Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Learning from SONY


Belajar dari pengalaman pahit memanglah tidak mengenakkan. Tapi itu sangat dibutuhkan untuk bangkit dan maju agar tidak terjatuh pada kesalahan yang sama atau belajar dari kesalahan orang lain. 
Siapa tidak kenal dengan SONY. Pastilah sering kita dengar terutama kedigdayaannya dalam beberapa dekade belakangan ini. Tapi, karena fokus yang salah, sehingga saat ini SONY jauh ketinggalan dengan produsen-produsen elektronik lain seperti Samsung, Apple, Dell, dll. Mungkin ini bisa kita jadi pelajaran berharga bagi kita.
------------------------------------------------------

Sayonara Sony: How Industrial, MBA-Style Leadership Killed a Once Great Company


Who can forget what a great company Sony was, and the enormous impact it had on our lives? With its heritage, it is hard to believe that Sony hasn’t made a profit in 4 consecutive years, just recently announced it will double its expected loss for this year to $6.4 billion, has only 15% of its capital left as equity (debt/equity ration of 5.67x) and is only worth 1/4 of its value 10 years ago!
Sony was once a marketplace creator, and leader
After World War II Sony was the company that took transistor technology invented by Texas Instruments (TI) and made the popular, soon to become ubiquitous, transistor radio. Under co-founder Akio Morita Sony kept looking for advances in technology, and company leadership spent countless hours innovatively thinking about how to apply these advances to improve lives. With a passion for creating new markets, Sony was an early creator, and dominator, of what we now call “consumer electronics:”
·    Sony improved solid state transistor radios until they surpassed the quality of tubes, making good quality sound available very reliably, and inexpensively
·    Sony developed the solid state television, replacing tubes to make TVs more reliable, better working and use less energy
·    Sony developed the Triniton television tube, which dramatically improved the quality of color (yes Virginia, once TV was all in black & white) and enticed an entire generation to switch. Sony also expanded the size of Trinitron to make larger sets that better fit larger homes
·    Sony was an early developer of videotape technology, pioneering the market with Betamax before losing a battle with JVC to be the standard (yes Virginia, we once watched movies on tape)
·    Sony pioneered the development of camcorders, for the first time turning parents – and everyone – into home movie creators
·    Sony pioneered the development of independent mobile entertainment by creating the Walkman, which allowed – for the first time – people to take their own recorded music with them, via cassette tapes
·    Sony pioneered the development of compact discs for music, and developed the Walkman CD for portable use
·    Sony gave us the Playstation, which went far beyond Nintendo in creating the products that excited users and made “home gaming” a market.
Very few companies could ever boast a string of such successful products. Stories about Sony management meetings revealed a company where executives spent 85% of their time on technology, products and new applications/markets, 10% on human resource issues and 5% on finance. To Mr. Morita financial results were just that – results – of doing a good job developing new products and markets. If Sony did the first part right, the results would be good. And they were.
The origin, and impact, of “Japan, Inc” on Sony
By the middle 1980s, America was panicked over the absolute domination of companies like Sony in product manufacturing. Not only consumer electronics, but automobiles, motorcycles, kitchen electronics, steel and a growing number of markets. Politicians referred to Japanese competitors, like the wildly successful Sony, as “Japan Inc.” – and discussed how the powerful Japanese Ministry of Trade and Industry (MITI) effectively shuttled resources around to “beat” American manufacturers. Even as rising petroleum costs seemed to cripple U.S. companies, Japanese manufacturers were able to turn innovations (often American) into very successful low-cost products growing sales and profits.
So what went wrong for Sony?
Firstly was the national obsession with industrial economics. W. Edward Deming in 1950s Japan institutionalized manufacturing quality and optimization. Using a combination of process improvements and arithmetic, Deming convinced Japanese leaders to focus, focus, focus on making things better, faster and cheaper. Taking advantage of Japanese post war dependence on foreign capital, and foreign markets, this U.S. citizen directed Japanese industry into an obsession with industrialization as practiced in the 1940s — and was credited for creating the rapid massive military equipment build-up that allowed the U.S. to defeat Japan.
Unfortunately, this narrow obsession left Japanese business leaders, by and large, with little skill set for developing and implementing R&D, or innovation, in any other area. As time passed, Sony fell victim to developing products for manufacturing, rather than pioneering new markets.
The Vaio, as good as it was, had little technology for which Sony could take credit. Sony ended up in a cost/price/manufacturing war with Dell, HP, Lenovo and others to make cheap PCs – rather than exciting products. Sony’s evolved a distinctly Industrial strategy, focused on manufacturing and volume, rather than trying to develop uniquely new products that were head-and-shoulders better than competitors.
In mobile phones Sony hooked up with, and eventually acquired, Ericsson. Again, no new technology or effort to make a wildly superior mobile device (like Apple did.) Instead Sony sought to build volume in order to manufacture more phones and compete on price/features/functions against Nokia, Motorola and Samsung. Lacking any product or technology advantage, Samsung clobbered Sony’s Industrial strategy with lower cost via non-Japanese manufacturing.
When Sony updated its competition in home movies by introducing Blu-Ray, the strategy was again an Industrial one – about how to sell Blu-Ray recorders and players. Sony didn’t sell the Blu-Ray software technology in hopes people would use it. Instead it kept Blu-Ray proprietary so only Sony could make and sell Blu-Ray products (hardware). Just as it did in MP3, creating a proprietary version usable only on Sony devices. In an information economy, this approach didn’t fly with consumers, and Blue Ray was a money loser largely irrelevant to the market – as is the now-gone Sony MP3 product line.
We see this across practically all the Sony businesses. In televisions, for example, Sony has lost the technological advantage it had with Trinitron cathode ray tubes. In flat screens Sony has applied a predictable, but money losing Industrial strategy trying to compete on volume and cost. Up against competitors sourcing from lower cost labor, and capital, countries Sony has now lost over $10B over the last 8 years in televisions. Yet, Sony won’t give up and intends to stay with its Industrial strategy even as it loses more money.
Sony’s Leadership was a willing conspirator to the failed strategy
Why did Sony’s management go along with this? As mentioned, Akio Morita was an innovator and new market creator. But, Mr. Morita lived through WWII, and developed his business approach before Deming. Under Mr. Morita, Sony used the industrial knowledge Deming and his American peers offered to make Sony’s products highly competitive against older technologies. The products led, with industrial-era tactics used to lower cost.
But after Mr. Morita Sony’s other leaders were trained, like American-minted MBAs, to implement Industrial strategies. Their minds put products, and new markets, second. First was a commitment to volume and production – regardless of the products or the technology. The fundamental belief was that if Sony had enough volume, and cut costs low enough, Sony would eventually succeed. Without any innovation.
By 2005 Sony reached the pinnacle of this strategic approach by installing a non-Japanese to run the company. Sir Howard Stringer made his fame running Sony’s American business, where he exemplified Industrial strategy by cutting 9,000 of 30,000 U.S. jobs (almost a full third.) To Mr. Stringer, strategy was not about innovation, technology, products or new markets.
                                           
Sony’s Industrial Strategy was cost-cut first, products are less meaningful
Mr. Stringer’s Industrial strategy was to be obsessive about costs. Where Mr. Morita’s meetings were 85% about innovation and market application, Mr. Stringer brought a “modern” MBA approach to the Sony business, where numbers – especially financial projections – came first. The leadership, and management, at Sony became a model of MBA training post-1960. Focus on a narrow product set to increase volume, eschew costly development of new technologies in favor of seeking high-volume manufacturing of someone else’s technology, reduce product introductions in order to extend product life, tooling amortization and run lengths, and constantly look for new ways to cut costs. Be zealous about cost cutting, and reward it in meetings and with bonuses.
Thus, during his brief tenure running Sony Mr. Stringer will not be known for new products. Rather, he will be remembered for initiating 2 waves of layoffs in what was historically a lifetime employment company (and country.) And now, in a nod to Chairman Stringer the new CEO at Sony has indicated he will react to ongoing losses by – you guessed it – another round of layoffs. This time estimated to be another 10,000 workers, or 6% of employees. The new CEO, Mr. Hirai, trained at the hand of Mr. Stringer, demonstrates as he announces ever greater losses that Sony hopes to – somehow – save its way to prosperity with an Industrial strategy.
Sony may not go bankrupt – but avoid it
Japanese equity laws are very different that the USA. Companies often have much higher debt levels. And companies can even operate with negative equity values – which would be technical bankruptcy almost everywhere else. So it is not likely Sony will fill bankruptcy any time soon, if ever.
But should you invest in Sony? After 4 years of losses, and entrenched Industrial strategy with MBA-style leadership focused on “numbers” rather than markets, there is no reason to think the trajectory of sales or profits will change any time soon.
As an employee, facing ongoing layoffs why would you wish to work at Sony? A “me too” product strategy with little technical innovation that puts all attention on cost reduction would not be a fun place. And offers little promotional growth.
And for suppliers, it is assured that each and every meeting will be about how to lower price – over, and over, and over.
Every company today can learn from the Sony experience
Sony was once a company to watch. It was an innovative leader, that pioneered new markets. Not unlike Apple today. But with its Industrial strategy and MBA numbers- focused leadership it is now time to say, sayonara. Sell Sony, there are more interesting companies to watch and more profitable places to invest.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2012/04/20/sayonara-sony-how-industrial-mba-style-leadership-killed-once-great-company/1/

Monday, January 23, 2012

Preventive Maintenance Alone is not Enough to Eliminate Breakdown

Sering sekali kita mendengar beberapa perusahaan menerapkan program preventive maintenance tetapi jumlah equipment yang mengalami breakdown tidaklah berkurang secara signifikan. Pertanyaan sebenarnya apakah preventive maintenance sendiri bisa mengurangi bahkan menciptakan zero breakdown.
Berdasarkan prinsip reliability engineering, penyebab equipment breakdown berubah terhadap waktu. Hal ini bisa dijelaskan dalam “life span charateristic curve” atau yang biasa disebut dengan bath-up curve. Gambar berikut memperlihatkan bath-up curve dan hubungannya dengan penyebab dan strategi yang bisa digunakan sebagai countermeasure.


Ketika mesin/equipment dalam kondisi baru, failure rate pada awalnya tinggi dan perlahan-lahan turun seiring dengan penyesuaian kondisi operasi equipment dengan proses. Dan, pada akhirnya failure rate akan menjadi lebih stabil pada periode tertentu, dan pada akhir umur equipment tersebut, failure rate akan naik (wear-out failure period).


Early period, accidental period dan wear-out period memiliki penyebab yang berbeda. Hal ini terlihat jelas pada gambar diatas. Oleh karenanya untuk mencapai zero breakdown yang diinginkan karateristik dari breakdown tersebut harus diketahui dengan baik sehingga pencegahan (countermeasure) bisa diimplementasikan secara spesifik.


Penyebab failure pada state awal (early period) adalah adanya kesalahan pada tahap desain dan manufaktur. Untuk mengatasinya, team desain harus melakukan tes terlebih dahulu sebelum benar-benar terpasang dan beroperasi. Dengan mengembangkan prosedure tes ini diharapkan semua kelemahan yang ditemukan bisa dilakukan improvement untuk mengkoreksi semua weakness yang ditemukan sehingga meminimalisasi kegagalan pada saat pengopersian.


Accidental failure disebabkan terutama oleh kesalahan yang disebabkan oleh pengoperasian equipment dengan tidak benar. Dan yang paling efektif untuk pencegahannya adalah menjaga agar equipment tersebut bisa beroperasi dengan benar dan tepat.


Wear-out failure disebabkan oleh terbatasnya umur alami dari sebahagian atau keseluruhan part dari sebuah equipment. Masa pakai equipment tersebut bisa diperpanjang dengan cara preventive maintenance dan improvement dari sisi maintainability nya (melalui perubahan di design). Hal ini bisa mengurangi failure rate di akhir masa pakai dari equipment tersebut.


Dari ketiga tipe failure yang terjadi, maintenance prevention adalah metode yang paling efektif untuk mencegah sebuah equipment mengalami failure/kegagalan oleh ketiga tipe tadi. Juga, maintenance free equipment design haruslah menjadi pemikiran utama pada saat design dari sebuah equipment sehingga ketiga tipe failure tersebut bisa dicegah. Oleh karena itu preventive maintenance sendiri tidak mampu untuk mengeliminir breakdown equipment. Sehingga jelaslah bagi kita bahwa semua bagian turut serta bertanggung jawab. Mulai dari design/planning, operation department dan tentu saja departement maintenance.


Source : Seiichi Nakajima, “Introduction to TPM” Productivity Press.

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Reliability Equipment and it's related to safety

Reliability of equipment is so related to safety. It is very clear explained by Joel Levitt in his article at UPTIME magazine edition August – September 2011. This Joel stated that there are four reasons reliability and EHS are related (Below is the four reasons):

Reason 1: Something was broken and had to be repaired. The breakdown caused the person to go into harm’s way. So, lack of reliability can cause death and injuries.
Equipment running as designed does not require people to enter a confined space, repair (and touch) exposed electrical wires, pressure test a generator, sit on top of a tank and weld, or even fall off of a ladder. How is reliability related to safety? Reliability removes risk from the equation, and the worker is not in harm’s way. If no one was welding above the tank, the explosion would not have happened; if there was no repair needed, no one would give been up on the ladder or on the roof.
A. Something breaks down and has to be repaired.
B. The breakdown causes a worker to be in harm’s way.
C. Reliable equipment does not require maintenance workers to be put into harm’s way.
D. The best solution to a hazard is to eliminate it.

Reason 2: Due to PM, the size and scope of repair is smaller, making for safer repairs.
The second part of the equation has been reported by Exxon-Mobil. They studied their maintenance-related accidents and found the following: “Accidents are 5 times more likely while working on breakdowns then they are while working on planned and scheduled corrective jobs.” High reliability implies an effective PM program that catches deterioration before it causes a failure. Since the asset is not yet broken, it is safer to work on.
A. PM activity catches deterioration early in the process before failure (and reliability is impacted).
B. At that point the repair is smaller, safer, and more manageable, resulting in fewer EHS incidents.
C. PM also gives managers more time to plan and deal with hazards.

Reason 3: Hazards are eliminated or mitigated
High reliability also implies that the maintenance planners have time to plan the job properly. One aspect of planning is to consider all the hazards and figure out and describe a way to accomplish the work safely. The job plan that an experienced planner develops will reflect the safe way to do the job. A planner should look at every job and see if any common hazards
are present. Hazards would include: airborne contaminants, falls from heights, slipping and tripping, falling objects, eye damage (particle, chemical, or flash), chemicals (ingestion, skin exposure, or breathing), asphyxiation, radioactive exposure, fire, explosion, electrocution, entrapment and crushing, and temperature stress. Every hazard identified is then eliminated (best option) or mitigated (second-best option). The safest plants are the ones where the safety of the workers is considered at every step in the job preparation process.
A. The planner plans the job to minimize downtime
B. The planner is specifically trained to look for hazards to safety, health, and environment.
C. Planners will mitigate or eliminate the hazard in the plan before the crew even leaves the shop.
D. The result is fewer EHS incidents and more reliable equipment.

Reason 4: Planned jobs allow fewer opportunities for the maintenance
worker to improvise.
Improvisation is statistically less safe than following the job plan with the correct tools and spares. One of the building blocks of a reliable culture is adequate maintenance planning. Without planning, the workers are forced to make do with what spares and tools they can find. To do their job, they may have to improvise to make things work. Improvisation might be great in the theater but can be deadly in maintenance. My guess is that the following worker was making do with an improvised support: Worker was performing maintenance on the back of a trash truck. The support gave way and the tailgate came down on the worker.
A. Improvisation is great in comedy.
B. Improvisation can be deadly in maintenance.
C. Adequate time for job planning means having the right tools, spares, equipment, skills, and drawings when the job starts.
D. The result is fewer EHS incidents and better reliability.
Reliability is the outcome of this intentional maintenance environment and is essential for a safe environment.

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Safety Improvement Implementation

Jadi, bagaimana memulai implementasi SHE (Safety, Healthy and Environment)? Untuk menjawab pertanyaan tersebut, terlebih dahulu harus dipahami beberapa prinsip dasar yang berlaku, yaitu :
  • Tidak ada yang ingin mengalami kecelakaan
  • Tidak ada orang yang ingin melihat orang lain mengalami kecelakaan
  • Hukum dan system adalah keniscayaan
  • Kita bisa menghasilkan lebih banyak bila bekerja sama
  • Apa yang dapat diukur pasti dapat dikerjakan
Berdasarkan safety piramid yang lebih dikenal dengan Heinrich Principle yang ditemukan oleh Herbert William Heinrich yang mengatakan bahwa satu kecelakaan fatal dimulai dengan 29 kecelakaan ringan dan diawali dengan 300 kejadian yang hampir menyebabkan kecelakaan (near-miss). Dalam piramida dapat digambarkan sebagai berikut :
Heinrich Principle

Di dasar dari piramida safety tersebut adalah unsafe condition and unsafe behavior.

Untuk memulai SHE implementation khususnya untuk safety, kita harus mulai dengan mencari semua sumber unsafe condition dan unsafe behavior tersebut. Cara menemukan item-item tersebut di lapangan bisa dilakukan dengan cara melakukan survey ke lapangan/shopfloor dan dari kegiatan autonomous maintenance (AM). dari kedua cara tersebut, temuan unsafe condition dan unsafe behavior seharusnya operator lah penemu yang paling banyak. Dengan training tentang AM1 dan 7 tipe abnormal dimana salah satunya adalah tempat-tempat yang tidak aman. Operator bisa menemukan sebanyak mungkin area di sekitar mereka yang tidak aman yang bisa menimbulkan kecelakaan.

Dari list temuan-temuan tersebut bisa dilakukan improvement. Improvement tersebut bisa berupa menghilangkan penyebab kecelakaan tersebut. Bila tidak bisa dihilangkan berarti harus diberi tahu tentang kondisi di area/equipment tersebut dengan membuat marking dan memperlengkapi mereka dengan alat perlindungan yang sesuai standard (dengan Personal Safety Equipment yang tepat), sehingga ketika operator tersebut melewati area tersebut, mereka bisa memperlengkapi diri sehingga kecelakaan bisa dicegah.

Juga, analisis terhadap near miss dan NLTA harus dilakukan. Analiss yang dilakukan untuk mencari akar penyebab near miss terjadi. Dari hasil analisis tersebut bisa ditemukan apakah hal tersebut bisa dihindari dengan cara improvement atau mengendalikan/control sumber penyebab kecelakaan.

Jadi, bila sumber bahaya tersebut tidak dapat dihilangkan hanya bisa dikontrol, apa selanjutnya yang harus dilakukan? Dalam tulisan selanjutnya hal ini akan dikupas tuntas.

Sunday, November 6, 2011

Fact on safety and health at work ILO

Berikut ini adalah data dari ILO (International Labour Organization) 2009 tentang data keselamatan kerja. Berikut kutipannya.

  • The ILO estimates that each year about 2.3 million men and women die from work-related accidents and diseases including close to 360,000 fatal accidents and an estimated 1.95 million fatal workrelated diseases.
  • This means that by the end of this day nearly 1 million workers will suffer a workplace accident, and around 5,500 workers will die due to an accident or disease from their work.
  • In economic terms it is estimated that roughly four per cent of the annual global Gross Domestic Product, or US$1.25 trillion, is siphoned off by direct and indirect costs of occupational accidents and diseases such as lost working time, workers’ compensation, the interruption of production and medical expenses.
  • Hazardous substances cause an estimated 651,000 deaths, mostly in the developing world. These numbers may be greatly under-estimated due toinadequate reporting and notification systems in many countries.
  • Data from a number of industrialized countries show that construction workers are three to four times more likely than other workers to die from accidents at work.
  • Occupational lung disease in mining and related industries arising from asbestos, coal and silica exposure is still a concern in developed and developing countries. Asbestos alone claims about 100,000 deaths every year and the figure is rising annually
Artinya, rata-rata 6301 meninggal akibat kecelakaan dan penyakit di tempat kerja setiap hari dengan hampir 1783 diantaranya terjadi akibat kecelakaan fatal. Dan jumlah ini bisa bertambah terutama di negara berkembang dimana safety belum menjadi budaya kerja. ILO juga mengatakan bahwa jumlah ini bisa bertambah karena di beberapa negara berkembang sistem pelaporan kecelakaan kerja tidak bisa diakses atau dilaporkan. Juga, kerugian financial yang ditimbulan sangat besar dari kecelakaan tersebut.

Jadi, Masih tidak mau peduli dengan safety?

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Planned Maintenance

Ada beberapa hal yang perlu diperhatikan dalam menjalankan planned maintenance dengan baik. Beberapa diantaranya adalah :
1. Implementasi secara penuh 5S (Seiri, Seiton, Seiso, Seiketsu dan Shitsuke) sehingga sikap mental kearah perubahan mulai terbentuk. Mulai dari mengorganisasi setiap equipment, membuat setiap equipment tempat yang semestinya, membersihkan equipment secara teratur sehingga pondasi sikap kearah perubahan mulai terbentuk.

2. Pembuatan KPI untuk planned maintenance ini harus sesuai dengan kebutuhan perusahaan dimana KPI ini didefenisikan dengan jelas. Juga, KRA (Key Result Area) juga diidentifikasi untuk mempermudah tingkat keberhasilan implementasi. Biasanya KPI ini berasal dari PQCDSM (Productivity, Quality, Cost, Delivery, Safety dan Morale) yang didefenisikan untuk maintenance.

3. Philosophy/prinsip dari zero failure dipahami sebagai prinsip bersama dengan konsep yang sama. Pemikiran lama seperti "All equipment can fail" harus diubah menjadi "don’t let equipment fail" atau "Failure can be reduced to zero".

4. Hubungan planned maintenance dengan pillar lain sangatlah erat. Tidak ada pillar dalam TPM yang berdiri sendiri. Hubungan pillar planned mainteance dengan pillar lain haruslah jelas dipahami hubungannya dengan FI, AM, QM, SHE, T&E , EM dan OTPM.

5. Methodology dalam menggembangkan Planned Maintenance haruslah dilaksanakan secara komperhensif. Biasanya stage pertama yang dilakukan adalah research kondisi equipment sekarang termasuk history dari failure/replacement dari equipment tersebut. Dari hasil tersebut, dibuat program planned maintenance sesuai dengan panduan step by step implementasi planned maintenance.

Perlu diingat bahwa TPM sangat constraint terhadap cost reduction. Juga, maintenance personel developement menjadi faktor yang penting dalam kesuksesan implementasi planned maintenance.

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Migration from wordpress to blogger

I just migrated from wordpress to blogger. The wordpress blog no longger can be updated.