. will be given to those teams.
Order, style, buyer, date, day, total machine no., total present member no. and
absent/replacement no. will be written by the supervisor everyday with in the first hour.
Target, SMV, change over date, time and related information, average team skill, efficiency will
be written by IE of respective floor everyday with in the first hour (in case of the incidents which
may occur other than first hour should be updated within half an hour of the occurrence of the
incidents) .
Hourly output, cumulative output, alter and reject status will be written by Quality reporter
within 5 minutes every hour.
NPT Graph: NPT graphs will be maintained by the IE.
Safety & Quality Graph: Safety cross & other graph will be maintained by the in-line roaming
QC
Productivity Graph: Productivity Graph will be maintained by the supervisor of the line/team
6.2.5 Lean Forum Approval
Lean Forum was approached with the design & SOP of the team status board. The Lean
approved the design and SOP of the team status board and advised core team to take necessary
steps to make a status board. The measurement of the board was decided to be 5’X4’.
6.2.6 Training on Maintenance of Status Board
Floor management were trained on the maintenance of the team status board and how to
calculated different parameters and how fill up different graphs.
6.2.7 Installing Status Board & Coaching
The status board was installed in a line as pilot run basis and relevant personnel who were
responsible for maintaining of the status board were trained and coached how to fill the board
properly for a week.
48
6.2.8 Review and Adjusting Status Board
After one week, a review session were arranged to review whether any adjustment were required
to the board prior to rolling out in the entire floor. It was decided that no adjustment were
required.
6.2.9 Recommendation to Lean Forum
Lean forum was recommended to roll the status board in the entire floor of seven sewing lines
and then in the entire factory.
6.3 Event-2: Workplace Organization-5S
6.3.1 Awareness Training for Lean Forum & Core Implementation Team
5S is the first step in implementing Lean system in any industry as it creates neat, clean, safe and
disciplined workplace where further improvement will be carried out. Lean can be sustained in a
cluttered and disorganized workplace. Moreover, it involves employees in the improvement
activities and which has no negative impact rather all the positive effects on the system and
people.
An awareness rising training session of one hour on 5S has been arranged to improve their
understanding of 5S, potentials benefits of 5S implementation with power point presentation,
pictures of organized workplaces and with 5S promotional videos.
6.3.2 Brief Lean Forum & Approval
An implementation plan was developed to implement 5S in a sewing line and then in a entire
floor consisted of seven sewing line as a pilot concept before implementing 5S in the entire
organization.
The implementation program was divided as follows:
1. Briefing workers on 5S and potential benefits of 5S implementation

2. Taking photographs of the current workplaces for comparison of Before and after
3. Implementing the First 3S’s in the pilot sewing line
4. Set requirements
5. Implement 4th & 5th S in the pilot sewing line
6. Design & launch scoring system
7. Implement 5S in the entire floor
8. Coaching the employees
9. Taking the photographs after implementation of 5S for comparison of before and after
10. Develop recognition system for 5S excellence
11. Implement the recognition system
12. Present result to the Lean forum with recommendation
49
The lean forum approved the 5S implementation program and suggested us to do 5S with
existing tools and furniture at this point as after implementing team concept may require
different types of furniture and tools and suggested to implement 5S in sewing line no.58 and
then in that floor (3rd floor).
6.3.3 Briefing Workers on 5S and Potential Benefits of 5S Implementation
A briefing session of 30 minutes was arranged for the workers and supervisors of the selected
line with 5S promotional videos and pictures of some well organized factories. The workers were
inspired seeing the videos and pictures and committed themselves to implement 5S in their line.
The potential benefits of 5S were described as follows:
1. Improved health and safety condition

2. Pleasant workplace free of unnecessary items
3. Less searching for needed items
4. Better space utilization
5. higher product quality,
6. Lower costs,
7. Increased customer satisfaction
6.3.4 Taking Photographs of the Current Workplaces for Comparison of Before and After
Supervisors along with core team members were tasked to take some photographs of the selected
sewing lines and of the entire floor to compare the outcome of implementing 5S.
6.3.5 Implementing the First 3S’s in the Pilot Sewing Line
Core implementation team started with separating needed items for the current style running in
the selected sewing line and accumulating unneeded items in a selected red tag area in the floor.
Three workers were selected from the line to accumulate all the unnecessary items along with
core implementation team (1st S-Short).
After removing all unnecessary items from the sewing line, needed items were stored in a
organized way which would facilitate easy storing and recovery of the needed items (2nd S-Set in
order).
Then storage location of each items were labeled including type of item, quantity to be stored
information and all relevant personnel were asked to keep all the items clean all time.(3rd S-
Shine). Moreover, it was decided that music will be played for 5-minute twice a day to signal the
employees to conduct clean their workplaces. . Input area and input shelf were demarcated to
house all the necessary threads, marking materials, bobbin, patterns and registers and labeled
those locations.
50
6.3.6 Set Requirements
As it was decided in the steering committee meeting not to invest in furniture at this stage as
team based layout would be setup and different requirements for furniture would be required, not
to invest for furniture at this point. It was decided to use available resources in the sewing line to
do workplace organization.
6.3.7 Implement 4th & 5th ‘S’ in the Pilot Sewing Line
Workers were assigned to clean their workplaces and keep their workplaces free on all
unnecessary items. Workers were advised to clean their workplaces before starting their work in
the morning and before leaving their workplaces while leaving their workplaces. Besides it was
decided that a special music will be played twice in a day for five minutes in each sessions to
signal major clean up their workplaces once in the morning and once in the afternoon.
Supervisors were tasked to ensure proper cleaning of the sewing line during major clean ups.
To make 5S sustainable, it was decided that all new workers and supervisors will be trained on
5S during their orientation program organized by the Human Resource Department. Besides, a
month in every year will be declared as 5S month.
6.3.8 Design & Launch Scoring System
An scoring format were designed as follows to do 5 minutes 5S audit by the in-line roaming QC
everyday to identify deviations and coach the workers based on the deviation from standards.
The in-line roaming QC will update the 5S-score in the team status board. (See Appendix-7)
6.3.9 Implement 5S in the Entire Floor
A tour and motivation sessions were arranged for the remaining six lines of the sewing floor. In
the tour workers, QC and supervisors were briefed on the 5S activities carried in the selected line
and workers of the selected line briefed all the steps and benefits they received after doing 5S
activities. The workers, supervisors and QC of the remaining six lines were requested to do the
same 5S activities in their lines under the guidance of core implementation team within one week
time. Afterwards 5S scoring of the all seven lines will be carried out.
6.3.10 Coaching the Employees
Core implementation team visits the sewing floor time to time to find the deviations and
arranged short meeting with the workers to coach them on 5S and its benefits.
6.3.11 Taking the Photographs for Comparison of Before and After pictures after
Implementation of 5S
After conducting 5S in the sewing lines, pictures were taken to compare before and after of 5S.
51
Figure 6.5: Before picture (5S)
Figure 6.6: Pictures of ‘Sorting’ phase
Figure 6.7: After Pictures (5S)
52
6.3.12 Develop Reward System for 5S Excellence
It was decided in the lean forum meeting that the highest score achiever of week will be
recognized through 5S champions badge. Brainstorming with core team, it was decided that a
badge made of fabrics and embroidered the letters “5S Champion” and the factory name
“Viyellatex” would be written on it. As per the idea, core team was assigned to make the badge
for 5S champion of the week. In the core team meeting, it was further decided that the highest
scorer of the week would be decided based on 50% of average score of the line as audited by the
in-line roaming QC and 50% of average score based on random audit conducted by lean team
members.
6.3.13 Implement the Reward System
After 5S activities conducted in all seven lines of the selected floor, the highest score achiever
were awarded with ‘5S Champion Badge’ for one week. One representative of the Lean Forum
awarded the workers, QC and supervisors of the line with the 5S Champion badge and
encouraged them on 5S maintenance.
Figure 6.8: Rewarding workers for 5S excellence
6.3.14 Present Result to the Lean Forum with Recommendations
Lean Forum were briefed on the 5S events and recommended to conduct 5S activities in overall
factory. Lean Forum congratulated the core team and workers and instructed the core team to
conduct 5S activities in all areas of the factory.
6.4 Event -3: Team Concept in Sewing
6.4.1 Lean Forum Briefing
A briefing session was arranged for the lean forum that team based production system can
improve line efficiency, throughput time, quality and overall performance significantly over the
current system as the balancing ratio of the current system is very low as work sharing concept is
53
absent and worker perform as individual than a team. Management decided that a piloting may
be conducted at a selected line. Management also approved a core team consisting of cross
functional team members to carry out the piloting of the team concept.
6.4.2 Selecting Product for Pilot Run
Discussing with core team following, a product was selected to do the piloting which will be
produced after 20 or so days as plan and preparation will take some time before all the
requirements are fulfilled for the smooth running of the pilot team.
6.4.3 Designing & Assignment of Operations
The IE department of the factory prepares the operation assignment using SMV derived from
General Sewing Data (GSD) study based on which line would setup. IE representative in the core
team brought the operation assignment to review and design the operations for the proposed
team. The traditional layout was as follows:
Table 6.1 : GSD Layout
Style File Number S0000220

Style Number / Title ESPRIT-Z21662
Style Description RNLSTEE,SJ 150 GSM.
Customer ESPRIT
Product Ref. BASIC.
SMV 8.267
Hourly Prod Target 180
Balancing Ratio 75%

Table 6.2: Machine Requirements
MACHINE CODE QTY UTILIZATION TOTAL

Manual M 13 70.59 13
Overlock Machine [514] OL14 7 84.34
Lockstitch Machine [301] LS1 10 71.79
20
Flat lock / Chainstitch [401] MC1 1 65.70
2N Flat Lock [406] MC6 2 94.20
54
Table 6.3: Operation Bulletin
SL OPERATION SMV UTILIZATION NO OF OP MC

1 BACK-FRONT MATCHING 0.449 1.35 2 M
2 SLD JOINT 0.277 0.83 1 OL14
3 SHOULDER SCISSORING 0.248 0.74 1 M
4 NECK RIB MAKE 0.243 0.73 1 LS1
5 NECK RIB FOLD TACK 0.266 0.80 1 LS1
6 NECK JOINT 0.287 0.86 1 OL14
7 CARE LABEL JOINT 0.183 0.55 1 LS1
8 BACK NECK PIPING 0.187 0.56 1 LS1
9 PIPING CUT ACCORDINGLY 0.220 0.66 1 M
10 MAIN LABEL POSITION MARK 0.248 0.74 1 M
11 MAIN LABEL JOINT 0.184 0.55 1 LS1
12 BACK NECK END TACK 0.283 0.85 1 LS1
13 BACK NECK PIPING TOP 0.260 0.78 1 LS1
14 THREAD CUT 0.443 1.33 2 M
15 FRT NECK TOP 0.219 0.66 1 MC1
16 THREAD CUT 0.274 0.82 1 M
17 SLEEVE HEM OPEN 0.329 0.99 1 MC6
18 SLEEVE PAIR & SLEEVE HEM 0.169 0.51 1 M
19 SLV & BODY MATCH 0.190 0.57 1 M
20 SLEEVE JOINT ( LONG SLV) 0.590 1.77 2 OL14
21 SLV OPEN TACK 0.276 0.83 1 LS1
22 SIDE SEAM (LONG SLEEVE) 0.814 2.44 3 OL14
23 BODY FOLDING 0.200 0.60 1 M
24 BTM HEM TUCK 0.271 0.81 1 LS1
25 BTM HEM 0.299 0.90 1 MC6
26 BTM HEM RAW EDGE CUT 0.285 0.85 1 M
27 SLEEVE 1/4 TACK 0.240 0.72 1 LS1
28 THREAD CUT AFTER TUCK 0.333 1.00 1 M
TAKT TIME 0.25
55
Below graph
g based
d on cycle tiime vs. taktt time showss line balan
ncing scenarrio.
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Cycle time Takt tim

me
Figure 6.99: Graph Baased on Cycle Time & Takt

T Time Depicting
D L Balanciing
Line
Based on
o the layou ut, the man
npower requ uirements are 20 sewinng machinee operators(SO) and 13 3
manual workers (aassistant opeerators –ASO). It would be difficu
ult to form a team with 33 workerss
as effecctive comm
munication, work sharing and keeeping team coherence will be diffficult. Two o
options were consiidered:
n-1: Combin
Option wnsizing the requiremeents of worrker as low as 16 to 20
ning operatiion and dow 0
workerss.
n-2: Formatiion of two teams

Option t which
h would be working tog
gether to coomplete all operations
o
Option -1 is more beneficial over

o one as downsizing g the worker requiremeent through eliminationn
of somee unnecessaary operations and commbining the remaining operations
o w
will reduce the numberr
of pick up and evaacuation of parts
p whichh will reducce the work contents off operationss which willl
reduce the
t cycle timme and incrrease the pro
oductivity.
A proceess flow chaart was creaated to visuaalize the opeerations and

d entry of boody parts ass follows:
56
Figure 6.10: Process Flow Chart-Traditional
57
To combine operations, regrouping of operations which uses similar machines and sewing
specifications are required without altering the pre-requisites of operations. Following tables
shows the combination and re-sequenced operations:
Table 6.4: Re-sequencing & Combining Operations
Style-Z21662 Buyer- Espirit Item- L.S. T-shirt
Out Put/Hr
Out Put/Hr
Combined
Operation
Operation
Remarks
Machine
Op. Seq.
Worker
SMVof
SMV
Req.
1 Fr & Back Part Matching 0.449 134 0.449 1 134 Manual
2 Shoulder Join 0.277 217
0.525 114 OL-4TH
3 Shoulder Scissoring 0.248 242 1
4 Neck Rib Make 0.243 247
0.509 118 PM
5 Neck Rib Fold Tack 0.266 226 1
6 Neck Joint 0.287 209 0.287 1 209 OL-4TH
7 Back Neck Piping 0.187 321
0.407 1 147 PMP
8 Piping Cut accordingly 0.22 273
9 Back Neck End Tack 0.283 212
0.531 1 113 PM
10 Main Label Position Mark 0.248 242
11 Main Label Join 0.184 326
0.444 135 PM
12 Back Neck Piping Top Seam 0.26 231 1
13 Thread Cut After Top Seam 0.443 135 0.443 1 135 Manual
14 Front Neck Top Seam 0.219 274
0.493 122 FL
15 Thread Cut after Top Seam at 0.274 219 1
16 Sleeve Hem 0.329 182 0.329 1 182 FL
17 Sleeve Pair after Sleeve Hem 0.169 355
0.359 167 Manual
18 Sleeve & Body Match 0.19 316 1
19 Sleeve Joint 0.59 102 0.59 1 102 OL-4TH
20 Sleeve Open Tack 0.276 217
0.459 131
21 Care Label Join 0.183 328 1 PM Elimination Target
22 Side Seam 0.814 74
1.014 2 118 OL-4TH
23 Body Folding after Side Seam 0.2 300
24 Bottom Hem Tack 0.271 221 0 0 PM Eliminated
25 Bottom Hem 0.299 201
0.584 103 FL
26 Bottom Hem Raw Edge Cut 0.285 211 1
27 Sleeve Tack 0.24 250
0.573 1 105 PM
28 Thread cut after Tack 0.333 180
Total 8.267 7.996 17
Takt time 0.47 minutes Balancing Ratio 80%
58
Below graph
g based
d on cycle tiime vs. taktt time showss line balan
ncing scenarrio.
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
6E
E-16
Fr & Back Part…
Neck Rib Fold…
Piping Cut…
Back Neck End…
Main Label…
Back Neck…
Thread Cut After…
Thread Cut after…
Sleeve Pair after…

Sleeve & Body…
Body Folding…
Bottom Hem…
Thread cut after…

-
-0.1
Bottom Hem
Shoulder Scissoring
Neck Rib Make
Sleeve Hem
Side Seam
N k JJoint
i t
Sleeve Joint
Main Label Join
Sleeve Open Tack

Care Label Join
Shoulder Join
Back Neck Piping
Sleeve Tack
Neck
Cycle time Takt tiime
Figure 6.11
1: Graph Based on Cyccle Time & Takt Time Depicting Line
L Balanccing
Summ mary of Req

quirements
Manu ual Worker 3
Machhine Operatoor 14
Machhine 14
Plain Machine-P
Piping attachhment (PMP
P) 1
Plain Machine (PPM) 5
Flat Lock
L (FL) 3
Over Lock (OL) 5
Matchhing Table 2
Input Table 1
QC Table
T 1
From thhe Analysiss, it is apparent that manpower

m an
nd machine can be redduced to almmost half off
the con
nventional ssetup. Baseed on the combined
c o
operation, fo
following prrocess flow
w chart wass
designeed to design the layout of workstattion.
59
Figure 6.12: Process Flow Chart-Pilot Run
6.4.4 Designing the U-shaped Layout
The U-shape layout and setting up machine side by side was decided to adopt for the pilot line to
achieve the following benefits:
1. Ease of communication
2. Ease parts evacuation and pick up
3. Ease of movement of workers
4. Ease of supervision
To design the u-shaped layout in which machine would be set up side by side, linear layouts
were designed based on the modified process flow chart to determine the sequence of operations
and workstation thereof
60
Linear Layout-1:
Figure 6.12: Linear layout-1
61
Based on Linear layout-1, linear layout-2 was designed to set sequence of all operations which
will be also the basis of U-shaped physical layout.
Figure 6.13: Linear Layout-2
Bending the linear layout-2, Operations and workstation sequence were set as below figure:
62
Figure 6.14: U-shaped layout
6.4.5 Set Pre-requirements for Implementation (for one team)
6.4.5.1 Team Structure
• One line composed of …14 ...sewing workers Plus ……3…manual workers.

• 1 input man to support the team for parts and trims distribution
• …1….table QC men
• …1…..inline QC man
• …1 on job trainer with adequate technical knowledge (supervisor)
6.4.5.2 Tools Requirements
• Scissors- …2……qty
• In hand scissors (trimmers)……17….qty.
• Side table for each operator
• QC Inspection and packing tables (30 inch X 3 or 4 feet)….qty. and two matching table ( as
per discussion)
63
• Shelf of 3 or 4 levels maximum height of 5 feet to hold non start parts
• Possible drawers file cabinet for accessories, trims and tools as area of storage
• Necessary sewing patterns for the style.
6.4.5.3 Clean Up Activities
• Hold pieces cut till implementation (Non Start)

• Minimize and complete in WIP between workers before implementation
• Move machineries as planned during night time on the day of implementation
• Remove all unnecessary parts, tools, pieces not related to in-process’ current style
• Regroup all accessories, trims, parts in one area for workplace organization during
implementation
• Clean the machinery tables and empty drawers
• Re-organize the bundles into bulk quantity split by parts category
6.4.5.4 Practices
• In hand scissors (Clippers)

• Practice of worker as per designed combined operations
6.4.5.5 Information
• Technical sheet with quality standards, sketch and method of measurement and checking
• Packing sheet and method of packing
• Trim sheet of current style
• Sealed contract sample
Sewing Machines: (as per selected product and analysis)
Table 6.6: Requirement of Machines
Summary of Requirements
Manual Worker 3
Machine Operator 14
Machine 14
Plain Machine-Piping attachment (PMP) 1
Plain Machine (PM) 5
Flat Lock (FL) 3
Over Lock (OL) 5
Matching Table 2
Input Table 1
QC Table 1
64
6.4.6 Identify Performance Measures
It was assumed that following metrics would be effected due to the implementation of the team
based concept:
• Line efficiency
• Machine utilization
• Space utilization
• WIP
• Throughput time
6.4.7 Train core team on Measurement of Performance Measures
Core team members were trained to measure the metrics of the selected line before any changes
were carried out in the selected line for determining the effect of the implementation.
6.4.8 Map Performance Measures
Core team members gathered data from the information system of the company and reviewed the
line physically to determine the WIP & throughput time of the line.
Table 6.7: Status of Traditional Line (Before Conversion)
Status of Traditional Line (Before Conversion)

Input Labor Minutes
Input SQF Minutes

Input MC Minutes
Produced Minutes
Sewing Operator
Working Hour
Production
Efficiency
Buyer
SMV
Style
Item
Date
SLV
11 Aug. 09 WALMART MM1Q0900 T.S. 9.162 1480 8 34 25 13560 28320 47.88% 16320 480960
SLV
SLV
SLV
SLV
SLV
SLV

65
Table 6.7: Status of Traditional Line (Before Conversion) (Continued)
Input Labor Minutes

Input SQF Minutes

Input MC Minutes
Produced Minutes
Sewing Operator
Working Hour
Production
Efficiency
Buyer
SMV
Style
Item
Date
SLV
SLV
SLV
SLV
SLV
SLV
SLV
DSH982 LSV
27 Aug. 09 M&S (9215E) T.S. 9.77 0 8 38 26 0 30720 0.00% 18240 480960
DSH982 LSV
29 Aug. 09 M&S (9215E) T.S. 9.77 0 8 37 27 0 30720 0.00% 17760 480960
SLV
DSH982 LSV
30 Aug. 09 M&S (9215E) T.S. 9.77 0 5 38 27 0 19500 0.00% 11400 300600
DSH982 LSV
31 Aug. 09 M&S (9215E) T.S. 9.77 296 8 38 28 2892 31680 9.13% 18240 480960
Total 19175 175861 591600 29.73% 342720 9619200
Table 6.8: Status of Traditional Line-Summary
Summary
Efficiency 29.73%
Lab. Productivity (SMV Generation /Labor Hour) 17.84
SMV Generation/Machine Hour 30.79
SMV Generation/SQF Hour 1.10
WIP 800
Throughput Time 500
Avg. Worker/ Line 61.89
66
6.4.9 Schedule Implementation
As worker requires to cut threads of their own operations and to keep the cycle time of the
operations low, practicing operations keeping trimmers in their hand was required. Another
requirement was to make the worker to practice the combined operations as per the design. As
altering the production line may reduce the productivity of the line for few days, need to be
considered to meet the planned lead time of the selected product which needs to be planned in
advance.
6.4.10 Develop Guidelines for the Pilot Team
Supervisor and team leader should hold a meeting with the members to explain the operations
sequences and the quality points, parts location etc. during starting new styles in the line.
Team leader will always discuss with supervisor to implement any decision in the line and vice-
versa.
Conditions & Responsibilities
• All threads will be trimmed off the operation.

• Scissors are attached to the sewing machine or to the table.
• Modular members are not allowed to remove the scissors off the sewing machine or the
table.
• No one is allowed to walk with the scissor or to be kept in her pockets.
• Develop a board that height is similar to the size of regular paper to hang the trim card,
the sketch and the specification sheet.
• All pencils should be fixed to the sewing machine or to a table applying the same rules of
the scissors.
6.4.10.1 In-Team Quality Procedures & Responsibility
Work Studies and Quality team must develop a standard work method including all needed
instruction to perform the checking. The instruction must be posted at the checking area.
• All SMO should adapt some techniques to their sewing machines in order to avoid any
excess trimming, or wrong seam allowances.
• In Process, all SMO should check the first piece produced against all critical and
measurement points as per the operation.
67
• In Process, all SMO should check one out of 7 pieces produced against all critical and
measurement points as per the operation before issuing the 7 pieces to the next SMO.
• Output checking point must have the following elements:
1. Measurement sheet,
2. Critical points list,
3. Trim card,
4. All size labels of the current style,
5. All hang tags of the current style,
6. Daily Units checking record,
• Final quality checkers are not allowed to carry a scissor with them or to fix a scissor to a
table.
• All threads are detected at the final checking area should be returned to the SMO
workstation for trimming purpose.
• Final quality checkers will return alter/rework pieces as soon as it is found and inform in
line QC for remedial actions.
6.4.10.2 WIP Status
• Fifteen pieces maximum between two operations when parts will move single pieces and
stop sewing to help the next operator or any other operations. He/she will return to her
operation when WIP drops to 5 pieces.
• When WIP is in maximum level, operator will stops his/ her work and will help the next
operator in manual jobs or perform other sewing operation in his/ her or other machine if
available.
6.4.10.3 Supervisor Responsibilities
• At first hour, he/she will talk with team leader first and then with all members of the team
regarding the last day’s performance (Production, Alter, Reject, Efficiency, 5S score) &
how they can overcome the last day’s problems.
• Talk with team leader and operator about bottleneck process & critical operation to
quality.
• Check 5S Audit has been done or not, if not then talk with AQC.
• Check all the data of the Visual Status Board & Graphs of SQNP board. If any item is not
maintained then he will consult with his superior.
• He will check produced pieces randomly to check quality of the products and will take
corrective actions if required.
68
Lean forum was presented with the current metrics of the selected line and proposed team based
layout, requirements, potential layout, pre-requirements prior to implementation and initial
guidelines for the team. Lean forum appreciated the ideas and approved the guidelines and
instructed the core team to facilitate all the requirements to implement the pilot team. Lean
forum also agreed to share the benefits achieved from the pilot concept with employees in the
form of productivity incentive.
6.4.12 Developing Skill of the Worker
Workers were supplied with hand trimmers to practice trimming threads of their operations and
practice to work keeping the trimmers in hand wherever possible mainly in all plain machine and
flat lock machine operations and practice to do bottom hem without pre-tacking for the duration
until the raw materials of the selected product were available and all requirements are met which
were supposed to be done in about three weeks.
6.4.13 Implementation with Follow Up
Workers of the selected line were briefed on the pilot team concept and the benefit for worker
which includes distribution of workload among the workers, sharing the workload of bottleneck
operations to alleviate extra working pressure, good working relations among workers and with
supervisory management as productivity would be higher and potential higher income for
workers and supervisors once the outcome of the pilot run accepted by the management as
satisfactory.
Workers agreed to participate in the concept but raise their concern that management may not
share benefits of the team concept with workers at the end. One lean forum members assured the
workers if company benefits from the team concept, management was willing to share it with its
employees.
Core team members selected required numbers of workers and supervisor as per the set
requirements of the team based on willingness of workers and required skills of the worker.
Among the selected members, a team leader was selected from the workers by themselves.
Workers were introduced with layout of physical set up and briefed on it. Then workers and
supervisors with help of core implementation team changed the physical layout in U-shaped
layout.
Workers and supervisors were coached on the concept during the implementation and
performance were measured based on different parameters after running the line for several
weeks.
69
6.4.14 Map Improvement
Table 6.9: Status of Pilot Team-After Conversion
Status of Pilot Team (Model Line-After Conversion)
Input Labor Minutes
Input SQF Minutes

Input MC Minutes
Produced Minutes
Sewing Operator
Asst. Sewing Op.
Working Hour
Production
Efficiency
Buyer
SMV
Style
Date
Item
SLV
5 Oct. 09 ESPRIT Z21662 T.S 8.27 300 10 13 4 2481 10200 24.32% 7800 201000
SLV
6 Oct. 09 ESPRIT Z21663 T.S 8.27 400 10 13 4 3308 10200 32.43% 7800 201000
SLV
7 Oct. 09 ESPRIT Z21664 T.S 8.27 2000 10 13 4 16540 10200 162.16% 7800 201000
SLV
8 Oct. 09 ESPRIT Z21665 T.S 8.27 700 10 13 4 5789 10200 56.75% 7800 201000
SLV
10 Oct. 09 G-STAR 87540 T.S 7.40 300 10 14 4 2220 10800 20.56% 8400 201000
SLV
11 Oct. 09 G-STAR 87540 T.S 7.40 300 10 14 4 2220 10800 20.56% 8400 201000
SLV
12 Oct. 09 G-STAR 87540 T.S 7.40 450 8 14 4 3330 8640 38.54% 6720 160800
SLV 201000
13 Oct. 09 G-STAR 87540 T.S 7.40 400 10 14 4 2960 10800 27.41% 8400
SLV
14 Oct. 09 G-STAR 87540 T.S 7.40 550 10 14 4 4070 10800 37.69% 8400 201000
SLV
15 Oct. 09 G-STAR 87540 T.S 7.40 800 10 14 4 5920 10800 54.81% 8400 201000
SLV
17 Oct. 09 G-STAR 87540 T.S 7.40 705 10 14 4 5217 10800 48.31% 8400 201000
SLV
18 Oct. 09 G-STAR 87540 T.S 7.40 800 10 14 4 5920 10800 54.81% 8400 201000
SLV
19 Oct. 09 G-STAR 87540 T.S 7.40 800 10 14 4 5920 10800 54.81% 8400 201000
SLV
20 Oct. 09 G-STAR 87540 T.S 7.40 660 10 14 4 4884 10800 45.22% 8400 201000
21 Oct. 09 G-STAR 87540 T.S 7.40 800 10 14 4 5920 10800 54.81% 8400 201000
22 Oct. 09 G-STAR 87540 T.S 7.40 640 8 14 4 4736 8640 54.81% 6720 160800
Total 10605 156 81435 166080 49% 128640 3135600
70
Table 6.10: Status of Pilot Team-After Conversion (Summary)
Summary
Efficiency 49.03%
Labor Productivity (SMV Generation/ Labor Hour) 29.42
SMV Generation/Machine Hour 37.98
SMV Generation/SQF Hour 1.56
WIP 175
Throughput time-Minutes 130
6.4.15 Present Results to Lean Forum
Lean Forum was briefed on the achievements of the model line and a comparison between
traditional line setup and model line was presented.
Table 6.11: Comparison- Traditional Line Vs. Model Line
Performance Improvement
Measures Unit of Measurement Traditional Line Model Line Percent
Line Efficiency Percentage 29.73% 49.03% 65%
Labor Productivity SMV Generation/ Labor
17.84 29.42 65%
Hour
MachineUtilization SMV Generation/ MC
30.79 37.98 23%
Hour
Space Utilization SMV Generation/ SQF
1.10 1.56 42%
Hour
Throughput Time Minutes 500 130 -74%
WIP Pieces 800 175 -78%
The comparison of performance parameters has been shown in histogram below:
Line Efficiency Labor Productivity

0.60 40.00
0.50
30.00
0.40
0.30 20.00
0.20
10.00
0.10
0.00 0.00
Traditional Line Model Line Traditional Line Model Line
Figure 6.15: Comparison Graph- Traditional Line Vs. Model Line
71
Machine Utilization Space Utilization
40.00 2.00
30.00 1.50
20.00 1.00
10.00 0.50
0.00 0.00
Throughput Time WIP

600 1000
500 800
400
600
300
400
200
100 200
0 0
Figure 6.15: Comparison Graph- Traditional Line Vs. Model Line (Continued)
6.4.16 Recommendations for Further Improvement
• Deploy IE functions
• Develop efficient sewing practices
• Increase line efficiency
• Design team concept connecting physically finishing section up to poly packing and
create continuous flow
• Design incentive system for sewing workers, quality personnel and supervisors
• Initially roll out team concept in a entire floor
• Then roll out in the entire factory
6.4. 17 Roll Out Plan
Lean forum appreciated the outcome of the pilot team and accepted all the recommendations and
instructed the project champion to take necessary steps to fulfill all the recommendations
including the incentive system and congratulated all personnel involved in the implementation of
pilot team.
72
6.5 Event-4: Design & Installation of Incentive System
To work as team, it is immensely important to give the team a common objective to achieve and
which will motivate workers, supervisors and line quality personnel to work as a team. After
achieving the success in pilot team, it was necessary to design a good incentive system for the
line personnel for sustainability of the concept and improve further. To develop an incentive
system, a core team was selected with personnel from IE, Information system, HR, production,
lean team.
6.5.1 Lean Forum Briefing
Lean forum was approached with the incentive system with basic idea that it will be based on
efficiency by the team and quality defects rate of the team and it should be a group incentive
system which means that incentive earnings will be calculated based on the achievement of the
team as a whole not based on individual performance. Lean forum further suggested that the
incentive system should be open ended which means that no boundary should be imposed of the
amount of money the team can achieve and it should be variable with the achieved efficiency or
minutes produced by the team and it should ensure the profitability of the organization as well as
higher earnings for the team. When project champion approached the lean forum that financial
data need to be analyzed to develop such a system where there will be a breakeven efficiency,
then the lean forum advised that financial data are sensitive and core team should advise the
breakeven efficiency and lean forum then will set the rate for each extra minutes achieved by the
team. Lean forum also advised not to communicate with the incentive system before finalizing
the details and prior approval of the system by the lean forum due to sensitivity on the issue.
6.5.2 Designing Incentive System with Core Team
Discussing all aspects, following guidelines were prepared for the proposed incentive system:
Objective: To motivate sewing workers to improve their performance as a team as well as

improve their life standards through higher earnings.
6.5.2.1 Guidelines:
Team based incentive system.

SO & ASO will get incentive equally.
Breakeven efficiency will be as follows:
Table 6.12: Breakeven Efficiency
Breakeven Efficiency SMV

50% < 10
45% ≥ 10
73
• For a style running more than 15 days in a line, breakeven efficiency will be as follows:
Table 6.13: Breakeven Efficiency for Style Running more than 15 Days

55% < 10
50% ≥ 10
For a style running more than 30 days in a line, breakeven efficiency will be as follows:
Table 6.14: Breakeven Efficiency for Style Running more than 30 Days

60% < 10
55% ≥ 10
Sewing starting time for a certain style will be counted from one and half hours after
input acquisition from cutting section. Style closing time will be the starting time of the
next style. In case of input shortage of next style, supervisor will inform IE & PO. IE &
PO will decide the style end time.
Incentive will be calculated after completion of sewing for the style or after fifteen days
of sewing, whatever comes first.
A sewing line will get incentive for achieving higher efficiency than breakeven
efficiency.
Efficiency, Breakeven efficiency, SMV generation will be calculated based on output
from end table QC pass data and working hour from planning and man power data from
HR department.
SMV of the product will be provided by IE dept.
Quality requirements: The alteration rate and rejection rate must be lower than or equal to
12% and 1% respectively to qualify for incentive.
Non productive time (NPT) for fire drill & power shortage will be counted if any case it
takes more than ten minutes.
Breakeven efficiency, incentive rate and defect rate will be adjusted according to
corporate objectives periodically.
No partial hour will be allowed.
The sewing worker will get earned incentive amount with their monthly salary.
Supervisor will get twice the amount earned by each worker’s.
Input man will get the same amount of each worker.
74
6.5.2.2 Incentive for Sewing Inline Quality Inspector (QI) & End Line Assistant Quality
Controller (AQC)
AQC will be eligible to get incentive if alteration rate found less than 10% at end line
quality inspection.
End line measurement QI & workmanship QI will be eligible to get incentive if defect
rate found at finishing section be less than 4% at the measurement & workmanship
inspection respectively.
Each Sewing AQC & QI will get the same amount of each sewing worker of the
respective line.
Lean forum was approached with the proposed guidelines of the incentive system. The lean
forum appreciated the prepared guidelines and discussing with core team and the members of the
lean forum, Lean forum approved that the sewing team will get TK. 0.30 collectively for 1 SMV
for generating more SMV than SMV required for breakeven efficiency and approved the
guidelines. The lean forum also suggested that the pilot team should be rewarded Tk. 300 per
worker for their achievement prior to implementation of the incentive system for their previous
performance.
6.5.4 Review Performance of the Model Line after Implementing Incentive System
After implementing incentive system, the model line was capable of enhancing their efficiency to
52.56% from 49.03% in non-incentive environment which shows 7.19% improvement based on
the analysis of 29 days of production data. (See Appendix-6)
Lean Forum was presented with the achievements of the model line and a comparison between
traditional line setup and model line after implementing incentive system for model line.
Table 6.15: Comparison- Traditional Line Vs. Model Line After Implementing Incentive System
Improvement
Performance Measures Unit of Measurement Traditional Line Model Line
Percent
Line Efficiency Percentage
29.73% 53% 77%
Labor Productivity SMV Generation/
17.84 31.54 77%
Labor Hour
MachineUtilization SMV Generation/ MC
30.79 41.74 36%
Hour
Space Utilization SMV Generation/ SQF
1.10 2.20 84%
Hour
Throughput Time Minutes 500 120 -76%
WIP Pieces 800 168 -86%
75
The comparison of performance parameters has been shown in histogram below:
Line Efficiency Labor Productivity

60% 35.00
50% 30.00
40% 25.00
20.00
30%
15.00
20% 10.00
10% 5.00
0% 0.00
Traditional Model Line Model Line Traditional Model Line Model Line
Line with Incentive Line with Incentive
Machine Utilization Space Utilization

50.00 2.50
40.00 2.00
30.00 1.50
20.00 1.00
10.00 0.50
0.00 0.00
Traditional Model Line Model Line Traditional Model Line Model Line
Line with Incentive Line with Incentive
Throughput Time WIP

600 1000
500 800
400
600
300
400
200
100 200
0 0
Traditional Line Model Line Model Line Traditional Model Line Model Line
with Incentive Line with Incentive
Figure 6.16: Comparison Graph- Traditional Line Vs. Model Line After Implementing Incentive System
76
CHAPTER SEVEN
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Conclusions
Though tools and techniques of lean manufacturing have been implemented successfully
across the industry-manufacturing and services alike around the world, it should be
implemented in a systematic way. It is utmost important to assess the current condition
of the factory through VSM, identify opportunities for improvements, identify tools and
techniques required for improvements and orderly implementing tools and techniques
involving all employees in the organization.
In the assessment of current state, it was found in VSM that processing time is only 4%
where retention time is 96%. Line efficiency was 29.73% and lack of line balancing was
37% and changeover time was 142 minutes per changeover which shows huge
opportunities for improvement in those areas.
Before implementing tools and techniques, employees were trained on wastes and how
certain tools can reduce those wastes to align the thinking. Through implementing 5S
and team status board, involved employees were able to notice how little changes can
make their work simple and improve visibility of off-standards and they were introduced
to changing for better.
Through implementing team concept through downsizing the team and better balancing
and eliminating unnecessary activities, team achieved 65% improvement in line
efficiency, 23% improvement in machine utilization, 42% improvement in space
utilization and 74% improvement in throughput time and 78 % reduction in WIP in
model line which is encouraging. To sustain the changes and improve further as well as
to share benefits of improvements with employees, state of the art incentive system was
introduced for workers, supervisors and quality inspectors to encourage them to perform
better and work as a team. After implementing incentive system, the line efficiency of
the model line was further enhanced by 7.19% over the performance of model line in
non-incentive environment and 77% improvement over traditional line. Throughput time
reduction was 76%. Though outcomes of 5S and visual management are difficult to
measure, these tools are foundations for lean implementation.
77
7.2 Recommendations
The study was done with a limited scope. The future works may include super market
pull between cutting and sewing, standardizing changeover procedures, setting up team
concept in cutting and TPM. The future works may also include Hoshin kanri or
Balanced Score Card policy deployment procedures to align the objectives of employees
with those of corporate objectives.
78
REFERENCES
[1] Womack, James P. & Jones Daniel T., & Roos, Daniel 1990, The Machine that changed the
world, Rawson Associates, New York.
[2] Locher, Drew A. 2008, Value stream mapping the development process: a how-to guide for
streamlining time to market, Productivity Press, New York.
[3] George, Michael L. & Wilson Stephen A. 2004, Conquering Complexity in Your Business,
McGraw-Hill.
[4] Hobbs, Dennis P. 2004, LEAN Manufacturing Implementation—A Complete Execution

Manual for Any Size Manufacturer, J. Ross Publishing.
[5] Sun, Shili, 2011, ‘The Strategic Role of Lean Production in SOE’s Development’,
International Journal of Business & management, Vol.6 No.2.
[6] Mito, Setsuo 1986, Why Produce the Right Part in the Right Amount at the Right Time,
Diamond Publishing Japan, 1986. (Originally published in Nihon Keizai Shimbun September
1985)
[7] Magee, David 2007, How Toyota Became #1 - Leadership Lessons from the World's Greatest
Car Company, Portfolio.
[8] Rich, Nick & Bateman, Nichola et. al 2006, Lean Evolution: Lesson Learned from
Workplace, Cambridge University Press.
[9] Womack, James P. & Jones, Daniel 1994, ‘Lean Production’, HBR.
[10] James P. Womack & Daniel T. Jones 1996, Lean Thinking, Simon & Schuster.
[11] Hines , Peter & Taylor, David 2000, Going Lean, Lean Enterprise Research Centre.
[12] Hasin, Ahsan Akhter 2007, Quality Control and Management, Bangladesh Business
Solutions.
[13] Spearman, Mark L., Woodruff, David L. & Hopp, Wallace 1990, ‘CONWIP: A Pull
Alternative to Kanban’, International Journal of Production Research, Vol.28, N0.5, p. 879-894.
[14] Karkoszka, T. & Honorowicz 2009, ‘Kaizen Philosophy a Manner of Continuous

Improvement of Processes and Products’ Journal of Achievements in Materials and
Manufacturing Engineering, Vol.35, No. 2.
[15] Flied, M. W. 2000, Lean Manufacturing: Tools, Techniques, and How to use them, The St.
Lucie Press, Boca Raton,London.
[16] Dennis & Pascal 2002, Lean Production Simplified, Productivity Press, New York.
79
[17] Mann, David 2005, Creating a Lean Culture-Tools to Sustain Lean Conversions,
Productivity press, New York.
[18] Japan Management Association 1985, Kanban: Just-in-Time at Toyota, Productivity Press,
Cambridge.
[19] Shingo, Shigeo 1983, A Revolution in Manufacturing: The SMED System, Productivity
Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts and Norwalk.
[20] Field, William M. 2000, Lean Manufacturing: Tools, Techniques, and How To Use Them,
The St. Lucie press, London.
[21] Hirano, Hiroyuki 2009, JIT Implementation Manual, Vol. 2, CRC Press, New York.
[22] Jessop, D. & Jones, O. 1995, ‘Value Stream Process Modeling: A Methodology for
Creating Competitive Advantage’, Proceedings of the 4th Annual IPSERA Conference,
University of Birmingham.
[23] Millard, Richard L. 2001, ‘Value Stream Analysis and Mapping for Product Development’,
Master’s Thesis in Aeronautics and Astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
[24] Womack, J.P. and Jones, D.T. 1995, Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in
Your Corporation, New York, Simon & Schuster.
[25] Rother, M. & Shook, J. 2003, Learning to See: Value Stream Mapping to Create Value and
Eliminate Muda, The Lean Enterprise Institution, 1.3 edn Brookline, MA.
[26] Mahadevan, B., Venkataramanaiah, S. & Shah, Janat 2000, ‘Design of a Cellular
Manufacturing System for a Product Oriented Plant’, Third International Conference on
Operations and Quantitative Management, Sydney.
[27] Shahrukh, A. Irani 2008, The Handbook of Cellular Manufacturing Systems, John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.
[28] Jayakumar, V. & Raju, R. 2010, ‘Investigation of Applications of SA in the Design of

Dynamic Cellular Manufacturing Systems’, International Journal of Engineering and
Technology, Vol. 2 (4), p. 220-224.
80
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Product Family Analysis
PRODUCT FAMILIY-ROUTING ANALYSIS
Total order minutes

Print before sewing
Embroidery before
Product Family
Total Minutes
Total Orders
Washing
Product
Sewing
sewing
others
Client
SMV
Style
%
T-Shirts G-star 84804 1490 12 17880 Y Y Y Y
Tang Top G-star 84150 4117 7 28819 Y Y Y Y
13.1
13.1 11.60
ALPHA Tang Top G-star 94162 171 5 2249 Y Y Y Y 738674
%
13.1
13.1
13.1
13.1
13.1
13.1
13.1
81
Total Minutes
before sewing
Total Orders
Embroidery
Print before
Product
Washing
Sewing
sewing
others
Client
SMV
Style
13.9
13.9
11.1
T-Shirts G-star 84820 7366 12 88392
11.1
T-Shirts G-star 84916 528 12 6336 Y Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84166 196 12.5 2450 Y Y Y
T-Shirts Espirit RQ2260 2238 8 17904 Y Y Y
8.33
T-Shirts SO 6669 1035 2 8624 Y Y Y
7.33
T-Shirts SO 8644 2999 3 21992 Y Y Y
1254
T-Shirts SO 6669 1 7 87787 Y Y Y
BETA 1205 8.33
T-Shirts SO 6669 8 2 100467 Y Y Y
7.39
T-Shirts SO 8644 3171 3 23443 Y Y Y
T-Shirts PUMA 3720 12.5 46500 Y Y Y
T-Shirts ESPRIT 800 12 9600 Y Y Y
Polo S G-star 1044 15 15660 Y Y Y
Polo S G-star 1179 15 17685 Y Y Y
Polo S G-star 442 15 6630 Y Y Y
9.91
Tangtop G-star 2998 6 29728 Y Y Y
9.91
9.91
T-Shirts G-star 5537 12 66444 Y Y Y
82
Total Minutes
before sewing
Total Orders
Embroidery
Print before
Product
Washing
Sewing
sewing
others
Client
SMV
Style
T-Shirts G-star 593 12 7116 Y Y Y 1290543 20.27
2000 %
7.20
7.20
7.20
7.20
7.20
7.20
T-Shirts Espirit RQ2260 2238 7 15666 Y Y Y
7.20
T-Shirts Espirit 8225 6 59269 Y Y Y
GAMA T-Shirts G-star 84912 1400 12 16800 Y Y
83
before Sewing
Embroydary
Total orders
Total mins
Total mins
Washing
Product
Sewing
Client
others
SMV
Style
T-Shirts G-star 84912 2046 12 24552 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84912 469 12 5628 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84912 547 12 6564 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84912 705 12 8460 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84912 480 12 5760 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84912 837 12 10044 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84912 1116 12 13392 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84922 1055 12 12660 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84924 1421 12 17052 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84924 233 12 2796 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84924 207 12 2484 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84924 2494 12 29928 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84810 5162 12 61944 Y Y 2771880 43.45
T-Shirts G-star 84810 584 12 7008 Y Y %
T-Shirts G-star 84810 601 12 7212 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84810 302 12 3624 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84810 222 12 2664 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84810 1444 12 17328 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84810 7726 12 92712 Y Y
1766
T-Shirts G-star 84910 4 12 211968 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84908 5275 12 63300 Y Y
1063
T-Shirts G-star 84812 1 12 127572 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84906 3852 12 46224 Y Y
1506
T-Shirts G-star 84908 8 12 180816 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84920 3899 12 46788 Y Y
1810
T-Shirts G-star 84922 1 12 217212 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84362 7955 12 95460 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84364 2936 12 35232 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84926 3012 12 36144 Y Y
LLT P 810109 2405 12.5 30063 Y Y
C. LST P 810112 1585 12.5 19813 Y Y
7.22
LST P 812574 7200 9 52049 Y Y
T-Shirts P 504038 2370 12.5 29625 Y Y
LST P 504040 1800 12.5 22500 Y Y
T-Shirts P 504174 2841 12 34092 Y Y
SWET P 504418 1050 18 18900 Y Y
S.JKT P 504419 1190 18 21420 Y Y
84
Print before sewing
Embroidery before
Total Minutes
Total Orders
Product
Washing
Sewing
sewing
others
Client
SMV
Style
6.92
T-Shirts ES R94620 800 7 5542 Y Y
3.99
Tanktop ES QX4622 223 5 891 Y Y
8.42
T-Shirts ES S90622 800 1 6737 Y Y
1766
T-Shirts G-star 84910 4 12 211968 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84908 5275 12 63300 Y Y
1063
T-Shirts G-star 84812 1 12 127572 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84906 3852 12 46224 Y Y
1506
T-Shirts G-star 84908 8 12 180816 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84920 3899 12 46788 Y Y
1810
T-Shirts G-star 84922 1 12 217212 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84362 7955 12 95460 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84364 2936 12 35232 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 84926 3012 12 36144 Y Y
7.23
Tanktop ES SX4680 1329 8 9619 Y Y
5.18
Tanktop ES R21665 7688 3 39847 Y Y
DELTA T-Shirts G-star 84246 1897 12 22764 Y Y Y
85
Total Minutes
before sewing
Total Orders
Embroidery
Print before
Product
Washing
Sewing
sewing
others
Client
SMV
Style
9.91
9.91
9.91
9.91
9.91
9.91
9.91
T-Shirts G-star 84236 5129 12 61548 Y Y Y 781585 12.28
T-Shirts G-star 84236 543 12 6516 Y Y Y %
T-Shirts SO 4115 7000 12 84000 Y Y Y
T-Shirts SO 5002 2339 12 28068 Y Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 94350 1536 12 18432 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 94352 1167 12 14004 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 94354 443 12 5316 Y Y
T-Shirts G-star 94356 1093 12 13116 Y Y
T-Shirts Espirit 90642 3600 12 43200
T-Shirts Espirit 90643 2800 12 33600
Others T-Shirts ES Q94684 1000 12 12000 Y
3.99
T.TOP ES QX4622 1000 5 3995 Y
T-Shirts ES RX4672 1404 12 16848 Y
Pant ES Q90630 1000 15 15000 Y
T-Shirts ES R94620 1000 12 12000 Y
L. PANT P 805963 1896 18 34128 Y
86
Total Minutes
before sewing
Total Orders
Embroidery
Print before
Product
Washing
Sewing
sewing
others
Client
SMV
Style
T-Shirts G-star 157 12 1884 Y
783945 12.31
%
10.6
T-Shirts G-star 2372 42 25243 Y Y
T-Shirts Espirit 3600 10 36000
T-Shirts Espirit 2800 10 28000

87
Appendix-2: VSM Data Log-Sheet
VSM Data Log Sheet

Order No: 810107 Route Cutting, PrintingSewing & Finishing
Buyer: PUMA Item Basic T- Shirt
Parallel Activity
Time (Parallels
Distance (Feet)
Time(minute)
Department
Equipment
Cycle time
Manpower
Activity)
Activity
NVA
Qty
VA
Fabric wait
Store for cutting 3000 2292 - 3000
in store
Fabric
Cutting loading to 1.22 2292 2 0.00 1
trolly
Fabric
Cutting transport to 0.92 2292 2 Trolly 50 0.00 1
cutting table
Waiting for
Cutting 23.74 2292 - 24
spreading
Transport
fabric trolly
Cutting 1.17 2292 2 0.00 1
to cutting
table
Feeding 1st
roll to
Cutting 1.15 120 2 0.02 1
spreding
M/C
Spreading Spreading
Cutting 3.53 2292 5 0.01 4
1st lay M/C
Cutting 2 nd lay 1.65 12 5 0.69 2
Marker
Cutting measuremen 1.37 2292 2 0.00 1
t
Fabric
115.5 Spreading
Cutting Spreading - 2268 5 0.25 116
6 M/C
189 Plies
Cutting Waiting 15.6 2292 - 16
AIR
Cutting Transport 0.76 2292 5 15 0.00 1
Pressure
88
Time (Parallels Activity)
Parallel Activity
Distance (Feet)
Time(minute)
Department
Equipment
Cycle time
Manpower
Activity
NVA
Qty
VA
Marker
Cutting attaching on 4.95 2292 4 Manual 0.01 5
lay
Cutting Waiting 20.25 2292 20
Cutting Cutting 46.8 2292 4 ST Knife 0.08 46.8
Waiting for
Cutting sticker 32.34 2292 Manual - 32
arrange
107.1
Cutting Stickering 2292 4 Manual 0.19 107
8
Cutting Waiting 26.31 2292 - 26
QC
Checking & 159.2 Lead
Cutting 2292 2 Manual 0.14 159
rejection 4 time
Cutting
Cutting Bundling 22.6 2292 2 Manual 0.02 23
Cutting Store in bag 17.62 604 2292 2 Manual 0.02 18
Waiting for
Cutting 51.45 2292 - 51
Print
Transport to 20
Cutting 2.85 2292 2 Manual 0.00 3
store 0
Cutting Waiting 800 2292 - 800
Front Part
sent for
120
Cutting printing 1200 2292 -
0
outside of
the factory
Waiting to
Cutting 2200 2292 - 2200
go to sewing
40
Sewing Transport 10.2 2292 Manual/lift - 10
0
Sewing Waiting 60.25 2292 - 60
Body
Sewing Matching & 0.12 1 1 Manual 0.12 0
folding
Sewing F & B mark 0.17 1 1 Manual 0.17 0
89
Parallel Activity
Distance (Feet)
Time (Parallels
Time(minute)
Department
Equipment
Cycle time
Manpower
Activity)
Activity
NVA
Qty
VA
Sewing Transport 1.62 20 Manual - 2
Shoulder
Sewing 0.21 1 1 OL 0.21 0.21
join
Sewing Waiting 15 20 - 15
Care label
Sewing 0.18 1 1 PM 0.18 0.18
join
Sewing Neck Join 0.87 1 1 OL 0.87 0.87
Sewing Cut mark 0.45 1 1 Manual 0.45 0
Twill tape
Sewing 0.4 1 1 PM 0.40 0.4
join
Label
Sewing 0.4 1 1 PM 0.40 0.4
making
Main label
Sewing 0.33 1 1 PM 0.33 0.33
join
Sewing Scissoring 0.28 1 1 Scissors 0.28 0.28
Twill tape
Sewing 0.23 1 1 PM 0.23 0.23
top seam
Sleeve
Sewing 0.32 1 1 Manual 0.32 0
matching
Sewing Sleeve join 0.5 1 1 OL 0.50 0.5
90
Parallel Activity
Distance (Feet)
Time (Parallels
Time(minute)
Department
Equipment
Cycle time
Manpower
Activity)
Activity
NVA
Qty
VA
Sewing Side seam 0.63 1 1 OL 0.63 0.63
Sewing Sleeve tack 0.25 1 1 PM 0.25 0.25
Sewing Folding 0.05 1 1 Manual 0.05 0
Sewing Hem tack 0.23 1 1 PM 0.23 0.23
Folding
Sewing 0.18 1 1 Manual 0.18 0
gmts.
Sewing Body hem 0.22 1 1 FL 0.22 0.22
Rew edge
Sewing 0.28 1 1 Scissors 0.28 0
cut
Sewing Blind hem 0.33 1 1 FL 0.33 0.33
Thread
Sewing 0.6 1 1 Manual 0.60 0.6
trimming
Security
Sewing 0.25 1 1 PM 0.25 0.25
tack
Thread
Sewing 0.04 1 1 Trimmer 0.04 0.04
trimming
Sewing QC 1.03 1 1 Manual 1.03 1
Measureme Measreme
Sewing 0.35 1 1 0.35 0
nt QC nt Tape
91
Parallel Activity
Distance (Feet)
Time (Parallels
Time(minute)
Department
Equipment
Cycle time
Manpower
Activity)
Activity
NVA
Qty
VA
Transport to
Sewing 1.33 140 Manual 10 - 1
reporter
Sorting-Size
Sewing 6.55 140 1 Manual 0.05 7
wise
Transport to 30
Sewing 14.59 140 Manual - 15
finishing 0
Finishing Waiting 5.89 140 - 6
Finishing Counting 3.71 140 1 Manual 0.03 4
Transport to
iron
Finishing 1.64 140 1 Manual 10 0.01 2
receiving
table
Received by
Finishing 1.76 140 1 Manual 0.01 2
target man
Transport to
Ironing
Finishing Ironing 0.76 1 1 Pressing ta 0.76 0.76
Transport to
QC table
1st QC-
Measurem
Finishing Measureme 0.45 1 1 0.45 0
ent Tape
nt Check
2nd QC-
Getup check
Putting in
Finishing another 0.2 100 1 Manual 0.00 0
table
Hang tag
Finishing 1.97 7 1 Tag Gun 0.28 1.97
attach
Finishing Hang tag ch. 1.53 7 1 Manual 0.22 2
92
Parallel Activity
Distance (Feet)
Time (Parallels
Time(minute)
Department
Equipment
Cycle time
Manpower
Activity)
Activity
NVA
Qty
VA
Transportati
Finishing on to 0.7 110 1 Manual 10 0.01 1
folding
Finishing Folding 0.93 1 1 Manual 0.93 0.93
Poly
Finishing 0.61 1 1 Manual 0.61 0.61
packing
Transportati
on to
arranging
table
Arranging
gmts.
Finishing Barcode 0.15 1 1 Manual 0.15 0.15
Transport to
Finishing 0.55 50 Manual 10 - 1
size area
Finishing Size check 0.15 1 1 Manual 0.15 0
Finishing Waiting 420 320 - 420
Transportati
Finishing on to 2.1 100 1 Manual 25 0.02 2
cartooning
Needle Needle
Carton 0.11 1 1 0.11 0.11
detector Detector
Carton Waiting 60.32 80 - 60
13.2
Carton Cartooning 13.27 20 1 Manual 0.66 7
Shipping Waiting for
4800 4800
store shipping
14112 127 1284
Total
.2 16.0 1 2
93
Appendix-3: Information Flow
Information Flow
Methods
Electronic
No
Manual
Type of Information From To Reasons
.
Sewing,
Cutting,Store,Finis For planning
1 Production Plan Planning hing,Q.C,Planning √ purpose
Buyer wise Monthly For planning
2 Plan Planning Merchandizer √ purpose
Cutting, Sewing, For planning
3 Order Status Report Planning Finishing √ purpose
Order Status Report For planning
4 Summary Planning Merchandizer √ purpose
For planning
5 Fast React Plan Planning Planning √ purpose
Sewing, Cutting, For planning
6 MO Sheet Planning Finishing √ purpose
Sample,Sewing,Sto
re,Planning,Febric For planning
7 P.P Meeting Plan Planning Planning √ purpose
For planning
8 Placement Printing Plan Planning Printing √ purpose
For planning
9 Febric Requisition Planning Febric Planning √ purpose
Sewing, Quality, For planning
10 P.P Meeting sheet Planning cutting, Technician √ purpose
For
Operation breakdown determining
11 Sheet I.E sample √ Productivity
for
measurement
12 Technical Sheet I.E sample √ control
13 layout Sheet I.E Sewing √ for line layout
Thread consumption For thread
14 Sheet I.E Planning √ requisition
For providing
input
condition
15 Line Feeding report I.E Sewing √
94
Methods
Electronic
No
Manual
.
For
understanding
process
16 Process flowchart I.E Planning √ sequence
For factory
17 KPI report I.E Sewing, Planning √ Evalution
For Achieving
18 Production Plan Production Production Officer √ target
19 Input target Sheet Production Cutting √ for daily input
For Achieving
20 MO Sheet Production Production Officer √ target
Sample Requisition for sample
21 Form Sample R&D √ activities
Sewing, Cutting,
finishing, for sample
22 P.P Meeting Sample Quality,Technician √ activities
For updating
Accesories Inventory Accsories
23 Report Store Merchandizer √ condition
For delivery
label to
24 Label Approved Report Store Quality √ sewing
For updating
Q.C Accessoer Accsories
25 inspection Report Store Merchandizer √ condition
For updating
26 Packing list Finishing Buyer Q.C √ packing qty
Production CAD
27 Marker CAD Cutting √ For lay cutting
For
consumption
28 Fabric Consumption CAD Planning √ febric
For costing
29 Costing consumption CAD Merchandizer √ purpose
Machine breakdown for loss time
30 sheet Maintenance I.E √ calculation
For rejection
31 Daily reject report Quality Production √ control
for
measurement
32 Measurement report Quality Production √ control
for quality
Daily End table check control
33 report Quality Production √
95
Methods
No
Electronic
Manual
.
Daily inline Correction for quality

34 report Quality Production √ control
AQL measurement for quality
35 report Quality Production √ control
for quality
36 AQL report Quality Production √ control

96
Apendix-4: Reject & Rework Analysis in Sewing
Quality Status -Sewing

Date of Observation-18-03-09 Line No.
Defect Particulars 14 15 Total
Uncut/ loose thread 27 17 44
Broken stitch 2 3 5
Skip stitch 0 0 0
Puckering 0 0 0
SV join open 7 5 12
Neck rip uneven 12 0 12
Neddle Mark 7 0 7
Oil spot 48 78 126
Dirty spot 6 11 17
Needle damage 13 0 13
Fabric fault 0 0 0
Side seam uneven 0 0 0
Tuck/label missing 4 0 4
Total reject 3 3 6
Total alteration qty. 140 114 254
Total inspection qty. 775 1122 1897
Alteration percent 18% 10% 13.4%
Rejection percent 0.4% 0.3% 0.32%
Right First Time (RFT) 82% 90% 86%

97
Appendix-5: Rework & Reject Analysis in Finishing
Quality Status -Finishing

Date of Observation-14-19th March-2009
Defect Particulars Quantity
Cut stitch 1135
Drop/ skip stitch 408
Needle damage 241
Puckering 558
Measurement 3599
Uneven 699
Dirty spot 7026
Oil spot 8956
Total rejection qty. 1236
Total alteration 22622
Total inspection quantity 205655
Alteration percent 11%
Rejection percent 0.60%
Right First Time (RFT) 88.40%

98
Appendix-6: Status of Model Line-After Incentive System Implementation
Status of Model Line-After Incentive System Implementation
Input Labor Minutes

Input SQF Minutes

Input MC Minutes
Produced Minutes
Sewing Operator
Working Hour
Production
Efficiency
Buyer
SMV
Style
Date
22-Dec-09 M&S 0100W/SWIM017 9.99 1040 11 18 5 10386 15180 68.42% 11880 211200
23-Dec-09 M&S 0100W/SWIM017 9.99 1043 7 10 5 10416 6300 165.34% 4200 134400
23-Dec-09 PUMA 812274 8.68 400 4 10 5 3473 3600 96.48% 2400 76800
24-Dec-09 M&S 0100W/SWIM017 9.99 1184 11 13 5 11825 11880 99.53% 8580 211200
25-Dec-09 M&S 0100W/SWIM017 9.99 886 8 17 5 8848 10560 83.79% 8160 153600
26-Dec-09 M&S 0100W/SWIM017 9.99 1111 6 16 5 11096 7560 146.77% 5760 115200
27-Dec-09 G-Star 94850 8.86 579 11 17 5 5130 14520 35.33% 11220 211200
28-Dec-09 G-Star 94850 8.86 705 11 17 5 6246 14520 43.02% 11220 211200
29-Dec-09 G-Star 94850 8.86 841 11 15 5 7451 13200 56.45% 9900 211200
30-Dec-09 G-Star 94850 8.86 605 11 15 5 5360 13200 40.61% 9900 211200
31-Dec-09 G-Star 94850 8.86 895 11 16 5 7930 13860 57.21% 10560 211200
02-Jan-10 G-Star 94850 8.86 1226 11 16 5 10862 13860 78.37% 10560 211200
04-Jan-10 PUMA 812274 8.68 200 11 15 5 1737 13200 13.16% 9900 211200
05-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 216 11 15 5 1469 13200 11.13% 9900 211200
06-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 787 11 15 5 5351 13200 40.54% 9900 211200
07-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 990 11 15 5 6731 13200 50.99% 9900 211200
08-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 581 8 15 5 3950 9600 41.15% 7200 153600
09-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 920 11 16 5 6255 13860 45.13% 10560 211200
10-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 985 13 15 5 6697 15600 42.93% 11700 249600
11-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 1170 13 15 5 7955 15600 50.99% 11700 249600
12-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 1197 13 16 5 8138 16380 49.69% 12480 249600
13-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 1213 13 16 5 8247 16380 50.35% 12480 249600
14-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 1071 13 16 5 7282 16380 44.46% 12480 249600
16-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 1449 13 16 5 9852 16380 60.15% 12480 249600
17-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 1081 13 16 5 7350 16380 44.87% 12480 249600
18-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 1186 13 16 5 8064 16380 49.23% 12480 249600
19-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 1170 13 16 5 7955 16380 48.56% 12480 249600
20-Jan-10 M&S 0169W/LHU3252 6.8 1068 13 16 5 7261 16380 44.33% 12480 249600
21-Jan-10 PUMA 812274 8.68 288 13 14 5 2501 14820 16.87% 10920 249600
Total 26087 205818 391560 52.56% 295860 6124800
99
Appendix-7: 5S Audit Sheet
5S AUDIT SHEET
Line no.:- Audit date :- Excellent =5 Very good =4 Good = 3
Points Not good = 0 to
Supervisor name:- Auditted by:- Average = 2
1
S.No.
Off Standard Secured

Points to Consider Area Freq. Points Remark CAP
Sewing line &

1 Unnessary M/c , table or any other objects
input, output
Unnessary thread, label, pattern & other trims
area
2
from previous styles & garments.
Unnecessary shipped style documents like
3
measurement sheet, OB ,Trim card etc.
All the Acc. & cut pcs are not mixed & are in
4
Sewing line & input, output

right places & those places are labelled.
All required documents like measurement sheet,
5 trim card ,index sheet etc are in file & set
according to uses.
area
Input area ,output area, check points, line no are
6 labeled & in proper way maintaing the principles
of X & Y axis
M/c, table , side stand ,basket and all other
7 equipment & half stitched garments in line are
also maintaing the principles of X & Y axis.
input, output area
M/c & table are clean,painted & working

Sewing line &
8
condition
Floor space is clean & isles are painted & free of
9
any obstacles.
Maintain status board with updated information
10
& CAP of Previous Audit Followed
Total points
Avg. points
100
Appendix-8: Safety Cross
Team Name: SAFETY CROSS Team No: Month:
1 2
"Safety & Quality First" 3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26
27 28 Green = Safe Day
29 30 Yellow = First Aid Required
31 Red = Recordable Injury
SAFETY KAIZEN NEWSPAPER

DATE PROBLEM ACTION WHO WHEN STATUS
101
Appendix- 9: Rework & Reject
TEAM NAME: DAILY REJECT & ALTER GRAPH TEAM NO: MONTH:
1
0
7
% of reject & alter
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
DATE
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
Reject=Red Line Alter= Blue
Line
102
Appendix- 10: Efficiency Graph Format
TEAM NAME: DAILY EFFICIENCY GRAPH TEAM NO: MONTH:

(Production X SMV)
EFFICIENCY= Χ100%
(Operator X Working hour X 60)
100
90
80
70
EFFICIENCY %
60
50
40
30
20
10
DATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Production
No of Operator
SMV
Working Hour
103

Lean Conversion of An Assmbly Line - A Case Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lean Conversion of An Assmbly Line - A Case Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lean Conversion of An Assmbly Line - A Case Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the thesis about?

What is the thesis about?

What challenges were faced during the lean conversion process?

What challenges were faced during the lean conversion process?

LEAN CONVERSION OF AN APPAREL ASSEMBLY LINE

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING

A thesis submitted to the Department of Industrial and Production Engineering, Bangladesh

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING

The thesis titled “LEAN CONVERSION OF AN APPAREL ASSEMBLY LINE - A CASE

Dr. Abdullahil Azeem Chairman

Dr. M. Ahsan Akhtar Hasin Member

Dr. A. K. M. Masud Member

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING

Chapter One: Introduction

Chapter Two: Literature Review

Chapter Three: Lean Manufacturing

Chapter Four: Lean Assessment –Current State

Chapter Five: Designing Future State

Chapter Seven: Conclusion & Recommendation

Appendix-1 Product Family Analysis 81

Table 4.1: Core Implementation Team 29

Figure 1.1: Materials Flow in Push and Pull Systems 14

Figure 3.1: Value Stream Icons 21

The application of Lean manufacturing in a business or manufacturing environment, describes a

1.3 Background of The Thesis

1.4 Problem Statement

1.5 Objective of the Study

The specific objectives of this project work are:

1. Improving line efficiency of an assembly line

The methodology of the study will be as follows:

5. Conduct Kaizen events based on future state map

2.2 Historical Background

The challenge in manufacturing during the 1930s shifted to product variety.

2.2.1 Ford System

2.2.3 Lean Manufacturing

3.2 Principles of Lean Manufacturing:

Key principles behind Lean Manufacturing can be summarized as follows:

2. Standard processes – Lean requires an the implementation of very detailed production

4. Pull-production – Also called Just-in-Time (JIT), Pull-production aims to produce only

6. Continuous improvement – A continuous improvement mentality is necessary to reach

3.3 Value & Waste

3.3.1 Types of Wastes

g. Making Defective Products:

3.4 Pull & Push Production

Cutting Sewing Finishing Packing

Fig. 1.1 Materials Flow in Push and Pull Systems

5S is a system to reduce waste and optimize productivity through maintaining an orderly

3.5.1 First pillar: Sort (Seiri)

3.5.2 Second pillar: Set in Order (Seiton)

3.5.3 Third pillar: Shine (Seiso)

3.5.4 Fourth Pillar: Standardize (Seiketsu)

3.5.5 Fifth Pillar: Sustain (Shitsuke)

3.6 Visual Management

Visual management is an important support for cellular manufacturing. Visual management

3.8 Quick Changeover

Hiroyuki Hirano states ten basics principles for Improvement:

1. Throw out all of your fixed ideas about how to do things.

2. Think of how the new method will work-not how it won’t.

3. Don’t accept excuses. Totally deny the status quo.