TWI - Job Metrics

What is the objective of Job Methods Training?

JM trains supervisors how to produce greater quantities of quality products in less time by making the best use of the people, machines, and materials now available to them. Supervisors are taught how to break down jobs into details, and then systematically question every detail to improve the method by eliminating, combining and rearranging the details of each job.

Each participant is required to bring in a current job from their work place and demonstrate to the class how they used the 4-step method to breakdown and improve that job. Participants learn the value of getting input from operators and other departments before summarizing the proposed improvement in writing to prevent presenting a flawed or incomplete improvement to their boss.

How did 63 participants who were asked feel about the Job Methods Training they participated in?

Overall Satisfaction with the JMT Program. Cumulative rating of 9.4 / 10.0.

Satisfaction with the content of the JMT program. Cumulative rating of 9.3 / 10.0.

Do you recommend Job Methods Training for other supervisors in your company? All 63 said yes.

Comments received from various groups include:

   When asked "Would you recommend JMT for other employees in your organization?"

• Yes, becuase we could get a lot of good ideas to make our jobs easier & safer.
• Yes.  There is a great potential to eliminate waste.  [JMT is] a cohesive process for workers (bonding).
• It's a good way to make everyone feel involved in company decisions.
• Yes, because they will find out there are better ways of doing a job rather than just doing a job.

   When asked what you liked about JMT,

• Worker interaction and the free flow of ideas
• Effect it has on my job
• Talking about problems with other employees and solving them
• I liked the way the course was taught and [I] learned to ask questions about a job, eliminate waste of the job you do, and the details of the job.
• [JMT] is a practical approach you can apply right away.

   When asked "What did you learn this week?"

• [A] JM proposal is a good way to get an idea across.
• [I] learned to work like a team and to share ideas with people from other areas.
• There's always room for improvement.
• Sharing information brings issues to light.
• [I learned to] listen to others and have an open mind.
• [I learned to] get input from others.
• I've worked with these people for over seven years and I'm amazed at all the good ideas they have.  [JMT] opens peoples' minds.
• [JMT] empowers people at all levels to make changes.

What kind of results can a company expect from Job Methods Training?

Companies typically generate an immediate ROI for this JM training that is recognized as the foundation for Kaizen and the Kaizen Teian Suggestion System at Toyota. And, like at Toyota, the savings keep coming for companies that continue to use JM to improve job methods on a regular basis. The following examples are taken from Improvement Proposal Sheets submitted by American company personnel that participated in TWI Job Methods program since it was reintroduced by TDO in September 2001.

Productivity Increase

Operation: Assemblers would enter labor for each job they ran.  Fifty four employees about 45 minutes/day = 40.5 hours/day.

Improvement: Have the group leaders enter the data, use a bar code scanner (already available), and modify the entry screens to reduce the number of non-used fields.  Six group leaders now enter data for all 54 assemblers in 1/2 hour each or 3 hours/day.  The savings is 40.5 - 3 = 37.5 hours/day.  Based on only a five day/40 hour week, that equates to 187.5 hours or the equivalent of over four employees.  This change had the same result as adding over four employees at $0/hour.

Workplace Organization

Operation: CNC machine prompts the operator when to change the cutter. The operator then walks to the wash station for a replacement, finds the tool to remove and inspect inserts, and then must decide whether to clean and re-install the inserts of replace them.

Improvement: Replacement tool is now hung on the machine; replacement cutter is stored at the machine instead of at the wash station; and air is now provided to clean reusable inserts at the machine. This eliminates 33 feet of walking and the need for the operator to ever leave the machine unattended but the supervisor did not document the savings from reducing the CNC downtime.

Visual Controls

Operation: Oil and chips must be removed from machined parts prior to the weigh for count operation. This washing operation created a production problem at shift change because incoming operators had to wait for production counts before running a particular and these counts were held up in the wash area.

Improvement: This downtime was eliminated by using color coded parts pans for each production shift. A Parts Identification Tag is now placed in the first and last pan of a parts run to signal the scale operator to get the counts to production at the start of each shift so they can schedule machines.

Point-of-Use Storage

Operation: Parts inspectors walk back and forth to storage area to obtain parts for inspection and then return parts to another area after being inspected.

Improvement: The manufactured parts storage areas were moved closer to Inspection. This generated an annual savings of $12,500 by simply reducing travel time for inspectors.

Process Layout

Operation: The assembly process for guide rail brackets has too much handling, walking and the inefficient use of fixtures that contribute to poor productivity and excess waste.

Improvement: By changing the location of where materials and fixtures are stored, and where equipment and benches are located, we were able to increase daily production from 200 to 250 units from one operator instead of the one and one half operators that were formerly needed for this assembly.

Set-up Reduction

Operation 1: Punching Machine

Improvement: Set-up time was reduced from 40 minutes to 20 minutes by rearranging the work site, replacing an old tool cabinet, eliminating select setup steps, moving the computer, and revamping the order and spec sheet process.

Operation 2: Improving setup times on the 7794’s in the Flex Cell.

Improvement: Output was increased from 5 to 10 lots from one worker and the level of skill requirements for the operator was reduced from Skilled to Unskilled.

Point-of-Use Storage

Operation: Parts inspectors walk back and forth to storage area to obtain parts for inspection and then return parts to another area after being inspected.

Improvement: The manufactured parts storage areas were moved closer to Inspection. This generated an annual savings of $12,500 by simply reducing travel time for inspectors.

Productivity Improvements

Operation: The supervisor worked with employees to create a job breakdown for the assembly, weld, test, inspect, and packaging of medical bowl/orifice.

Improvement: The work rearranged to improve flow and reduce operator fatigue.

Results: Before After Impact

Daily production output of assemblies 3,780 4,431 +17%

Production hours required 55 36 -35%

Number of operators 2 skilled 2 non-skilled cost reduction

Pull Systems / Kanban

Operation: Parts and shopping cart components for a machine assembly were not centralized.

Improvement: A parts Kanban is now created prior to the assembly of this machine. This resulted in an annual savings of $2,100 from reduced travel time that does not include additional time saving that resulted from having misplaced parts eliminating the need for operators to look for these parts.

Cellular Manufacturing

Operation: This supervisor worked with her people to evaluate a bending and assembly operation.

Improvement: A cell was formed that combined two gauging operations into one and separated this task from assembly so the gauging operator could be located closer to the water source to reduce travel time. This cell improved the flow of parts, reduced the job to a non-skilled classification, and increased daily production from 3-4 pieces to 6.

Cost Reduction

Operation: The Packing, Billing and Shipping of Damper Seals.

Improvement: By combining operations and rearranging the work area we were able to reduce the cost of this operation 32% from $50.44 to $34.46.