Relationships between Employees Participation, Overall Equipment Effectiveness and Human Error Events and its Impact on Productivity INTERPHEX 2011 March 29-31, 2011 Jacob K. Javits Convention Center New York, NY

1

2

Overall Equipment Effectiveness OEE metric, has fast become the accepted yardstick that combines:

How efficient a manufacturing operation is… Packaging World, Sept. 2010 “Benchmarking OEE” EMI

3

Investigator Interest • Help improve the OEE metric from the training/human reliability standpoint. • Justify “soft skills” initiatives. • Concern regarding exaggerated focus on “production”. • Scientifically demonstrate “people’s perceptions/feelings” contribution to OEE results. – Evidence suggest that these practices have an “significant impact on quality and efficiency” . (United States Department of Labor, Office of the American Workplace. (1994). Road to high performance , a guide to better jobs and better business results. Washington, D. C.: US Government Printing Office.

4

Investigation Problem – Publication from Office of the American Workplace (DOL) • •

Road To High Performance Workplaces, A Guide To Better Jobs And Better Business Results”. 1994. Identifies common elements in different companies identified as high performers.

– Recommends the following practices: • Skills and information • Participation, organization, and association • Compensation, security, and work atmosphere The levels of efficiency, as measured by the industry (OEE), are related to the implementation of practices of highperformance, participation, organization, and association.

Investigation Problem (cont.) • Incorporate and consider human elements in efficiency metrics/initiatives. • Need to examine the role that industrial-organizational psychology plays. Manages psychological elements related to productivity Organizational Diagnostics Organizational Structure Provides recommendations on improvement/maintenance of professional performance. – Leadership development. – It is necessary to sustain the professional contribution of this discipline with quantitative efficiency. – – – –

Purpose of the Study • Phase I Descriptive: quantitative – Current practices – Frequency • Phase II- Relationship between variables: perspectives, quantitative, comparative – – – –

Participation Organization Association OEE

• Phase III Perspective of the principal players of the process: perspective, qualitative – Interview about the work experience with relation to practice

Hypothesis – H1 There exist a direct and positive relationship between the high levels of implementation of the work practice category of high execution “participation” and the high levels OEE, where the more participation, the higher the level of OEE. – H2 There exist a direct and positive relationship between the high levels of implementation of the work practice category of high execution “organization” and the high levels OEE, where the more participation, the higher the level of OEE. – H3 There exist a direct and positive relationship between the high levels of implementation of the work practice category of high execution “association” and the high levels OEE, where the more participation, the higher the level of OEE

Justification • Empiric information with relation to opportunity of increasing the efficiency (OEE) from a perspective of performance technology (people). • Focus in organizational climate associated with participation, organization, and association, with the same level of formality and discipline than technological and procedural initiatives. • Include structured high execution work initiatives where participation, organization, and association are promoted by design. • Contribute to process optimization.

Justification (cont.) • Different methodological approach to the one studied for this phenomenon combining both paradigms of the scientific investigation: – Quantitative – Qualitative • Contribution to the industrial psychology professional practice comparing the need for their intervention with the industrial engineering, mechanical engineering, and chemical engineering. • Demonstrate relationship between behavior, performance, and human development with the operations productivity.

Concept Definitions

11

Method

12

Collection Method Phase 1 Descriptive Questionnaire

Phase 2 Results OEE Reported

Phase 3 Perspective from the process players

Data Analysis

14

15

Hypothesis Verification • Participation • H1- The substantive hypothesis was corroborated due to the fact that there is a positive and direct relationship between participation and OEE. – Correlation coefficient obtained was .763 to a significance statistical level equal to or less than .01. – A Pearson Product-Moment Correlation of +0.75 is considered a considerable positive correlation. – Predictive results of OEE demonstrated that the more participation, higher the OEE index with a significance level of .001. 16

Hypothesis Verification (cont.) • Association: H2 The substantive hypothesis was not corroborated • Showed no significant correlation – correlation coefficient of .115 – degree of statistical significance of .05. – + 0.10 it is considered a weak positive correlation • Organization: H3 The substantive hypothesis was not corroborated • Does not exist correlation – correlation coefficient of .004 and a degree of significance of .98. +0.004 means no relationship between variables 17

Hierarchy of the impact of high performance practices

18

Conclusion • The implementation of “participation practices” has a direct impact and is a predictor for OEE levels. – – – –

Communication Time Work/time conditions Forums

• According to the DTF guide. – – – –

Most effective when participation is encouraged. Have the authority to make changes in the process. Seek input on a daily basis. Establish structures to facilitate consultations.

19

Conclusion • Association and Organization DO NOT have, as independent factors, a direct impact on the OEE values. • They do have an indirect interdependence with the efficiency results (OEE). • This implies that, although both these practices, association and organization, in isolation constitute predictive factors of OEE, when combined with the participation practices, it enhances their effect and become necessary components to accomplish efficiency. 20

Conclusion • Association is necessary so that the benefits associated with the “organization” practice manifest. • Organization itself correlates with participation and involvement, and correlates/predicts the levels of efficiency of OEE • Strategies to increase the efficiency levels or OEE – Promote shared responsibility – Empowerment – Work environment based on trust and collaboration.

21

Recommendations • Orientation Programs to organizations. – Organizational designs – Work practices – Human and psychological factors

• Training programs on how to apply these practices. • Develop quantitative metric models – Company results – Relationship between practices and human and psychological factors. 22

OEE, Human Error and Training

© Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

23

Background • Human Error – Major contributor of failures (80%) – Impacts quality – Impacts availability – Regulatory standing – Customer service – Costs

© Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

24

HE and Training • Training is proven to be effective – New set: Knowledge, Skills and Abilities (KSA’s) • New • Different • Stopped doing but are able to…

– – – –

New employees New processes Changes to existing processes Design, delivery, method and content is based on the intention (by design)

• Training is mostly used to correct or prevent failures. © Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

25

What is Human Error? • All those occasions in which a planned sequence of mental or physical activities fails to achieve its intended outcome • Any action, or lack of a required action, that exceeds the system tolerance

It’s It’s about about human human behavior behavior © Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

26

Human Behavior • Knowledge by itself does not change behavior… – Individuals – Motivations – Experiences People Peopledo dowhat whatthey theyWANT WANT and andwhat whatMAKES MAKESSENSE SENSEto to them. them. © Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

27

Human Error Vision • Old Vision – Human Error is the cause of accidents/incidents – You must identify an employees inaccurate assessments, wrong decisions and bad judgment

• New Vision – Human Error is a symptom of deeper trouble inside a system – Instead, identify how people assess tasks and decisions that make sense at the time given the circumstances that surrounded them

WHY? WHY?

28

Investigation Process Equipment Failure

© Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

29

HE Investigation Process Why?

© Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

30

How is Human Error controlled? – By using human factors (80%, any aspect of the workplace or job implementation that makes it more likely for the worker to make an error)- SYSTEMS/CONDITIONS – By managing acquired behaviors (20%, also called habits)- PEOPLE

© Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

31

© Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

32

Why? Human Error Categories… Categories… 1. Procedure related error 2. Human factors engineering related error 3. Training related error 4. Supervision related error 5. Communications related error 6. Individual error © Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

33

Human error rates • Instances (events) • Opportunities (lots/tests)

© Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

34

Case Study

© Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

35

The Challenge • Reduce HUMAN ERRORS and improve HUMAN RELIABILITY, while… – New technologies and equipment (new skill set needed) – No additional resources (headcount) – 25-30% reduction in budget

© Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

36

Coding B

A 1

2

C

Systems

3

4

5

6

a

b

7

c

8

9

d 01 02

37

Process • Categorize and code – Four levels (deductive: general to specific) 1. 2. 3. 4.

Causal factor type Root cause category Near root cause Root cause(s)

• Quantify • Plan based on priorities (GUT) © Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

38

Results

© Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

39

Accomplishments

© Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

40

Lessons Learned • Training responsible for 8%-10% of events – 100% of efforts directed towards less than 10% of the problems

• Distinction between human error and the individuals fault • It’s all about explaining human behavior © Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

41

© Copyright 2010 by Ginette M. Collazo Phd. www.ginettemcollazo.com

42