A new management philosophy appears to be gaining traction. This shift might have broad implications on how manufacturing operations are managed in tomorrow’s “Factory of the Future.” Taking a stance completely opposite to the work begun with the Toyota Production System, a new Cavalier Movement seeks to increase idle inventory, to establish extra Work-in-Process buffers, and to slow down output. In a bid to completely reverse the benefits touted from Lean manufacturing, the Cavalier Movement seeks a goal of improving quality and customer satisfaction by simply adding waste into the production process.
One example is the use and placement of tools alongside work centers in the production process. Rather than focus on minimizing movement and tasks performed, this new philosophy encourages workers to frequently try new approaches to performing their specified routines. Consistency is to be avoided, with the objective to keep workers actively engaged through, in essence, a strategy that re-invents the wheel every day.
According to a recent interview by a proponent of this new management strategy, “We are just tired of working so hard to improve efficiency. Now is the time to cut output, increase product scarcity and, ideally, build every product 100% correctly the first time, regardless of time, resources or cost. Continuous process improvement initiatives are over-rated.”
Employees at early adopter manufacturing enterprises appear to be in support of the program. “Stress has gone way down, from before and after we implemented our Cavalier Movement program. Now, when a quality issue presents itself, we simply shut down the entire line right away. This approach gives us much greater access to best examine our work-in-progress and seek out the root cause to issue resolution.”
A rumor has been circulating across the manufacturing community in the Washington DC area that the roots for this program can be traced to local best-in-class practices currently in process at the US Government. No confirmation of this rumor has been validated as of yet.
The ramifications of the Cavalier Movement going “main-stream” are significant. No longer will there be any need to coordinate operations across plants – each can operate fine as a silo – with no implications to performance metrics. And, should a future supply chain disruption occur, such as from an extreme weather event, then the additional buffers built into the production process can become quite handy.
Have you considered such an operations strategy shift? If so, please let us know how that has worked out for you. ☺
If you liked this article, here is another you might enjoy:
