APPENDICES
Annelies Roll
Index Appendices:
A. Total Supply Chain Europe ...2
B. Structure Unilever Netherlands ...3
C. Overview of site Sourcing Unit Oss...4
D. Overview of Products...5
E. Overview of Recent Problems...6
F. TPM Levels ...7
G. 4M-analysis ...8
This is the public version of a confidential report; therefore, certain confidential details
are removed.
University of Groningen
2.
A. Total Supply Chain Europe
(Unilever Internal documents)
SVP Supply chain
Europe
Home &
personal
care
VP Savoury
Spreads
and
Cooking
Beverages
Dressings
Tea
Frozen
Cluster
dry 1
Cluster dry
2
Cluster
Pasty
Cluster
Noodles
Cluster Wet (Oss as
leader)
Ansbach
Germany
Oss
Netherlands
Sanguinetto
Italy
Duppigheim
France
Gastouni
Greece
Ice cream
B. Structure Unilever Netherlands
(Unilever Internal documents)
Unilever N.V.
Unilever Netherlands Holdings B.V.
Unilever NetherlandsB.V. Unilever Research & Development Vlaardingen Foundation Unilever Pension Fund Progress Business Unit Unilever NL Ice Cream & Frozen Foods Business Unit Unilever NL Home & Personal Care Unilever Nederland Foods Business Unit Unilever Nederland Home & Personal Care
Unilever Foodsolutions Unilever Netherlands
Ice Cream and Frozen Food
Unilever Netherlands Home and
Personal Care
Central Work council
Shared Services
Board of Commissioners
Unilever Netherlands Foods
University of Groningen
4.
C. Overview of site Sourcing Unit Oss
D. Overview of Products
University of Groningen
6.
E. Overview of Recent Problems
Problems regarding Production Rates Outdated Production rates.
Lack of theoretical background of production rates.
Confusion with the operators, because of implausible prescribed rates. Bad adjustments of production rates between areas.
Buffers are not used in the right way.
Lack of insight on how to deal with variances in production rates. Jamming and Starvation occur frequently.
Lack of insight into bottlenecks. Problems regarding Norm Rates
Non-transparent financial settlement; Gap between income and expenses Planning problems
Problems regarding Loss of Performance Efficiency 20 percent unexpected stoppages.
Operators tend to reduce the rate to prevent stoppages. Lack of aimed improvement projects.
Suspicion of large loss through reduced speed. Idling and minor stoppages.
F. TPM Levels
Losses / level LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4
1. breakdown losses * have chronic b/d’s * B/d repair time > PM time * >20% deviation of life range * Root-cause of breakdowns not clear
* Only spontaneous breakdowns
* B/d repair time = PM time
* Within parts service life span
* Root-causes of B/d’s are clear and addressed
* Time-based component maint. System. * D/T repair time < PM time * B/d downtime < 1 % * service life of components upper range of specs * Condition-based component maint. System.
* Maint. Staff do only PM * AM do D/T repairs at < 0,1% of DT level * Clear improvement in MTBF 2. minor stoppages
* no awareness / data * Data on frequency and location of minor stoppages
* reduced 1/20th of current root-causes of minor stoppages are clear and countermeasures in place
* zero minor stoppages
3. speed losses * equipment specs not clear
* No settings documented by machine model / types.
* root-causes are clear * setting documented * <5% variation between same type machine
* countermeasures for root-causes of speed loss implemented * revised settings with notes on quality and accuracy impact * < 2% speed loss
* operates at designed sped or above
* zero speed loss
