| 1. Challenge |
| |
 |
External market forces and a counterproductive incentive plan presented an unexpected challenge, making initial progress slow. |
| |
|
|
| 2. Findings |
| |
|
Excessive employee-initiated overtime |
| |
|
|
| |
|
Considerable downtime due to reactive maintenance |
| |
|
|
| |
|
High work-in-process volumes as "comfort" buffers to make up for poor work-flow processes |
| |
|
|
| 3. Goals |
| |
|
Shift the corporate culture from a reactive management style to a proactive one |
| |
|
|
| |
|
Upgrade the legacy management systems to deliver real-time information |
| |
|
|
| |
|
Strengthen the subsidiary’s balance sheet and enhance its competitive position |
| |
|
|
| 4. Recommendations |
| |
|
Conduct huddle meetings at the beginning of each shift |
| |
|
|
| |
|
Implement a management operating system designed to allow supervisors to asses performance at the end of each shift |
| |
|
|
| |
|
Calculate realistic standards for a fair days work and develop scorecard to evaluate individual performance |
| |
|
|
| 5. Results |
| |
|
Because unexpected challenges slowed the initial progress, DB&A made the decision to stay for the 2nd half of the engagement at their own expense to get the client back to a 2.3-to1 ROI |
| |
|
|
| |
|
The client was thoroughly satisfied with the results, as well as the integrity that DB&A showed when it was time to make good on its guarantee |
| |
|
|
| |
|
A second engagement was initiated with its Canadian subsidiary |
