Why don’t our employees follow the operation instructions?
Thread Content
Everyone in the quality field knows that standardized operations are the foundation of quality assurance. Recently, a very common phenomenon has been observed: failure to follow SOPs. Things like this happen almost every day. Why not follow the SOP? Why does it occur so frequently? What exactly is the problem? The reasons for this may be as follows: First, the 1SOP is too simple, with unclear descriptions of the steps and requirements, making it difficult for employees to understand. I still remember a Japanese client once saying, “SOPs are written for the workers; a good SOP is one that anyone who can read can understand, even cleaning staff.” A SOP should provide detailed instructions for every step from the start to the end of an action; each step and each specification must be clearly outlined, and pictures of both good and defective products should be included for each type of defect. When producing Mitsubishi’s BOSA previously, one of the steps involved employees picking up the BOSA and placing it into a tray; it was such a simple action, yet the customer raised many issues at that time. For example: Where to pick up BOSA? Are the forceps used to pick up BOSA made of metal or plastic? Pointed or round? Which part of BOSA is picked up with forceps? Is it a Receptacle Body or a TO holder? Which part of the BOSA cannot be clamped? How should BOSA be placed in the material tray? All issues should be defined in the SOP. Only detailed definitions can ensure that all employees understand everything without any doubts, allowing them to follow the SOPs. II. The content of 2SOP is unreasonable. When defining each process, step, and requirement in an SOP, there must be a basis for it; it cannot be defined arbitrarily by the person who writes the SOP. The most fundamental consideration is the comfort of the employees while performing their tasks. Of the 17 issues identified during the audit of Client N, two of them related to employee comfort, which shows that Japanese clients place great importance on this aspect. Some time ago, while working on Line 13 of a certain manufacturing facility to produce Model M for Customer N, I saw that the employees responsible for assembling the upper and lower covers had to apply considerable force to press them together. One of the workers there even showed me the blisters on his hands as a result of this task. Although this pressing action seems simple and doing it a few times doesn’t seem difficult, it is actually very challenging for employees who have to do this thousands of times per day. The one or two hours before ending work each day are likely when employees feel most tired; at this time, the products may not be properly pressed together, increasing the risk to quality. Our IE and ME personnel should spend more time observing the production lines, listen to the employees’ opinions, and consider their needs more. Improving the comfort of workers helps to reduce the risk of adverse outcomes. III. 3 What will employees do when they find that following the SOPs is not smooth? Is it to overcome difficulties and follow the SOP? Should I still do the homework in my own way? Will the employees pass this message on to their managers? In most cases, employees do not take the initiative to provide feedback, as they are busy working on the assembly line with little time to rest, let alone take the time to report problems. At this time, our IPQC and team leaders need to step forward; they not only need to have the ability to spot problems but also the initiative to analyze them and make improvements. Investigate why employees find the operations difficult and why they do not follow the SOPs. Are the requirements of the SOPs indeed unreasonable, or are the new methods developed by the employees more reasonable and efficient? Do all employees think this new method is better? Should IE be notified to assess the feasibility and quality risks of the new method? Following SOPs is a very ordinary and simple task for employees, but it can give rise to many issues; these issues are not only related to the front-line manufacturing departments but also closely connected to support departments such as quality control, IE, PE, TE, etc. Only through close cooperation among all departments can minor tasks be carried out correctly and thoroughly, thereby improving the quality of the products.
Many of the things introduced to China are meant for people who don’t understand them to see, rather than for those who need to use them
I’d like to share some experience for reference: I’ve always had a special interest in Japan, and their lean production methods do indeed improve employees’ efficiency; moreover, there’s a clear increase in team cohesion as a result. I visited GAC Toyota, and the sense of pride and commitment among their employees was truly impressive ； The toilet in the painting department requires one to take off their shoes before entering, a practice that isn’t followed in many companies in Japan; it was a Chinese person who ensured this rule was implemented. (GAC is a joint venture with 50% shares held by each party, and there are also conflicts between Chinese and Japanese employees.) The taxes and profits paid per car sold are higher than those of the vast majority of state-owned enterprises. But I still won’t buy Japanese cars). In Toyota, work instructions are revised from the bottom up, and this is incorporated into the employee promotion system. ——There are detailed explanations in \"The Inheritance of Flow.\" Our company has been implementing lean practices for almost three years now, and we place great emphasis on standardization, work instructions, and the six causes analysis method. In my opinion, it is a very common phenomenon for employees not to follow the operation instructions. It really can’t be blamed on the employees; who wants to be constrained by rules and regulations? But if work instructions can make it easier for employees to work and reduce errors, who wouldn’t be willing to follow them? The key is that what is created must be applicable! If it is unreasonable, make timely modifications! During the implementation process, it is necessary to keep checking, making corrections, and conducting evaluations when needed. To truly strengthen execution is extremely, extremely exhausting! ! ! The chemical production process is lengthy, and it cannot be simply replicated by looking at things like dashboards or timing schedules. Our company is quite special; the vast majority of our employees are migrant workers, and not every employee can read. For farmers, watering earlier and weeding later has little impact on the harvest. Making the guys operate in accordance with standards and regulations is even more troublesome; habits are truly hard to change. It’s very difficult to change our own habits, let alone those of others Since last year, there have been several extremely challenging cases, which have led us to develop some work instructions and methods for implementing standards. At gas stations, faults such as the pressure-protective press stopping due to improper operation can easily occur when using reverse circulation pumps and reverse pressure boosters. It has a significant impact on the stability of production on the user side as well as product quality. I started by drawing the system schematic diagrams and block diagrams, explaining each step in logical order so that my colleagues could carry them out. It doesn’t work well; you get exhausted, the training isn’t effective, and no one says what’s wrong. As the friend upstairs said, it’s for the people in Lean Office to check. Later, I figured it out: I took photos of the site and numbered each valve. Find the key production staff who have not experienced any accidents during operations and sit down with them to discuss how to carry out each step A illustrated guide was printed out. Keep the wording as simple as possible; the valve sequence and which gauge to check are clearly indicated. Then, using this guide, have the station manager and key production staff demonstrate on-site, in front of the operators, how to switch pumps and pressure machines. “Show it to him, tell him about it. ” After that, have the operator carry out the actual operations according to the training content, \"showing you how to do it and explaining it to you.\" All of these trainings are hands-on! It’s extremely time-consuming and labor-intensive! Train everyone! How can you say that no one will follow such work instructions? Through these measures, since the beginning of this year to date, there have been no more incidents of pump reversal or press reversal resulting in the press shutting down due to operational errors. The key is that the operator knows how to do it this way, so nothing bad will happen (and if something does go wrong, he will still be held accountable and subject to evaluation). The largest class had to conduct frequent tests due to a press malfunction, with the press being reversed four times. During this process, communication was strengthened, relationships were streamlined, and cohesion was enhanced. If you come up with some other things, the bros will be willing to accept them too. What others say isn’t necessarily applicable; you need to play based on your own circumstances. Once the goal is clear, whether it’s a fishbone diagram, SOPs, or Minitab, they are all just tools. Without standardization, there can be no stability in production or product quality, let alone energy savings and reduced consumption. As a frontline manager, the real skill lies not just in strategy, but also in breaking down conventional ideas.......