Measuring production floor performance using systematic approach: a case study of hospital beds production

The trend of customer today in many industries is in customized products. The implication to this is in the production floor especially in the assembly plant, where the flow of materials must be managed to ensure that every machine or workstations are supplied with complete materials and volume (qua...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sudiro, S., Yusof, S. M.
Format: Conference or Workshop Item
Published: IEOM Society 2016
Subjects:
Description
Summary:The trend of customer today in many industries is in customized products. The implication to this is in the production floor especially in the assembly plant, where the flow of materials must be managed to ensure that every machine or workstations are supplied with complete materials and volume (quantity), in the right time, so that throughput can be achieved as scheduled. This study is being conducted in a hospital bed industry which uses a special workbench to assemble the beds. This papers outlines the efforts taken to measure production floor performance in the company. The main objective of the study is to define key performance indicators (KPI) of hospital bed production and measures the production floor performance. Using systematic approach to define the main KPIs, resource production capability, valid product definition, production performance as production scheduled and operational performance. Using break down tree analysis for each main KPIs, detail KPIs can then be deploy with the weights of all the KPIs. Based on those KPIs, an instrument(questionnaire) to capture all data need to measure production floor performance was developed. This instrument can be deployed in the production floor to be monitored by the supervisors, and production floor manager. The feed back analysis used value engineering method. The result for production capability, product design definition, production schedule and group production performance showed a level of 3.06, 2.75, by 3.33 and 2.36 for each group performance, and a total performance of 2.92 from a scale of 5. The total level of production performance is below average and the group contributor achieved performance level of below average and average only. This level is far from excellent level performance which require improvement to achieve the level of world class company.