Dore Dore Case 6u3g1h

Doré Doré

Rashi Airen

UM18172

Shishir Singh

UM18173

Shivam Goyal

UM18175

Shivam Srivastava

UM18176

Shivam Jolly

UM18177

Shivangi Jaiswal

UM18178

TRADITIONAL OPERATION

CELLULAR MANUFACTURING

 2OO pieces of same style and colour, 8 different size in a batch  Knitwear contained 55 sewing machines, and staffed by 42 workers  Machine operated 8 hrs/day and 5 days/week  Time = 10 minutes of actual labour

 Delivery time fell from 15 days to 1 day  Flow rate of 2000 garments per day reduced WIP from 30,000 to 20,000 units  WIP Inventory fell by an estimated 1.23 FF Million COMPARISON

Took no of garment dependent workflow variability

Reduced product movement and cross-trained operators who could switch tasks

CHANGES REQUIRED  REORGANISATION  CROSS TRAINING  OPERATION LAYOUT  CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Motivation For Converting To Cells Reduction in Delivery Time

WIP Reduction:

The average sewing throughput time of a garment • Work-in progress was reduced from 720 to 48 • Reduced idle time and hence an increase in labor dropped from 15 working days to 1 working. utilization as well as machine utilization. Autonomy • Quality improves because each cell has 'ownership' over production and cells often aim for 'zero defects' and the elimination of waste ('Muda’) • Workers become multi-skilled and are consequently more adaptable and flexible to the changes in the business • Staff feel more involved in decision-making and the variety of work and greater responsibility resulted in better motivation

Loyalty of Workers: Teams remained together unless someone left the factory. When a worker was absent, the rate of output dropped. In the first cell, when one team member went on maternity leave, the five remaining decided not to replace her, as she had promised to return. Emphasizing the tremendous rise in loyalty by cell , Marguet noted that the worker had curtailed the length of her maternity leave to return to the cell.

Cells in Hosiery Production Would not recommend the adoption of M. Enfert’s plan  Improvement is marginal (and possibly incorrect) considering the potential losses sustained through the use • Hosiery requires four distinct operations, not all of of the cell system which are compatible with the cell design • Only three out of four of the processes are compatible  No Cross-training  there may be rivalry between different cells and conflict with the cell model may arise if one cell is left to wait for output from another

Far more complicated than in knitting production

Budget limitations:

Deg the cell was that ironing required an expensive (350,000-800,000FF per machine), highcapacity, extremely specialized machine. If Enfert’s plan is to be tested, it should be tested well after the implementation of the cell system in the knitting operation, which will serve as a trial to its effectiveness.