Process Confirmation Standard for Kaizen at BMW Dingolfing—Part 4

Work standards are key to kaizen, and their correct use requires process confirmation. The BMW Group Dingolfing plant does an outstanding job with this process confirmation, driving their continuous improvement. This gives BMW automotive plants an outstanding performance on par with Toyota. In this last post on the series on the process confirmation standards at BMW Dingolfing, we dig deeper into the confirmation for the work standard documents and the digital displays used to manage the product variety coming down the line.

Standards and Work Standard Documents

This section looks at the printed documentation. The first question checks whether the sequence of tasks on the work standard document is up to date. A fast improvement cycle like at BMW or Toyota often updates the standard, and it is important to not only change the work but also update the documentation.

The next question checks whether the worker follows the work standard sequence repeatedly. Ideally he does. If not, the follow-up investigation would decide whether the worker made a mistake (and needs to be reminded or trained) or the standard has an improvement potential (and needs to be changed). I do like the last word repeatedly for this check. The group leader should check not only once, but multiple times, whether the sequence is followed or not. That way he can also see deviations between the different iterations.

The last question is whether the operator stays within the limits of his stations. Each station (called a “Takt” at BMW) has a clearly marked beginning and end (also as checked with the first question in the section on the floor markings). In many car plants, it is a common bad behavior of operators to work ahead of their station and then take a longer break until the assembly line catches up with them again. In pretty much all cases, this leads to inefficiencies (at the minimum extra walking) and often to problems (if the prematurely assembled part is now in the way of another worker trying to add his own parts). In the other direction, the worker is falling behind (e.g., if there is a problem and he needs more time). In any case, it is a fluctuation that causes lots of problems. This question checks whether such a work-ahead or falling-behind is happening, and if so a follow-up tries to improve the situation. (For completeness’ sake, there are also highly variable plants that use working ahead as a tool to handle product variability, as for example Fendt in Marktoberdorf. But please do not use this exception as an excuse to do it at your plant too, just because you have slightly different products. By using working ahead to solve one problem, you create many more and probably bigger problems afterward).

Digital Dashboard

This section looks at the display monitors, showing the operators what product variant is coming down the line, its sequence, and what parts need to be installed for this model. The first question asks whether the variable work content is visualized. When having a flexible line with multiple products at a small lot size (ideally one), the worker has to pay attention to make sure he does not miss something. If you buy a car with heated seats, and the worker forgot to plug them in, it would be a bummer. While this will probably be caught by the final quality check, it is still a hassle to fix it afterward. Hence, the group leader has to verify whether the display shows these customization tasks, including symbols, images, and if necessary the count.

The second question builds on that, and checks whether the symbols, images, and generally the information on the display are up to date. Work standards should be up to date for smooth operations. But mistakes in this build manifest will surely lead to quality problems down the line.

The last question for this digital display of the build manifest is geared toward visual management. Is the display free of part numbers? At BMW, they try to make the parts and tasks for the customization more visual through colors and symbols, instead of a hard-to-read, difficult-to-search, and easy-to-confuse part number.

Summary

This concludes the twenty-two questions of the BMW Group Dingolfing plant process confirmation. They aim to verify, maintain, and especially improve the work standards for fast improvement cycles and LOTS of small improvements that make companies great. They also help to maintain good quality. And, as this process confirmation checklist is also a form of a standard, it is also improved regularly itself.

However, please do not just copy all the questions from BMW and dump them on your front-line leadership. First of all, while these questions work for BMW (at least until the next improvement of these questions), they may not be the right thing for you. Depending on your situation, your questions may look different. If you want to create a process confirmation standard (which I would encourage you to do), create your own questions. Maybe use the BMW checklist as an inspiration, but then create your own items to make sure the standard is current and used correctly, operators are trained, areas and items are labeled consistently and correctly, and (maybe most important) the operators improve their own standards. Maybe you are producing screws or textiles, and scratches on the product are very low on your list of priorities. Hence you could skip this question. Or maybe there is a bigger risk of injuries in your area, and you could add items to the checklist to verify safety protocols are properly followed (e.g., is everybody properly wearing their personal protective equipment, etc.?). Or you are working on highly confidential stuff, and have standards to ensure secrets stay… well… secret. There is no one-size-fits-all in work standards, and you’re better off customizing the process confirmation to your needs.

Second, just dropping a checklist onto the front-line supervisors is likely to fail. You need to train them AND give them the time and resources to not only do the checklist but especially follow up if there is a deviation! Finding an issue is easy; fixing it is much more time consuming. For example, BMW uses 3D printers on the shop floor to help them with that (but again, your solution may look different). But now, go out, establish a proper standard for process confirmation, fit in the drive for continuous improvement, and organize your industry!

PS: Many thanks to Thorsten Ahrens, Head of Assembly iX, i7, 8, 7, 5 Series in the BMW Group Dingolfing plant, for showing me his very well managed shop floor!