Being efficient does not mean your productive

I have been in hundreds of metal stamping plants around the world and have heard from many an owner about how efficiently their plants are running. "We are running at 88% efficiency" one said.
As I began to study their operations, I did find that their stamping plant was running with great efficiency. People were moving parts, tools, bins, etc. as though everything was perfectly orchestrated. I asked each department head what was their efficiency rating based on and each had their list of parameters and were following them very closely.
As the day went on and we began studying their productivity, a very different scene began to emerge.
They had presses that could average 22 stokes per minute, yet they were only averaging 5 strokes per minute during an 8 hour shift.
How could this be if they are 88% efficient?
Lets take a look at just one of their presses; Their target production for one shift is 2400 parts. This number is based on their many years of experience improving how product flows through the plant. The crane operator has a certain amount of time to move the new coil into place and to remove the old die and load the new one with the aid of the die setter. The die setter has a certain amount of time to set-up the new die in the press and feed the material through the die. Quality control has a certain amount of time to sign off on the part once it is produced. The tow motors have a certain amount of time to remove a full bin and place an empty bin in its place. At an average of 5 strokes per minute over a 7 hour time frame, they produced 2100 parts, or 88% of their target.
You can see that every aspect of the process had its allotted time to do what needed to be done. Each person or persons mentioned above was doing their job very EFFICIENTLY. They for the most part were performing the tasks within the time allowed.
So why were they not productive? Even though everyone worked efficiently, they were not EFFECTIVE. The steel was stored at one end of the plant and the tools at the opposite end. The crane operator was moving back and forth all over the plant just moving steel and tools. This took a lot of time. The total time to change the tools in the press was just over 2 hours.
When they went on break or had to change bins, the press stopped stamping. When 1 of the 4 operators miss-hit his palm buttons or had trouble adjusting the part he had manually transferred to the next station, it caused a delay in stamping. When the scrap had built up under the die and they stopped to clean it out, this caused a delay in stamping.
Don't get me wrong, everyone worked very hard and met the expectations of the company, but they weren't being productive.
If they reduced their changeover time to 20 minutes, that is an additional hour and forty minutes of stamping time.
If they re-tooled so that the part was transferred automatically either by the strip or a transfer system, added sensors to monitor the parts, and implemented systems to extract the scrap and shift bins automatically, there would be no delays during production, and they could even run during breaks.
In reality they were only working 36% of the time. The other 64% was efficiently waiting, fixing, moving, etc.
By making layout and process changes, they could go from 5 people per press to 1 person per press, and from an average of 5 parts per minute up to 19 parts per minute. Which would mean that instead of producing 2400 parts per shift, they could be producing over 9000.

So remember, just because your people are efficient at what they do, it does not mean that they are being effective and producing the most amount of quality parts in the least amount of time.
Take a new look at your stamping operations and see if you have changed efficient movements for productivity. If you would like fresh eyes looking at your process, please don't hesitate to contact us through our website www.consultamex.com.