fm work orders parts acquisition project
DESCRIPTION
FM Work Orders Parts Acquisition Project. Mission of FM. FM exists to assure that Campus buildings and grounds enhance learning and meet compliance requirements in a cost effective manner, while educating students through labor. Vision of FM. To finish the 2013-14 year with: - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
FM Work OrdersParts Acquisition
Project
Mission of FMFM exists to assure that Campus buildings and grounds enhance learning and meet compliance requirements in a cost effective manner, while educating students through labor
2
3
To finish the 2013-14 year with:– 95% Customer Survey score– Zero Lost-time accidents– Zero Regulatory compliance issues– 100% PM’s completed on time– 10% reduction in WO turn time from 2012-13 baseline
Vision of FM
SIPOC of FM
4
Suppliers Inputs Process Outputs Customers
Students
Faculty
Staff
Completed PM & work orders
Cleaned Spaces
Landscaped Grounds
Work Satisfaction Survey
Suggested major repairs or renovations
Training of students
Building/Fire Code requirements
OSHA / EPA regulations
SOP’s
Work Orders
Major Repair requests
Cleaning & Grounds Schedules
Weather events
Events or Special Requests
Materials Vendors
Parts Vendors
Tools & Training
EHS
College O&S Management
Students
Faculty
Staff
5
Hi-Level FM Trades Work Order Process
Completed Work Documentation
FM AdminWork Performed
FM Admin
Work RequestMajor RepairsPM Schedule
Closed Work Order
Work OrderPM Order
Customer(Building Owner)(FA)(Other requestor)
FM Mgmt
Customer Satisfaction Survey
TMA Database
SWOT Profile of FMStrengths
• Select Trades skill sets• Buy-in to College Mission• Safety Culture• Sustainability Culture• Building ‘Owner’ process
Weaknesses•Lack of historic data metrics•Lack of historic customer focus•Productivity rates & expectations•Lack of robust PM system•Select Trades skill sets•Lack of Standard Work
Threats•Economic / budgetary constraints•Competition from local industry
Opportunities•Full use of TMA•Full use of Tracy Time System•Full use of APPA HK standards
Gap Analysis Opportunities and Priorities• The existing Work Order parts acquisition process is too time consuming
with non-valued added and expensive steps.
• Project focus is to:• Identify value added & non-value added steps• Eliminate non-value added steps• Create Standard work• Identify reduced cost and steps
7
Mission of WO parts acquisitionThe Work Order parts acquisition process exists to procure the necessary parts to complete work requests in an economic and effective manner so that buildings and grounds enhance learning.
8
9
To finish the 2013-14 year with:– Reduced parts acquisition expense– Increased value-added work time for acquisitions
Vision of WO parts acquisition
SIPOC of WO parts acquisition
10
Suppliers Inputs Process Outputs Customers
Students
Faculty
Staff
Completed PM & work orders
Cleaned Spaces
Landscaped Grounds
Work Satisfaction Survey
Suggested major repairs or renovations
Training of students
Building/Fire Code requirements
OSHA / EPA regulations
SOP’s
Work Orders
Major Repair requests
Cleaning & Grounds Schedules
Weather events
Events or Special Requests
Materials Vendors
Parts Vendors
Tools & Training
EHS
College O&S Management
Students
Faculty
Staff
SWOT Profile of WO parts acquisition
Strengths• Buy-in to College Mission• Strong Process “Owner”• New TMA system
Weaknesses•Lack of historic data metrics•Lack of historic customer focus•Productivity rates & expectations•Lack of Standard Work
Threats•Pushback of Trades technicians•Lack of sense of urgency
Opportunities•Full use of TMA•More opportune use of student labor•Vendors open to “new” way of doing business
Project Charter• Mission – Establish an improved WO parts acquisition process.• Burning platform – Existing process consumes too much time & expense• Process Description –To establish a value-added WO parts acquisition process that provides real time accuracy in TMA and reduces
expense and non-value added work.• Problem Statement – Present system is a mess. Leads to use of critical Trades resources to acquire parts• Sponsor – Derrick Singleton• Process Owner – Wayne Orr• Team Lead – Ronnie VanHook• Facilitator – Derrick Singleton• Team – Derrick Singleton, Wayne Orr, Becky Berheide, Regina Williams,
Jeff Reed, David Wilkerson, David Tipton
Hi-Level Process Map (Before)
13
14
Hi-Level Process Map (After)
15
16
Report-out Final Notes• An eight month review of data (July 2012 to February 2013) of how many invoices were processed by
the Facilities Management team and Accounting.• A total of 1,602 were processed during the time frame – an average of ~200 per month or 50 per week.• The average amount of these invoices during the study was $39. The lowest was for 38 cents• Each invoice also indicated a trip off-campus by a trades person (often two) to obtain a part.• A review of vendors and locations indicated that the average round-trip was ~5 miles.• Hard data was unavailable on the time per trip, but is conservatively assumed that
each trip was 30 minutes.
17
Report-out Final Notes• Per Finance (David Wilkerson), a trade report indicated the average cost to process
an invoice is $89.21.• Alternatively, Fifth Third Bank, provider of the College P-Card, has a transaction cost of $21.83.• Additionally, Fifth Third Bank pays the College a rebate of 1.5% on transactions.• The need to lean out the project proved to have more opportunity than was originally
expected. The project focused on eliminating the trips to vendors by trades technicians,
the total number of trips, and the invoices created.
18
Report-out Final Notes• The following changes have been implemented as the new process:
Vendors were negotiated with to obtain pricing discounts and/or “milk run” deliveries, the reduced the cost of parts acquisition by lowering the total vendors dealt with and reduced the need for some pick-ups.An analysis of the highest velocity of parts being turned was completed. As a result, 241 new parts that were previously obtained from vendors were “internalized” to prevent trips.The largest vendors were negotiated with to accept a monthly payment by PCard based on one invoice, rather than the previous method of invoicing every single itemized part bought during the month.A new policy was implemented to only allow student labor in the FM Storeroom to be able to leave campus to obtain parts, except in an emergency case that had to be approved by a Team Leader.
19
Report-out Final Notes• The following Lean tools were utilized:
Spaghetti Diagram – though not specifically mapped, the tool was foremost in the thinking of the project. By preventing technicians from leaving campus to obtain parts, they are not crisscrossing town and campus to obtain parts, burning fuel and doing non-value added work.Value Stream Map – the Current and Ideal VSM’s were mapped to identify where non-value added work was occurring and where it could be eliminated. By eliminating the “muda” of back office processing of invoices and the travel time of technicians from picking up parts and refocused onto repair work, productivity is up and costs are down.Kanban– by internalizing the inventory of 241 parts previously bought “as needed”, these parts are now managed as the rest of the inventory with use of kanban and pull refill. Standard Work– a new directive that any parts pick-ups must be coordinated by the Inventory Mgr has been implemented.
20
Results• The following results have been identified:
The 200 trips to procure parts and 200 invoices process per month from July ’12 to Feb ‘13 have been reduced on average over the last five months to 72 trips (64% reduction) and 6 invoices (97% reduction).
The previous cost of the process was estimated over 8 month study period to be in the range of $9,829 to $17,842 per month to one that is averaging an expense of $305 per month.The inventory increase of the 241 new parts added ~$4,000 of initial expense to the overall inventory. However, inventory turns have improved from 2.92 during the 8-month study to 4.99 since. Average inventory value with less parts during the 8-month study was $122.8K; average value over the new period is $108.9K.The new process allows for the tradesmen technicians to be able to remain on campus repairing items and completing work orders, thus being more productive and assuring that the mission is met of maintaining campus buildings and grounds to be conducive to learning. 21
Report-out Final Notes• The following productivity and customer service gains have been noted with the project:
Productivity– In the eight-month study period, a total of 6,461 work orders (807/month on average) were completed. In the five-month period after the change, 4,381 work orders (876/month on average) have been completed…an 8.6% productivity gain.
Customer Service– In the eight-month study period, the average Customer Satisfaction Index score was 94.5%. In the five-month period after the change, the Customer Satisfaction Index score was 96.0%.
22
Full Data• Double Click to see full datasheet for calculations of savings
•
23
Baseline Avg trips
Miles/Trip
Gas mileage
Avg Gas Cost
Total trip mileage
Total Gas used
Total Gas Cost
Avg Techs/
trip
Avg Time/
tripLost Tech
Time Tech Cost Lost Tech Cost200 5 18 $3.50 1000 55.6 $194.44 1.5 0.5 150 $16.65 $2,497.50
JULYActual trips
Miles/Trip
Gas mileage
Avg Gas Cost
Total trip mileage
Total Gas used
Total Gas Cost
Tech Trips
Avg Time/
tripLost Tech
Time Tech Cost Lost Tech Cost57 5 18 $3.50 285 15.8 $55.42 0 0.5 0 $16.65 $0.00
AUGActual trips
Miles/Trip
Gas mileage
Avg Gas Cost
Total trip mileage
Total Gas used
Total Gas Cost
Tech Trips
Avg Time/
tripLost Tech
Time Tech Cost Lost Tech Cost80 5 18 $3.50 400 22.2 $77.78 0 0.5 0 $16.65 $0.00
SEPActual trips
Miles/Trip
Gas mileage
Avg Gas Cost
Total trip mileage
Total Gas used
Total Gas Cost
Tech Trips
Avg Time/
tripLost Tech
Time Tech Cost Lost Tech Cost85 5 18 $3.50 425 23.6 $82.64 7 0.5 3.5 $16.65 $58.28
OCTActual trips
Miles/Trip
Gas mileage
Avg Gas Cost
Total trip mileage
Total Gas used
Total Gas Cost
Tech Trips
Avg Time/
tripLost Tech
Time Tech Cost Lost Tech Cost79 5 18 $3.50 395 21.9 $76.81 6 0.5 3 $16.65 $49.95
NOVActual trips
Miles/Trip
Gas mileage
Avg Gas Cost
Total trip mileage
Total Gas used
Total Gas Cost
Tech Trips
Avg Time/
tripLost Tech
Time Tech Cost Lost Tech Cost60 5 18 $3.50 300 16.7 $58.33 9 0.5 4.5 $16.65 $74.93