Figure 1. Click here for larger version.
PhM: We hear of so many cases where either Six Sigma or Lean is selected to drive improvements. How do you coordinate Lean and Six Sigma efforts?A.H.: Basically you select a method based on the problem at hand. If it involves quality and variation, then Six Sigma is the tool of choice. If it involves reducing waste, then Lean is the key. But since both quality improvement and waste reduction are needed, both tools should be used.PhM: How do you determine which activities are wasteful and which processes lead to quality variations? Can you quickly walk us through the whole process?A.H.: Weve found that, in most pharmaceutical manufacturing operations, most of the activities that go on day to day fail to add any value to final product (Figure 1, above). One of the first steps is value stream mapping, representing visually all activities and processes required to make the product, to define which activities actually add value, which are necessary but dont add value, and which arent necessary at all.
The goal is to eliminate wasteful processes entirely, and minimize steps that may be necessary but dont add value (Figure 2, at right). Going through this process allows you to focus on areas that add value, and facilitates easy fixes. It also allows you to optimize the sequence of longer and shorter term improvement projects, based on how they will affect the critical path.PhM: What do you do after mapping?A.H.: We perform a SCOT analysis, to determine Strengths, Challenges, Opportunities and Threats, involving all stakeholders in each process. This groups work determines the five key areas that we focus on, and helps us develop a mission, goals and action plans. The mission, goals and action plans are updated every year, and each projects goals are aligned to a formal charter so there are no pet projects.PhM: Apart from applying DMAIC and Lean, how did you focus your efforts?A.H.: Input from stakeholders, during the SCOT analysis, was critical in achieving focus. Corporate and division goals also shaped our strategy. As far as additional data are concerned, we interviewed employees, did a marketing survey, and examined customer requirements closely.PhM: How did you organize people within the group? Who is overseeing these efforts and who reports to whom?A.H.: We appointed a full-time Operational Excellence manager to tie projects to overall business needs and drive operational excellence throughout the culture. This manager is supported by a full-time black belt, who, in turn is supported by a master black belt who works full time developing tools, training and communications programs, and mentoring the black belts.We also appointed champions for each of our five key goal areas:
- New business;
- Operational excellence;
- State-of-the-art operations;
- Excellence in quality and compliance;
- Better connection with employees.
PhM: How do you translate goals into actions?A.H.: The key is aligning projects to strategic objectives and prioritizing projects based on available resources, as well as their potential contribution to plant success. At Hayward, weve developed a project alignment matrix (Figure 3, at right), grouping projects based on key focus area.We then rank the projects and align them with goals. Cost savings and other data can be entered when applicable (Figure 4, below). All employees are listed in this matrix, and flags assigned to each, and assignments are made based on functional area (Figure 5, below).Weve also developed plant and developmental scorecards that measure results for each project based on how they addressed cost, customer, regulatory compliance and continuous improvement.PhM: Can you give some examples of results that you achieved through this Operational Excellence program?
Figure 4. Click here for larger version.
A.H.: In one case, we reduced the manufacturing cycle time of a monoclonal antibody gel. We realized that stabilizing cycle time would reduce the need for WIP and inventory at the plant.We analyzed the process to develop a better understanding on what was contributing to the longer cycle times.PhM: What did your analysis show?A.H.: Our prioritized list of sources for variation involved manufacturing scheduling and interdepartmental handoffs, external quality control lab testing cycle time, and exceptions. Roughly three quarters of batch review cycle time did not add value to product, and had a significant impact on bottom line results.PhM: How about on the shop floor?A.H.: We took a Lean Kaizen approach to reduce time wasted by interdepartmental handoffs during batch review. In the process, we discovered that much of the pain in the release process came from getting hold of supporting documentation, to release manufacturing protocols for the batch record. Many of the supporting documents came into QA only after the end of the entire manufacturing process. This created a windfall of documents during the release process.
PhM: Did you implement any 5S or other programs to address this?A.H.: We divided the manufacturing process into intermediate product substeps and treated those as if they were releasable product. For making purified bulk, for example, substeps were seeding of bioreactors or inoculum, termination of bioreactors and purified bulk manufacture. We set targets of five days after each substep to turn in error-free manufacturing documents to QA, including time required for turn-backs and error correction, and 8 days for QA approval.Each substep was assigned a lot tracking sheet, containing three essential fields: master protocol name and number, date QA received, and Date QA approved.We did this for the convenience of the purification department which already used its own internal tracking system. We used this new tracking sheet to replace the older system, rather than giving operators yet another system to review.
PhM: How about improving efficiency of document retrieval?A.H.: Workflow was also analyzed closely, and we found staff spent significant time searching for records, and traveling between departments.We established Standard Work procedures that documented the best way to perform a repeatable task consistently, and posted standard work instructions and boards describing the process near each relevant station. We also installed a master protocol (MP) Status Board (Figure 6, at right) so that everyone could easily view the progress of each batchs documentation.We also developed a new document filing system (Figure 7, below) to systematically reduce the time employees took to retrieve documents. We dismantled a small shelf unit from a junk pile and salvaged its shelves to place in this taller shelf. We bought brackets and screws from Home Depot and a power drill from Facilities to put this together. Each area was labeled, and yellow tape run down the middle to separate documents for production and purification departments. The shelving system is used exclusively for manufacturing protocols (MPs) and the inspiration came from our Neuchatel facility.
Figure 7. Click here for larger version.
The MP board led to significant improvements in document approval cycle time. So far, all these efforts have combined to reduce document approval times from 31 to 7 days, and raise sigma quality level from 0.1 to 1.4For batch release, median variance in days, has fallen from 30 to -2, the process capability index has moved from -.4 to 0.45 and sigma quality level has gone from 0.3 to 2.3.Overall, the Kaizen efforts reduced distance staff spent traveling from work areas by 147 miles per year. It reduced batch review cycle time by 70%, and batch release cycle time by 50%. Visual management also improved communication. Everyone from operators to manager now knows the document review status of each lot.PhM: Are these efforts prerequisites to staying in business today?A.H.: At Baxter, we see them as the key to remaining competitive. And theres plenty of evidence to support this view. Just look at the Baldrige Index, or the financial performance of companies that have won the Baldrige Award for quality. Theyve outperformed the Standard & Poors Index by a factor of up to six-fold, for the past several years. Operational Excellence is the key to business success, but corporate goals are only one part of the equation. These efforts ultimately require buy in from management and operations each day to succeed.