Toyota production system

TOYOTA PRODUCTION SYSTEM “ONE - BY - ONE CONFIRMATION” University of Kentucky Lean Manufacturing Conference
May 14-16, 1997

Mr. Kitano – Keynote Address May 15, 1997

© Toyota Motor Manufacturing, 1997 Available at http://www.MfgEng.com with permission of TMM

2

INTRODUCTION OF THEME: TPS, ONE-BY-ONE CONFIRMATION
Often professionals say that they want to learn about TPS because theywant to attain a specific result. They say: • “We want reduced labor and material costs,” or • “We want increased productivity,” or • “We want higher quality,” or • “We want better employee motivation.” Many professionals have been lead to believe that transplanting the “mysterious secrets” of TPS into their American businesses will solve all of the problems their companies are facing. So, today,I am going to tell you the “secret” of TPS, from my experience. This secret can be applied to: • Any industry • Any work-site situation • Any culture The “mysterious secret” of TPS is common sense. You have probably heard this “mysterious secret” from your parents and teachers, since the time you were born. It is the basic principle of: “Do it right the first time!” Now, you know everything! But,seriously, let me explain a little further, how “to do it right the first time.” It is through “ONE-BY-ONE CONFIRMATION:” • From the smallest detail of a process • To the most complex scope of your company Now, you know the whole secret! It is just common sense! How did Toyota discover this mysterious common sense secret of ONE-BY-ONE CONFIRMATION? In 1934, in the early days of the development ofToyota’s first vehicle, Kiichiro Toyoda decided to duplicate the Chevrolet six-cylinder engine. Under the direction of © Toyota Motor Manufacturing, 1997 Available at http://www.MfgEng.com with permission of TMM

3

Kiichiro Toyoda, the Toyota group worked from the experience they had in simple castings for the loom business. However, the intricate coring for the intake and exhaust chamberswas beyond their experience. They quickly studied other foreign and domestic systems to develop suitable cores, and modeled their designs after those they had studied. Kiichiro’s group rationalized that by using these best practices of foreign and domestic methods, they would be able to sustain consistency. Eventually, the casting process began to improve, and many castings (maybe 300) wereproduced. The machinists anxiously awaited to process these castings on the newly acquired equipment. They proceeded to immediately process and stockpile the completed, shiny machined heads as evidence of their skill and fine equipment. However, the first engines made with these heads failed to achieve the expected performance. Kiichiro had not verified, from the beginning, if the actual productioncastings met the required design shape to produce the horsepower target. This created a big concern for Kiichiro. Should he order his workers to re-work the castings to save the potential loss? What would you have done? Kiichiro realized that his initial focus had not been narrowed down to basic system verification, or one-by-one confirmation. He recognized the costly lesson of not confirming thequality at each step of the process. This did not just mean quality of zero defects. This also meant verification of each process in relation to the preceding and following processes, as a whole system. He realized that he must stop the perception of “It’s OK to just repair poor quality!” If not, his company would repeatedly suffer from • rework, • repair, and • thus, low quality. He took a stand thathas become a Toyota trademark. This was the beginning of learning “how to wait.” Confirming processes one-by one, step-by-step, and not proceeding with the next step until requested, was the original start of the “just-in-time” philosophy, which I will talk more about later.

Available at http://www.MfgEng.com with permission of TMM

© Toyota Motor Manufacturing, 1997

4

AVOIDING...