Anitha Thyagrajan

What is Fault Tree Analysis? Represents the logical relationship between sub-system and components failures and how they combine to cause system failures. The TOP event of a fault tree represents a system event of interest and is connected by logical gates to component failure know as basic events FTA analysis involves five steps: *Define the undesired event to study *Obtain an understanding of the system *Construct the fault tree *Evaluate the fault tree *Control the hazards identified Where do you think it is most effective? FTA functions as a diagnostic tool to identify and correct causes of the top event. It can help with the creation of diagnostic manuals / processes. FTA goes from product failure to Part failure & FMEA goes from part failure to Product failure. FTA examines system from TOP to DOWN, FTA is used to Investigates potential faults, Its modes & causes and quantify their contribution to system unreliability in the course of product design. Methodology (Rules) 1. The “Immediate, Necessary & Sufficient” Rule 2. The “Clear Statement” Rule 3. The “No Miracles” Rule 4. The “Complete-the-Gate” Rule 5. The “No Gate-to-Gate” Rule 6. The “Component or System Fault?” Rule Methodology (Rules - 1) – Immediate, necessary and sufficient cause Immediate - Closest in space, time and derivation of the event Necessary - There is no redundancy in the statement or gate linkage The event could not result from a sub set of the causal. Sufficient - The events will, in all circumstances and at all times, cause the event Methodology (Rules - 2) – The clear statement rule Write event box statements clearly, stating precisely what the event is and when it occurs. Methodology (Rules - 3) – The ‘component or systems fault’ rule If the answer to the question: “Can this fault consist of a component failure?” is Yes, – Classify the event as a “State of component fault” If the answer is No, – Classify the event as a “state of system fault” Methodology (Rules - 4) – No miracles rule If the normal functioning of a component propagates a fault sequence, then it is assumed that the component functions normally. Methodology (Rules - 5) – the complete gate rule All inputs to a particular gate should be completely defined before further analysis of any one of them is undertaken Methodology (Rules - 6) no gate to gate rule Gate inputs should be properly defined fault events, and gates should not be directly connected to other gates. Benefits and limitations *Prepared in early stages of a design and further developed in detail concurrently with design development. *Identifies and records systematically the logical fault paths from a specific effect, to the prime causes *Allows easy conversion to probability measures. *But may lead to very large trees if the analysis is extended in depth. *Depends on skill of analyst. *Difficult to apply to systems with partial success. *Can be costly in time & effort. "FTA is normally only performed for more serious undesired events.

To provide any product or service, you have to use resources like money, materials, labor, time, and information. The goal is to provide the greatest amount of value to customers while utilizing the least amount of your resources. This idea of adding value to products and services is a key concept of Lean. It is defined as anything for which the customer would be willing to pay. If what you are providing is not something the customer would be willing to pay you for, then you are not providing value to the customer. Any time you begin analyzing a process, you want to look at each step and determine if it is contributing to the value of the desired output. Each step can be classified into one of three categories: *Value-added *Non-value added, but necessary *Non-value added (waste) Value-Added Steps: Value added steps in a process are those in which you add something to a product or service for which the customer would be willing to pay. These activities are where you gain the most from expending your resources when providing a product or service. Take the Sun Card, for example. There are several steps in the process for applying for and receiving a Sun Card, but the customer is only willing to pay for the physical card with their name, ID number, and photo on it. In this case, only those steps in the process that contribute to the actual creation of the card would be considered value added steps. Non-Value Added But Necessary Steps: Just because a process step is not value-added does not mean it is a bad thing. Processes all include steps that do not add value, but are necessary to make the product or service happen. It has been my experience that the majority of activities in service processes fall into this category. They do use resources, so you want to reduce the amount of non-value added work whenever possible. Often, this type of activity fulfills some sort of administrative purpose such as enabling value added steps, maintaining organizational records, or meeting legal or regulatory requirements. Looking at the Sun Card example, when a person wants a Sun Card they must fill out an application. As far as the customer is concerned, this is a non-value added step because it does not directly result in the creation of the physical card itself and they would not be willing to pay to fill out a form. This step is necessary because it enables the Sun Card staff to start the process, verify that the customer is eligible to receive a Sun Card, and locate their information in ASU’s database. Without this step, the creation of the physical card would not be able to happen. Non-Value Added Steps (Waste): The third category that process steps can fall into is pure waste. In these steps resources are expended, delays occur, and no value is added to the product or service. Customers are absolutely not willing to pay for these activities. These steps should be eliminated from the process. The Sun Card process does not contain any pure waste steps. Lean identifies seven or eight types of waste, depending on whom you talk to. I am one of those who identify eight types of waste. These are: *Unnecessary processing or steps in a process *Transporting materials or information over long distances *Delays / waiting *Idle inventory / resources *Unnecessary or excessive *motion/movement of staff *Rework/ fixing defects that should not have occurred in the first place *Producing more than needed to meet demand *Underutilization of staff, their knowledge and/or skills The underutilization of staff is the type of waste that does not appear on every list. Value-added Activities Performed at Logistic Zones. DIAGRAM The main value-added logistics activities are part of what can be generally referred as warehousing, which can involve a wide array of activities: Simple storage, distribution, and order picking part of the inventory management systems of manufacturers, distributors and retailers. Quality control (inspection) and testing of products before being sent to customers. Transloading international load units into domestic load units. This applies notably to container transportation. Receiving goods, breaking shipments and packing (preparing for shipment). Can also involve packaging were goods are broken down into retail units. In part related with packaging, labelling provides information on the product for consumers such as brand and price. More advanced activities involve the tagging of units using RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) for distribution or retail purposes. Light manufacturing tasks such as assembly and customizing to country-specific (or culture-specific) demands, which includes adding parts and manuals. A variety of reverse logistics activities such returning empty packaging, the recycling of used goods back into the commodity chain or the cleaning of containers to be reused. Providing specialized storage facilities, such as to support cold chain logistics. The transport activities of pickup and delivery are also part of the added value process since they support logistical activities and provide employment. Both flows can be terminal-related if long distance transportation is involved (e.g. maritime, rail) or directly related to suppliers or customers. A value adding activity is one that customer not willing to pay: Packaging helps protect and preserve products, but these days companies tend to over-package and over-protect. Excess packaging illustrates the waste known in Lean methodology as over processing. Added processing that doesn't bring value to goods or services in the customer's eyes creates unnecessary waste. When trying to eliminate over processing waste, start by focusing on standardized work. The first step is creating standard operating procedures (SOPs). With today's technology, it is easy to create SOPs that include digital photographs of important steps in a process, as well as simple written instructions—often in more than one language. These SOPs should be easy to understand and follow, and kept in a visible place in the appropriate work area. Developing SOPs can be incorporated into a Workplace Organization Kaizen event or part of the Standardize step (the fourth S in the 5S process). They reduce variability to improve quality and minimize unnecessary overprocessing. The logistics and transportation sector presents many opportunities to reduce over processing. A good example is the value-added services typically performed by third-party logistics providers. These activities include assembly or kitting processes as part of a postponement strategy. These value-added processes are often one-off events where little effort is put into developing SOPs and minimizing overprocessing. If we spend a little more time focusing on reducing non-value-added activities such as overprocessing, we can both reduce costs and improve quality.

What is 5S? Sorting: Eliminate all unnecessary tools, parts, and instructions. Anything that is not required for the current work should be stored in a designated area or discarded. Stabilizing / Straightening: Everything should have a place. The location for each item should be clearly labeled. Most used equipment should be most accessible. Equipment should be kept close to where it is used. Sweeping / Shining: Keep the workspace and equipmnt clean, tidy, and organized. Cleaning should happen on a regular (daily) basis, if not more frequently in a "Clean as You Go" approach. Standardizing: All work stations for a particular job should be identical. All employees doing the same job should be able to work in any station with the same tools that are in the same location in every station. Sustaining: Main focus on the previous 4 S's. When implementing 5S there are possibilities to cut costs. Additional 10%, 20%, or even 30% in administrative cost reductions, severance aside. Some specific examples more relevant to office work: Sorting: How many hours are wasted trying to track down files in network folders which are labeled poorly or otherwise unsorted? What about looking for information on intranet sites? A lack of proper information organization at the electronic level is a HUGE source of waste for most companies and increases exponentially with size and company lifetime. Stabilizing / Straightening: Someone else mentioned a stapler. How much time gets wasted looking for supplies? Where do you find the department digital camera? How about replacement supplies? What if you have to ask someone else to help, now you've set two people looking? What about walking across the office to pick up things you printed 10 times a day? Sweeping / Shining: It is hard to accomplish the above two with any physical items without keeping things cleaned up. Piles of papers, reports, parts, toys, etc on a desk invite more stuff to accumulate. This causes a buildup of STUFF on/in desks and makes it even harder to answer "now where is file XXXX?" or "where did I put the stapler?" types of questions. This doesn't necessarily mean 100% polished, but means you avoid having piles of unrelated and outdated stuff cluttering the workspace and causing inefficiencies in finding things/etc. Standardizing: Consider the time required for new/transfer employees or visitors to figure out where stuff is and how things work. If you have a completely different file system electronically than a different facility in the same company (assuming you even have a coherent system to begin with...), anyone transferring is going to spend much time trying to understand how it works. Asking regular employees, etc. All this is complete wasted time - no value is gained in relearning a file system (this is in effect difficult to really realize this savings because almost all companies have completely broken file systems, network drives, etc). Same with office layouts and even job responsibilities to some extent. Sustaining: None of this is easy to retroactively implement within office environments. Unfortunately, most of these inefficiencies are taken as part of the job. However, if the same level of inefficiency was ever allowed on a production floor - where 5S is more commonly implemented - heads would be rolling and there would be significant outcry. Does 5S actually save enough money when implemented outside manufacturing?? YES "Reduce spending on department management. Most administrative departments (particularly those with more than 20 employees) use as much as 20% of their budgets to supervise and coordinate their own activities. Those parts probably don’t need the level of supervision they once did. * Gain control of “miscellaneous” spending. * Contribute in controlling costs and reduce waste associated with excess inventory and expired items. * 5S in an organization provides a safe environment * optimal utilization of space and leads to improved quality * Increase in coordination between employees and improvement of staff productivity. *It reduces the service time and increase customer satisfaction.

Processes are supposed to help organizations scale up, improve efficiency for new hires and existing employees, and so on–but they can quickly get out of control. Why do we love process so much? It offers a way to measure progress and productivity, which makes people feel more efficient and accountable. When used correctly, processes should standardize and simplify the necessary tasks that keep business running smoothly. They should enable organizations to undertake complex work, particularly as an organization grows. Expense reporting, for example, should have a process that every single employee follows every single time–that’s just common sense. Smart processes encapsulate bundles of organizational knowledge. And that’s a good thing. But it’s not a good thing when there are so many processes in place that they restrain the people they’re supposed to help. If your team spends its days asking for permission before executing, taking an hour to complete expense reports or time sheets, attending redundant meetings, or answering irrelevant emails, you’ve got a problem. Exactly when are employees supposed to find the time to innovate when every task or topic is labeled “urgent” and every deadline is ASAP? Something will eventually give, and that something is going to be the part of the job they can keep pushing off until later. 1)Empowering with permission–but without action 2)Leaders focused on process instead of people Overdependence on meetings 3)Lack of (clear) vision 4)Management acts as judge, not jury Over the years I’ve encountered organizations, large and small, that have essentially allowed the process to become their culture. I’ve also seen businesses suffer when they assumed that if a process worked well for one division, it would work well for the company overall. Good processes can turn especially dangerous when they creep from manufacturing lines and finance departments into brainstorms and research labs. Some of the worst offenders have been companies that implemented overarching processes like Six Sigma, a rigidly data-driven quality-management program originally designed to tackle manufacturing problems. Fifty-three percent of the Fortune 500 have deployed it and of the Fortune 100, 82 percent have used it. Despite its manufacturing origins, Six Sigma has been used across many industries and sectors, and proponents claim it saved Fortune 500 corporations nearly a half-trillion dollars since its inception. If so many successful organizations are using it and saving money, what’s the problem, right? Again, it comes down to priority. When we shift such a huge amount of an organization’s focus onto standardizing everything, other areas inevitably suffer. Another oft-cited example of Six Sigma’s negative effects occurred at 3M. When former GE executive James McNerney took the helm in 2001, he instituted a rigorous Six Sigma program, which meant slashing costs, training thousands of employees to become program experts, and requiring extensive reporting on new products in the R&D pipeline. In the short term, especially in the eyes of investors, it seemed to work. Costs were brought under control, production speed increased, and operating margins rose from 17 percent to 23 percent by 2005. But researchers in the labs were stifled by the demands of the new metrics. 3M had a century-long history of innovation, but now R&D had been cut and inventors weren’t given adequate time to tinker with products before having to demonstrate successful commercialization. “We were letting, I think, the process get in the way of doing the actual invention,” After McNerney’s departure for Boeing in 2005–just four years after joining the company–3M began to reevaluate Six Sigma. In addition to the friction it caused among staff, its long-term growth potential appeared compromised and there were concerns that 3M had become “a less creative company…a vitally important issue for a company whose very identity is built on innovation.” In recent years, 3M has significantly changed the way it uses Six Sigma. The company acknowledges that the program adds value in its factories, so it’s still utilized in manufacturing operations. Researchers working in the labs, however, are no longer beholden to the metrics and rubrics of Six Sigma. The shift has been successful–and there are metrics to prove it. One of the best measures of innovation efforts is the percentage of revenue that a company derives from products introduced in the last five years. At 3M, this number had traditionally hovered around 30 percent but had dropped to 21 percent after Six Sigma’s introduction. In 2010, the number was back up to 30 percent and may soon surpass 35 percent. * Today, managers are especially in a bind. They’re expected to efficiently produce outstanding short-term results, but the innovation they’re supposed to pursue could very likely hurt their careers. *“Those in middle management… found innovation disruptive to their day-to-day activities and felt it got in the way of running an efficient operation–which is what they were paid to do.” *When people’s jobs depend on meeting metrics and maintaining the status quo, can you fault them for their reluctance to expend any energy toward creation and invention

Kaizen: kaizen is define by gradual approach to ever higher standards in quality enhancement and waste reduction, through small but continual improvements. Kaikaku: Kaikaku is define as radical overhaul of an activity to eliminate all waste (muda in Japanese) and create greater value. Kakushin: Kakushin literally means “innovation” or reform as in the reformists in a political party. It is different than innovation as in the current business buzzword, meaning coming up with new things to sell. Difference: I view the kaikaku as the work done as part of (for lack of a better term) a "Lean Awakening". So perhaps in a manufacturing setting it is the complete, radical change in mindset (and process) needed to go from a batch-and-queue methodology to single piece flow. The Kaizen would then become the incremental, continuous improvement that drives consistently better processes. I have attached a simple graphic that shows the difference between step change improvement and small continuous improvement. It might be of useful. Also shown on the graph is the result of not sustaining both step change improvement and continuous improvement. Complement each other Both Kaizen and Kaikaku can be applied to activities other than production. Define what success looks like for your operations. In manufacturing you might use delivery time, % of operation that is waste, or even defect rates. In the service industries you may use number of customers, wait times, or even employee turnover. Do Kaizen activity until you start hitting a glass ceiling with your improvements. This is when you start seeing diminishing returns on your improvements. Test your breakthrough idea thoroughly before large scale implementation with cardboard mock-ups and an iterative design process. Continue to Kaizen the new design. All three concepts complement each other in a positive way to improve the process, Service, Reduce waste and reduce waiting time. What would a company lose if one of these as a concept as not utilized????? Serious impact on revenue, and *profitability. Serious impact on operating costs, *regulatory compliance. Customer Satisfaction. Quality of the product.

My statement goes like this - “You can’t manage what you can’t measure,” Considered example as Supply chain Mgt or Logistics The major trends in business right now — low-cost, outsourcing, customization, globalization and more — all create tremendous complexities in a supply chain. In most cases, however, companies have not changed how they manage this critical part of the business. Many still lag when it comes to measuring how well they are doing, and balancing the trade-offs involved in keeping service levels high and costs low. Many SCM metrics, like inventory turnover, are already built into a typical accounting system. But some of the more sophisticated benchmarks, including measuring the level of customer satisfaction, Service level, take some work to develop. Companies are beginning to realize that they need end-to-end visibility in their supply chain management efforts. Companies need to anticipate demand, since it takes time to respond to demand-side changes. They’re learning, but there’s still plenty of room for improvement.” Conclusion: “Every company should have metrics that track performance & manage the performance better. “How do you know whether you would lose business or gain business “ – Without proper metrics.

Root Cause Analysis (RCA) is a popular and often-used technique that helps people answer the question of why the problem occurred in the first place. It seeks to identify the origin of a problem using a specific set of steps, with associated tools, to find the primary cause of the problem. In RCA systems and events are interrelated. An action in one area triggers an action in another, and another, and so on. By tracing back these actions, you can discover where the problem started and how it grew into the symptom you're now facing. Three basic types of causes: Physical causes – Tangible, material items failed in some way (for example, a car's brakes stopped working). Human causes – People did something wrong, or did not do something that was needed. Human causes typically lead to physical causes (for example, no one filled the brake fluid, which led to the brakes failing). Organizational causes – A system, process, or policy that people use to make decisions or do their work is faulty (for example, no one person was responsible for vehicle maintenance, and everyone assumed someone else had filled the brake fluid). RCA looks at all three types of causes. It involves investigating the patterns of negative effects, finding hidden flaws in the system, and discovering specific actions that contributed to the problem. Necessary Condition: A is True only, if B is True, B is necessary for A because B is being True is needed A to be True Sufficient Condition: If R is true, Then S is true, R is sufficient for S because R is all you need to get S. R is enough to Get S 1. A cause may be necessary but not sufficient for a problem to occur "Air is necessary for human life.", "Human beings must have air to live." 2.A cause may not be necessary but sufficient for a problem to occur while air is a necessary condition for human life, it is by no means a sufficient condition, i.e. it does not, by itself, i.e. alone, suffice for human life. While someone may have air to breathe, that person will still die if s/he lacks water (for a number of days), 3.A cause may be neither necessary nor sufficient for a problem to occur "Wanting to succeed is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for success." "Being the smartest student in a class is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for achieving the highest grade in that class." 4.A cause may be necessary and sufficient for a problem to occur I placed an order in an online shopping, I need update proper delivery pincode to get my Item/ goods to be delivered. "Since having air to breathe is necessary for human life, if follows that the existence of human life suffices for the existence of air."

Define: Personal Excellence: Producing your best in any given situation, within or without a conducive environment to do so Strive to be better than last time & every time. Process Excellence: It is the process of improving business Performance and Impact Bottom line directly through a set of problem solving tools, frameworks and template. Operational Excellence: It builds on the concept of end-to-end process flows in core and support processes, including organisation’s culture (and with it HR) in its domain. It requires the organisation to ensure staff understands how the organisation works as a value creation system, and to have structures and empowerment that enable people to fix problems when necessary." Being world class Being the best globally Excellence in everything we do. Business Excellence: Is excellence in Strategies, Business practises & Stakeholders – related performance results that have been validated by assessments using proven business excellence models Comparing with a simple example. Personal Excellence: Being on time to a meeting. Process Excellence: Meeting conducted in an efficient & effective manner. Operational Excellence: Meeting arranged/ conducted with in the budget allocated (cost). Business Excellence: Service provided while conducting meeting & Cost incurred for the meeting. Contrast Process excellence is a part of Operational excellence. Process excellence directly proportional to the Operational excellence. Operational excellence is moving tools to Transformation. Better Flow of production, thus Less Inventories, and On Time in Full Error Free Deliveries. Improved Discipline and higher Engagement of People in Company Wide Efficiency Improvements Three major elements of performance, improvement and excellence in an organization. Smaller Larger Broader Excellence Ambassdor - Question 1.docx