PPT ON IMPROVING DISTRIBUTOR ETA COMPLIANCE RATE DEC.2015

Title: Parts Kaizen Marathon 2015Subject: “Improve ETA Compliance Rate for Dist.

Backorders”

10th December, 2015

1

P

DCA

1• Title

2• Outline

3• Team Formation

4-6• Clarify The problem

7• Breakdown the Problem

8• Target Setting

9• Root Couse Analysis

10• Develop Counter measure

11• See Counter Measure Through

12-15• Monitor Result & Process

16• Standardization

17• Next Step

OUTLINES

TOYOTA 8 STEP PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS 2

MOTTO: "SEE SOMETHING SAY SOMETHING”

Express TEAM

Improve ETA Compliance Rate for Dist. Backorders

TEAM FORMATION

Joel Justice Okine

Swalih Chenath Emmanuel K.H.Agama

Abdallah Gomma Raju Nuepane Abdul Majeed

Nissar Taison Mathew

3

CLARIFYING THE PROBLEM

+ + +

+

Shipping " Arrival at local port

Transportation L/T

Dist W/H " Dealers

Delivery L/Tto DLR

LoadingPacking &sortingConfirmationUnboxingUnloading

DIST W/Hshipping operation L/TDIST W/H receiving operation L/T

Port "DIST W/H

Customsclearance

Customs clearance L/T

Invoicing,shipping

Pick & pack/ production

Orderreceiving

Supplier processing L/T

Invoice

Supplier processing L/T + Transportation L/T + Customs clearance L/T + DIST processing L/T

Calculating ETA (Estimating the Standard Lead Time)

ETA Supply Chain Process4

CLARIFYING THE PROBLEM

“The parts took longer to arrive than I was told by the dealer.”

“The dealer can’t tell me when parts will arrive.”

CS decrease!

Customer Complaint 5

CLARIFYING THE PROBLEM

Ideal ETA Compliance Rate 90%

Current ETA Compliance Rate 65%

25%

ETA Compliance Rate

GAP

6

BREAKDOWN THE PROBLEM

TMAP AIRCentralparts depot

Partsdet.

Servicedet.

Distributor Dealer

ETA Compliance Rate Gap (25%)

ETD

Suppliers CS decrease!

Synchronization between ETA Supply Chain.

Knowledge in 4 stages of ETA Information

Diagnosis and Estimated Repair Order Requisition Transportation

Lead Time(TMAP (Air)

ETA Compliance Rate Gap (25%)7

88

TARGET SETTING

TARGET SETTING

Before Nov 2014 Target 20150%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

65%

90%

ETA Compliance Rate

Nov 2014

• Install T-Open to assigned key personnel

• Dedicated Staff for NAP ETA Mgt.

• Shipment tracking file Shared

Nov 2014 to 2015

• ETA Mgt & SOP Training

• Installation of EPC Program

ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS

Warehouse receiving and Binning Lead-time

Multiple requisition for Repair Orders(75%)

Synchronization between ETA Supply Chain.

Special order parts control board handling

Knowledge in 4 Stages of ETA Information

Diagnosis and Estimated

Repair Order Requisition

Delay in Documentation & Clearance

Warehouse storage capacityMultiple local

courier’ agents

Transportation Lead Time(TMAP (Air

ETA Compliance Rate of 25% Resulting to Low CS

BO Age Analysis 48%(Government Penalty)

Updated N.A.P Adherence

9

DEVELOP COUNTERMEASURE

Challenge

Transportation Lead Time

(TMAP Air)

Warehouse receiving and Binning Lead-time

Updated N.A.P Adherence

BO Age Analysis 48%(Government Penalty)

Root Cause

Multiple local courier’ agents

warehouse storage capacity

Special order parts control board handling

Multiple requisition for Repair Orders(75%)

Countermeasure

Used of single and Viable Courier Agent

(UPS)

Overnight Empty Bin Utilization.

Training to staff on ETA, SOPH, and N.A.P report

Review and Analyze BO Lines with Service Team.

Challenge, Root Cause and Countermeasure

10

11

COUNTERMEASURE

Used of single and Viable Courier Agent

(UPS)

Training to staff on ETA, SOPH, and N.A.P report

Review and Analyze BO Lines with Service Team.

Overnight Empty Bin Utilization.

PERIOD

November 2014 Continuous

Sept.2015 Continues

November 2014 Continues

April 2015 Continuous

OWNERS

Joel and Management

Joel, Taison, Emmanuel ,Field Support

Team

Emmanuel , Joel, Service Team

Majeed, Swalih, Raju, Gomma, Warehouse

Receiving Team

SEE COUNTERMEASURE THROUGH

COUNTERMEASURE, PERIOD and OWNERS

11

MONITOR RESULT & PROCESS

Monitoring of TMAP Air Documentation Lead Time

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

11

1513

27

15

32

12 11

1412

15

16

Average Documentation L/T Before

OCT.2015 NOV.2015 Total Average L/T0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

6 6 6

12

8

10

Average Documentation L/T After

12

MONITOR RESULT & PROCESS

N.A.P,SOPH & ETA Information Management Training for Dealers

Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Average TOTAL

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Nov 2014 ETA Compliance Rate (Before)

Dec-14 Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 TOTAL 0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Sept. 2015 ETA Compliance Rate (After)

13

Before After

No Monitoring

42095 42125 42156 42186 42217 422480

102030405060708090

MONITOR RESULT & PROCESS

Monitoring of One Time Requisition Per Age Analysis (April. 2015- Sept. 2015

14

MONITOR RESULT & PROCESS

Success

Failure

P D

CA

Summary ETA Compliance Rate (Before (Nov.2014) & After (Sept 2015)

Before Nov 2014 Target 20150%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

65%

90%

Series1

+25

15

STANDARDISATION

Manual Forms

Checklists Flow-chart

STANDARDISATION

1 •Management and Service Approval of N.A.P before Ordering.

2 •Daily N.A.P Analysis, E-Mail sent to Dealer Parts Branches

3 •Monthly Training to staff on ETA, SOPH, and N.A.P Report Management

4 •Monthly KPI Report on ETA Compliance Rate, Air & Sea Order Lead Time.

16

NEXT STEP

INCREASED SET TARGET TO 98 % 2016

Target 98% 2016

Sustainability

Effective Commun

ication

17

18

Question & Answer

Thanks

MOTTO: "SEE SOMETHING SAY SOMETHING”

18