Page 59 - TPM A Route to World-Class Performance

40 TPM-A Route to World-Class Performance

and planners must work as a team and actively seek creative solutions which
will eliminate both waste and equipment-related quality problems once and
for all!
An often-asked question is 'How does the 5S/CAN DO fit within the TPM
activity?' One way of explaining it is to again use the analogy of the football
team. As stated above, in this scenario, the operators are the attackers and the
maintainers are the defenders.
However, they need a football to play with. The football is the structured
and detailed nine-step TPM methodology of measurement, condition and
problem-prevention activities, as applied to the critical machines and equipment
(Figure 3.6).
There is, however, little point in having an excellent team with a powerful
football if the pitch is in a dreadful state - namely the workplace and its
organization. Under the TPM umbrella, the team takes responsibility for
marking out the pitch, cutting the grass and putting up the goal nets and
corner flags. This is the 5S/CAN DO activity which the team is responsible
for, rather than it being delegated or subcontracted to a groundsman.

3.3 Overall equipment effectiveness versus
the six big losses

The analogies above illustrate important common-sense dimensions of TPM
philosophy. These combine to provide a powerful driver to improve OEE by
reducing hidden losses.
In Figure 3.14 the tip of the iceberg represents the direct costs of maintenance.
These are obvious and easy to measure because they appear on a budget and,
unfortunately, suffer from some random reductions from time to time. This is
a little like the overweight person who looks in the mirror, says he needs to
lose weight and does so by cutting off his leg. It is a quick way of losing
weight, but not a sensible one! Better to slim down at the waist and under the
chin and become leaner and fitter as a result.
The indirect costs or lost opportunity costs of ineffective and inadequate
maintenance tend to be harder to measure because they are less obvious at
first sight - they are the hidden part of the iceberg. Yet they all work against
and negate the principles of achieving world-class levels of overall equipment
effectiveness.
In our iceberg example, the impact on profitability is in inverse proportion
to the ease of measurement. Quite often we find that a 10 per cent reduction
in the direct costs of maintenance (a commendable and worthwhile objective)
is equivalent to a 1 per cent improvement in the overall effectiveness of
equipment, which comes about from attacking the losses that currently lurk
below the surface. Sometimes this is correctly referred to as the 'hidden factory'
or 'cost of non-conformity'. The tip of the iceberg is about maintenance eficiency;
the large part below the surface is about maintenance effectiveness. One is no