Ycp Cac

Operations Management: SCM 300

Clock Assembly Report 2

Joseph Shortlidge

April 15, 2015

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Mission Statement:

Here at York College of Pennsylvania Clock Assembly Company (YCP CAC), it is our mission to provide our customers with excellent service and high quality products at affordable prices. Our goal is to keep our customers satisfied with our efficiency and reliability. The foundation of our company is a promise to our customers to provide products and services that exceed their expectations.

Vision Statement:

To produce the highest quality clocks as well as model success, integrity and customer value for clock production operations.

YCP CAC is a clock manufacturer that operates in an assembly line. Our manufacturing headquarters is located on the campus of York College of Pennsylvania in York, Pennsylvania. Here at YCP CAC, we currently offer only one clock model, the YCP-3000. The YCP-3000 is available in two colors, black and blue. There are several detailed steps that go into producing the YCP-3000.  YCP CAC currently employs 16 workers who are stationed at our facility. These 16 employees are dispersed among 12 different workstations in which the product is ordered, created, and shipped to our customers.

INTRODUCTION:

This report provides adequate information on the production of YCP CAC’s newest clock, the YCP-3000. In the following report, our company includes the bill of materials (BOM), the facility workstation layout, process capacity, and suggested changes to continuously improve our production process.

WORKSTATION SUGGESTIONS/IMPROVEMENTS:

YCP CAC’s solid manufacturing process has lead the company to early success, however we believe that there are optimal changes to be made to make the company’s process more efficient. One problem we observed while YCP CAC was creating the YCP-3000 was the bottleneck at C/H assembly.  We believe this problem arose because the task was assigned to one worker, whereas it should have been broken down into an assembly line task.  Workers at the C/HA station are given a battery pack which they screw onto the back of the clock. The battery is anchored by a screw which holds it in place. Next, the hands are put on the front side of the clock and anchored by another screw.  Because this process has multiple complex steps, we believe creating an assembly line for this part of the project would create to better organization and lead to a more satisfying result. To explain: there will be three stations, one employee putting hands on the clock, another employee putting the screw to hold the battery, and the final employee will assemble the battery pack onto the back of the clock.  Implementing this change will also eliminate the traffic at the station and thus clearing the C/HA station of being the bottleneck.

SUPPLIER ISSUES/SUGGESTIONS TO IMPROVE

Another suggestion would be to inspect the hands upon arrival from the outside vendor. During the second simulation, three black clocks had failed inspection at different times due to the fact that the hands on the clock fell off. Since they failed inspection they were not able to be sent out and since the defect was on an outsourced product it could not be fixed at the rework station. Along with inspecting outsourced materials upon arrival another suggestion would be a more effective way of relaying information throughout the assembly line. Since the assembly line was working from a pull system the company was only producing the clocks they knew they needed. Since the three black clocks only failed at the end the rest of the assembly line didn’t know that those clocks had not been shipped and were still needed. This lack of communication was the primary reason for defects not being able to be fixed. The last order completed order # 31 was shipped at 9 minutes and 45 seconds, the simulation ended at 12 minutes and 6 seconds. So the last 2 minutes and 21 seconds were spent waiting on 2 black clocks. Instead of sending the completed orders back up the line, the warehouse clerk should of been able to inform the production scheduler of the failed clocks and had the production scheduler fulfill the new order.

IMPROVEMENTS NOTICED IN SIM. 2:

YCP CAC suggested that the warehouse clerk provide the production scheduler with the list of days customer order schedule in simulation 1. The production scheduler will use that schedule to send out orders to the kitters that reflected what was needed for that day. This would increase efficiency and eliminate the 9 minutes that were wasted waiting on black clocks. It would also help reduce cost because only the clocks needed for that day would be produced. In the second simulation, no workstation were waiting for products to be passed to them. This is in a way saving the company money because all workstations were up and running.  If employees are receiving constant flow of work and not being made to wait, it causes an increase in work ethic and motivation and it saves the company money.  In the second simulation YCP CAC was not paying any employees for wasted time, which means simulation 2 saw in increase in employee performance.

PUSH VS. PULL SYSTEM:

During simulation 1, YCP CAC incorporated a push system of inventory control. A push system involves our company forecasting inventory needs to meet our estimated customer demand. The biggest disadvantage to using a push system is when the forecasted calculations are incorrect. This causes either a shortage or a surplus of supplies. A shortage will hurt the company because they should be selling product but instead have zero. On the other hand,  a surplus is when the demand predicted is lower than the inventory received. When there is excess inventory, the company will have to pay a holding cost, leading to a lower profit margin. In simulation 2 we switched to a pull system of inventory control. This system begins with a customer’s order and works up from there. This type of control strategy is to limit waste, excess inventory and will cut inventory carrying costs, which is why we believe is ideal for a company like ours.  This system is an example of Just-in-Time (JIT).

COMPARISON OF SIM. 1 TO SIM. 2:

We as a team saw in increase in production in the second simulation compared to the first. The first simulation saw only 8% (4 out of 45) of orders received on time, while in simulation 2 all 31 orders received were on time. Another increase noted was the percentage of orders fulfilled. In simulation 1 only 24% (11 out of 45) of orders received were fulfilled. In simulation 2, 68% (21 out of 31) were fulfilled.   This is the type of improvements we need to see on a daily basis at YCP CAC. These improvements will keep YCP CAC among the top producers of clocks in the Eastern region of the U.S.  It will also increase our credibility and reputation with our customers and among other company’s in our field. In simulation 1, we were given 20 minutes to complete as many clocks as possible, and we made 39 clocks. In simulation 2, we were given 12 minutes to complete as many clocks as possible, and completed 40 clocks in 12 minutes. We made 1 more clock in 8 less minutes. This improvement is outstanding and shows our customers we are improving all aspects of the production process.