A manufacturer of high-performance cables for energy and telecoms was struggling with production reliability, while demand was growing strongly and head office was pushing for fewer staff and less working capital. Production and maintenance built one vision and one way of working together. Output rose by 30%, labour costs fell by 20%, and the plant was named best plant in the division.
Duration: ten months
“The project was well tailored to our needs. And when we saw the first results, we all worked even harder to push the changes through. It was a very motivating time. A great exchange of ideas, and fantastic collaboration.“- Production shift leader
The situation
A manufacturer of high-performance cables and systems for energy and telecoms was struggling with production reliability at every stage of the process. As a result, the schedule was constantly being changed at the last minute, with major consequences: extra line stops for unplanned changeovers, ever smaller windows for maintenance, falling output, overtime, more work in progress, and a shortage of drums, because they were being used to store unfinished orders.
Demand was growing strongly. So production had to be brought under control, to deliver reliably, right first time and in sufficient volumes. At the same time, head office was pushing for fewer staff and less working capital.
What was really wrong
The production shift leaders and maintenance management were the group that had to turn the tide. But each shift leader had a very different idea of what he wanted to achieve, and roles and responsibilities weren’t clearly assigned.
The performance management framework was weak and a lot was managed on gut feel. Production and maintenance blamed each other when problems arose; it had always been that way. Workforce planning was below par too, because there was too little visibility of people’s skills. This was made harder still by reliance on a large flexible workforce with little continuity.
What we did together
One concrete picture of how production should run. The first priority was getting the production shift leaders aligned before maintenance could be brought in. Together we created a detailed, tangible operational vision: how production should run, and what that would look like. The roles and responsibilities of operators, shift leaders and production managers were also clearly defined. The vision was quantified as the ambition to hit next year’s budget: 25% more output.
The plan of approach, developed by Axisto together with people from the line organisation. In working sessions we recorded what was already working well and where things could improve. On that basis, an implementation plan and project structure were designed. That released a lot of energy and a strong will to change, but also the realisation that it was a big undertaking.
Starting with the shift handover. People needed to see that their current problems were being tackled and their work was getting easier. So we started with the handover between shift leaders. An improved performance management framework captured each shift’s performance and problems and made them open for discussion. For the first time, management was based on facts and concrete improvements were set in motion.
Maintenance benchmarked itself against good maintenance.Axisto showed what high-level maintenance looks like and how it works, and the maintenance department assessed itself against that. It made the improvement potential clear, as well as what needed work. Like production, they created their own operational vision and implementation plan.
Production and maintenance together. In joint sessions, both departments integrated their visions and plans. They defined shared KPIs and agreed targets.
Developed a shift leader team. A targeted team development programme helped the shift leaders on their way to the high-performing team they had envisaged. It proved a real struggle. The breakthrough only came when two shift leaders moved into different roles and a new operations manager was hired.
What it delivered
- Output: +30%
- Labour costs: −20%
- Cost of poor quality: -75%
- From blaming each other to collaboration and shared responsibility, at every level
- Halfway through the project, annual production was already ahead of budget, and labour costs below target
- The plant was named best plant in the division
What happened afterwards
The change in attitudes and behaviours within production and maintenance led to a lasting culture of improvement. Through their experience on the project, many employees also saw opportunities in their own departments, and in support functions such as logistics and product design.
On a later visit, the momentum had been maintained, and the approach had spread to other departments and processes.
