LEAN MANUFACTURING OVERVIEW
In 1910 Charles Sorensen and
Henry Ford created the first moving assembly line as a way of reducing wasted
motion and handling complexity in automotive assembly. Without question, the
lean manufacturing system pioneered by the Toyota Motor Company has a common
beginning with these early “work flow” improvements. However, this common
heritage led to two very different manufacturing systems: mass production and
lean production.
The objective of mass
production is to maximise economies of scale through high capital utilisation.
At Ford, the emphasis on flow was limited almost exclusively to the final
assembly line, while subassembly processes, suppliers and distribution operated
on almost independent production schedules, resulting in large batch sizes and
high inventory levels. Inventory at all points was accepted as a necessary
buffer to survive schedule and output instability. Quality was inspected and
projected into the system through mass inspection and inventory buffers.
Capital was a solution to the relentless push for capacity. Finally, production
was driven from forecasts, pushing material through the plant in anticipation of
actual customer demand. The mass production system flourished in the high
growth, boom phase of the automotive industry and was widely copied in other
sectors.
The objective of lean
production is the elimination of waste through the efficient use of all
resources. In 1945 the president of Toyota Motor Company issued an edict to the
company to catch up with America in three years otherwise the automotive
industry of Japan would not survive. At the time, labour productivity in
Japanese factories was 1/10 that of US automotive manufacturers. Scarce capital
and small, highly diverse “island” market did not support large-scale, mass
production. Finding a solution to the challenge led to a fundamentally
different “Lean Production” system, which ultimately triumphed over mass
production during the 1973-4 oil crisis. At a time of global recession and slow
growth, Toyota sustained profits and grew US market share while US companies
lost on both counts.
A
new paradigm
The lean production system
pioneered at Toyota created a new paradigm for excellence in manufacturing.
This paradigm is founded on the belief that cost reduction is sometimes the only
viable mechanism for a corporation to increase profit; price is not always an
effective lever. Today, some organisations are fortunate enough to determine
their selling price by first taking the product cost and adding on a sufficient
profit margin:

A company can therefore increase
profit by raising the price of its product. However, in a diverse marketplace,
most companies do not have this advantage as consumers and market conditions
largely determine price. In these markets, companies face the following
equation:

This is often referred to as
the “cost-minus” principle because the company can only increase profit through
cost reduction. Cost reduction in a manufacturing environment occurs through
the elimination of waste. Waste can be defined as something for which the
customer is not willing to pay; it is a non-value adding activity. The
elimination of such activities shortens the lead time, so value is delivered to
the customer faster and with less effort.
The new paradigm of lean
manufacturing transcends more than just a production system – it is a new way of
thinking about organising the improving operations. Traditionally one often
associates lean manufacturing with a collection of tools and techniques on the
factory floor. However, there are several tiers in how the new thinking can be
applied. At the highest level, the concepts of lean manufacturing can be
successfully applied across any industry or sector of the economy, such as the
construction, aerospace, and financial environments. At the next level down,
the operating practices of lean manufacturing need to be tailored to a degree,
such as the high-level design of a pull system. On the most pragmatic level,
the tools and techniques of lean manufacturing aim to identify and eliminate
waste in the particular environment. These tools must be tailored to the
particular environment, such as the particular types of kanban comprising a pull
system.