Recently, a friend from my undergraduate days complained that he was written up at work for low productivity. He operates a forklift in a warehouse and was informed that he only reached 97 percent of the previous week’s productivity.
ADVERTISEMENT |
I asked for details, but there was not a lot he could tell me; he was working when he was asked to sign a document warning him about his low productivity. He asked to read the document on his next break, but by then it had been turned in, and he was not permitted to see it.
That alone sounds like a management problem.
My friend explained that there are different types of “pick paths” he could be assigned to. Some involve single-item orders, and these are easy to “make rate” with. Pick paths with multi-item orders are almost impossible to make rate with. Each day the forklift operators receive their assignments from a manager, and my friend spent two weeks only doing multi-item pick paths.
Generally, a forklift operator works both types of pick paths during a normal week so the results average out. Of course, a forklift operator being assigned only to the more difficult pick paths will fail to make rate.
Perhaps instead of simply evaluating productivity against one figure, an SPC chart could be used. Ideally there would be two SPC charts, one for single-item pick paths and one for multi-item pick paths. This way a forklift operator only working the more time-consuming pick paths can avoid being disciplined for actions outside of her control.
An SPC approach would also give management a chance both to set a realistic rate and identify the existence of special cause variation in the weekly data. The use of SPC could also help to identify potentially relevant trends. For example, if the productivity for all forklift operators starts to slowly drop over time, there could be an outside force at work. Maybe the types of products being ordered by customers is changing? Management would have an earlier warning if it used SPC and monitored the data.
If the assignment of pick routes and disciplinary actions is so random, then I must wonder what basis is used in determining what the expected productivity rate should be. I suspect it might be based on what management thinks a forklift operator can accomplish, and not what the pick process actually requires. If the voice of the process is ignored, management can demand any productivity rate it wants. Then it will have to deal with the high employee turnover resulting from all the forklift operators that are terminated for “failing to make rate.”
The entire situation sounds like management failed get input from both the employees and the process. Employees can run harder, or drive faster in the case of forklift operators, but the process will continue to be whatever it is. By studying the process, determining control limits, and plotting the daily productivity in a control chart, the company’s management could set up a system that takes into account any variability in the process.
Without SPC the company may be taking disciplinary actions against its employees for random events outside the employees’ control, such as being assigned to easier or harder pick paths. The company also loses out on the feedback that can be provided by SPC. In the end, the company could also lose time and money, the very things it wants to save.
Add new comment