Appendix I
Co
rd
is
St
ra
te
g
ic
Ob
je
c
tiv
es
M
a
rket
Sh
a
re
L
ead
ersh
ip
Op
erati
o
n
a
l
E
xcel
le
n
c
e
Innov
a
tiv
e
Ne
w
P
rod
uc
ts
T
eam
w
o
rk
Re
le
ntle
s
s
Co
rd
is
V
isi
on &
Mi
ss
io
n
Nu
mb
e
r 1
i
n
C
irc
ul
a
tor
y
Di
seas
e
Ma
na
ge
m
e
nt
…
B y Lea d e rs hi p i n In n o v a tiv e C u s to m er D riv en P rodu c ts an d S e rv ic es t h at Im pr ov e E c ono m ic and C lin ic a l Ou tc om e s . B e c o m in g th e L o we st Co s t P rod uc er Ra p id D epl oy m e nt o f P rod uc ts and S e rv ic es F o cu si n g o n T e c h nol ogy D riv in g A s s o c iat e C o mmit m e n tOp
S
tr
ate
g
ie
s
Mea
sur
es
Op
er
at
io
n
’s
M
iss
io
n
:
‘Re
le
n
tle
ss
ly worki
ng t
oge
th
e
r t
o
a
c
hie
v
e
o
p
er
ati
o
n
a
l ex
cell
e
n
ce’
Op
erati
o
n
s
W
o
rld
w
id
e
E
xcel
le
n
c
e
in
Ta
le
nt
B e y o nd C o m p lia nc e S u pp o rt Gl oba l P ro duc t C o m m e rc ial iz at io n M e et or E x c e e d C u s tom e r S e rv ic e R equi re m ent s Im pl em ent M a nuf ac tu ring S trat egy Im pr o v e Or gani z a tion al E x c e llenc e In s till B e y ond C o m p lia n c e C u ltur e IS S B u ild on Sc h e d u le P ro du c e C a p a c ity t o B u ild IS S o n T im e a s R e qui re d to M eet the P ro d uc t Launc h C y c le IS S B u ild - on Q u al ity - on V o lu m e - on B e n e fi t M e e t O v e ra ll L in e F ill Ra te 10 0% E x e c u tio n P e r S c he d u le a n d B u dg et Mee t / E x c e ed 2002 BP O b je c tiv e s - C O G S - I n v e n to ry ( $ /Da ys) - C a p ita l - T a x E ffi ci e n c y 50 % R educ tio n o f N on-C o mp lianc e I n c ident s Z e ro Re ca lls ( O p s R e la ted) M a p I te m s C o m p le te d O n Ti m e ( 1 0 0 %)In
it
ia
ti
v
es
E s ta bl is h a P roc e s s o n H o w W e W ant C o n tra c ts t o B e D e v e lo ped S c he d u le , Mi x , an d F o re ca st A tta in m e n t T rai ni n g and P roj e c t ID R e v iew P e rfor m a n c e to Man u fac turi n g S c hedul e - F inanc ia ls C o m p li a n c e I n it ia tive s - P a cka g in g - C o mmi ngl ing - T ip S e p a ra tion - Co m p li a n ce Up d a te s / M o n th AD R 2 100% 3 D R eady in C rit ic al Po s iti o n s 7 5% o f C rit ic al P o s iti on s P E T ra ine d b y Y e ar E n d Ph a s e In / P h as e O ut S K U Re d u c tio n M a nu fa c tu rin g S tr a te g y Im pl e m en ta tio n O p ti mi z e Manage m e nt of On -H a nd I n v e nt or yO
p
er
at
io
n
s
St
ra
te
gi
c
O
b
je
ct
iv
e
s
Ma x imiz e C a s h Flo w P E Pr o je c t R e v ie w / N e w P E Da ta b a s e H e p a c o a t Opti m iz a ti o n M e e t or E x c e ed P E BP O b je c tiv e s D e pl oy P E i n al l B u s ines s e s S y s te m s and P ro c e sse sAppendix II
Hier wordt een grote boom opgenomen; een boom van de Sonic (PR13300) gedateerd 18 augustus 2002.
Appendix III
Appendix IV
As mentioned in the thesis, the scrap costs are a significant part of the final cost price of a product (on average 18%). Every product has more or less 50 scrapfactors though (see Appendix II), so it is necessary to select the most important ones.
A number of characteristics of scrapfactors are listed. This list is used to determine which scrapfactors are important.
− Value related component
− Level on which the scrapfactor is active
− Value of the scrapfactor
− Variation of actual scrap of the relative production process
− Difference in comparison with other product families
The first characteristic is the value of the component, which the scrapfactor is related to. Obviously this is an important criterion since this value greatly determines the costs of the scrap. For instance, it makes a big difference whether one can reduce the scrapfactor with 5% related to a value of € 50.00 than related to a value of € 0.50.
A characteristic, which has a strong relation with the previous one, is the level on which the scrapfactor is active. Since on every level value is added, components on a ‘higher’ level (note that level 1 is ‘higher’ than level 2; see Appendix II) typically represent components with more value. Of course this is not a guarantee, because on the higher levels a lot of simple components (with little value) are added, but for the assemblies this is certainly true.
The value of the scrapfactor is also a criterion for the importance of a scrapfactor. Obviously a current scrapfactor of 1.30 is likely to have more improvement potential than a scrapfactor of 1.04. Nevertheless this is not a very valuable criterion i.e. when the value of the item is nearly nothing and the relative production process is hard to improve, then such a scrapfactor will have a low priority (although the scrapfactor is maybe very high).
Obviously the production process to which the scrapfactor is related also influences the improvement potential of the scrapfactor. The variation in actual produced scrap is considered as a sound indicator for the improvement potential. A high variation is a sign that the
production process is not in control. Therefore it can be expected that improvements can be made. A disadvantage of this characteristic is the need for figures; research is needed before one can tell whether the scrapfactor can be improved i.e. is important.
The last characteristic that is identified is the differences between scrapfactors of different product families concerning the same production process. This can be an indication for the improvement potential. To illustrate: the scrapfactor for shrinking the stent on the catheter (see Error! Reference source not found.) is for the BX Sonic 1.12 and for the BX Velocity 1.08 (proposed scrapfactors for 2003), one can wonder whether it is reasonable that there is a difference or what causes this difference.
The combination of the above characteristics determines the importance of a scrapfactor. No single characteristic can give a reliable indication for the importance of a scrapfactor. To prioritise the different characteristics, several persons (engineering, material management and business unit managers) within Cordis have been interviewed. The results of these interviews are shown in Table (1 = most important, 5 = least important).
Characteristic BUM Engineering manager Production manager Material management manager Value related component (costs of the
component)
1 1 3 1
Variance of actual scrap of the relative production process
4 3 2 3
Scrapfactor 3 2 1 4
Difference in comparison with other product families
5 4 4 5
Level on which the scrapfactor is active
2 5 5 2
Table A Prioritisation of characteristics scrapfactors
Some notes should be made concerning the results shown in Table A. Most of the managers mentioned that the prioritisation depends for a great deal on the purpose. The production manager has chosen for a process excellence approach, which results in special attention in the value (mean) and the variance of the scrapfactors. On the other hand the BUM focuses much more on the impact of scrapfactors on the final cost price. Obviously all managers focus in the way that is in agreement with their own function and so their personal goals.
Appendix V
Monthly Plant Review Exhibits
(to be submitted to…on review date – 1 day)
Owner
Managing director 1 State of Plant overview (key issues, plant priorities, etc.) – max. 2 pages
Finance 2 Summary of manufacturing variances
Finance 3 Production unit volume analysis
BUM/finance 4 Direct labor efficiency by product
Finance 5 Plant CNIS summary (vs BP and MU)
Finance 6 CNIS analysis by major product line
Finance 7 Process excellence summary
BUM/finance 8 Yield summary
Finance 9 Headcount summary operations
Finance 10 Headcount details
BUM/finance 11 Transfer schedule
