Legitimate Fear
In today’s cut-happy environment, any change is viewed through the lens of job loss. TPM is no exception. When Paul Wilson, Managing Director of Aster Training, installed a TPM system, his team had to face fear from the maintenance ranks. He said, “We worked hard at alleviating any fear the maintenance technicians might have had that their jobs were under threat. This soon evaporated once we were challenging them with more interesting projects.” Much of the work being taken over by operations is not being done at all (like basic maintenance activity). Maintenance departments will find themselves with ample work on just the projects requested by the TPM teams. These projects will generally reduce waste, make the machinery operate better, or achieve lower levels of product variation. The result is better profit without personnel cuts (for the same volume). Of course significant cuts in volume will require retrenchment, but that is another conversation and should not be mixed up with a TPM implementation.
One of the leading thinkers in TPM is J. Venkatesh. His review of the history of TPM can be found in an article on Reliabilityweb.com. TPM is an innovative Japanese concept. The origin of TPM can be traced back to 1951 when preventive maintenance was introduced in Japan.
W.E Deming traveled to Japan under the Marshall Plan and began a powerful and eventually world-changing discussion about quality. The royalty of what was left of Japanese industry were in the training rooms. They saw that the drive for quality and efficient production was their only edge. They had no resources beyond what they could build and imagine.
The ideas of TQM (Total Quality Management) and the concepts of PM were only partial answers to the issues of maintenance and quality. After much trial and error, the PM effort evolved into TPM.
The concept of preventive maintenance was taken from American industrial practices. Nippondenso* of the Toyota group was the first company to introduce plant-wide preventive maintenance in 1960. Preventive maintenance is the concept where operators produced goods using machines, while the maintenance group was dedicated to maintaining those machines. However, with the automation of Nippondenso, maintenance became a problem as more maintenance personnel were required. So the management decided that the routine maintenance of equipment would be carried out by the operators. (This is the beginning of Autonomous Maintenance, one of the features of TPM). The maintenance group took up only the essential maintenance works.
Thus, Nippondenso, which already followed preventive maintenance, also added autonomous maintenance done by production operators. The maintenance crew was released of their routine maintenance tasks; instead, they carried out equipment modification for improving reliability and maintainability. The modifications were made or incorporated in all their new equipment. These tasks are aimed at maintenance prevention (MP). MP or Maintenance Prevention is the elimination or reduction in the need for maintenance. By reducing the source of the dirt, we also reduce the need for cleaning (an example of Maintenance Prevention). Thus, preventive maintenance along with maintenance prevention and Maintainability Improvement gave birth to Productive Maintenance (PM). The aim of productive maintenance was to maximize plant and equipment effectiveness to achieve optimum life cycle cost of production equipment.
By then, Nippondenso was using quality circles, involving the employee’s participation. All employees took part in implementing productive maintenance. Based on these developments, Nippondenso was awarded the Distinguished Plant prize by the Japanese Institute of Plant Engineers (JIPE) for developing and implementing TPM. Nippondenso became the first company to obtain the TPM certification.
TPM had become a part of TPS (Toyota Production System). According to Bob Williamson, a long-time veteran of the TPM wars, the TPS systematically focuses on the identification and elimination of waste to reduce manufacturing costs. In Japanese plants of that era, the culture was ripe for involvement of everyone in the production process.
In many ways TPM is a return to a pre-1920s model of maintenance. Before the 1920s, machine operators were skilled mechanics, so they were expected to repair their own machines. As mass production took over, lower-skilled operators were recruited and the production jobs became more menial. Many of these newly-minted operators were immigrants or just off the farm. Their greatest advantage was their lower wage rate and the long hours they were willing to work.
As the numbers of machine operators grew, the ability to fix one’s own machine quickly was gone. Company-sponsored training to improve one’s skills was non-existent. Soon this group, as well as management, forgot that these people had capabilities far exceeding those needed as operators. A tradition settled in of operators being only button pushers. The maintenance department as we know it developed at that early time by necessity, filling in with specialists in repairs and maintenance.
A new situation has developed in the way we look at organizations. For the last 35 years, organizations have slimmed ranks, reduced overhead, and optimized processes. At the same time we have increased the complexity and speed of equipment and our reliance on computers, PLCs, and sophisticated controllers. We are faced today with smaller crew sizes and greater maintenance demands than ever before.
TPM recruits the operators into the maintenance function to handle basic maintenance tasks and to become the champions of the machine’s health. TPM returns to the pre-1920 roots by re-involving the operator in maintenance activity and decisions.
The maintenance department becomes an advisory group to help with training, setting standards, doing major repairs, and consulting on maintenance improvement ideas. Under TPM, maintenance becomes more closely aligned with production. For TPM to work, maintenance knowledge must become disseminated throughout the production hierarchy. The operators must have complete, top-level support throughout all phases of the transition and thereafter.
TPS, (Toyota Production Systems) the Parent of TPM
TPM was the brainchild of Toyota. It was based on a component of the Toyota Production System. The production system had several parts. TPS (as it is called) is designed for a particular time, circumstance, and place. It was designed by people in tune with their culture and organization. Finally, TPS was specifically designed to manage the assembly of automobiles.
Machines to be Worked Upon
There are special attributes of automobile assembly that lend themselves to a TPM approach. The first item is that the tools are pretty small (compared to other industries such as steel making or mining). These relatively small tools meant that the operators could literally put their hands on the machine and learn something about its operation.
The second factor was that these tools and the processes used are not intrinsically hazardous (with a few expectations). This means that you might get hurt if you do the wrong thing, but it is unlikely that you will endanger others, like you could in an oil refinery or mine.
With the assembly tools being smaller, the need for elaborate sets of repair and maintenance tools and deep maintenance knowledge is not as important, especially for basic maintenance services. Finally, the machines are modular and quite sophisticated. When something breaks, usually an entire module is replaced.
The Employees
There are two aspects of auto assembly employees. This group is usually well paid and has low turnover. Low turnover