matt hrivnak . com

Recently, I facilitated a kaizen event which was targeted at dramatically reducing the setup time of a Former-Winder twisting machine in a textile plant.  Naturally, we performed a SMED event; dedicating 3 days to the event and 2 days of prior videotaping (performed by me, under ‘normal’ conditions). A little background on the Former-Winder’s operation.  It is a machine that takes in raw material Yarns or Ends, twists them together into a strand, and winds them onto a 3 foot long bobbin.  The Yarns/Ends used can number anywhere from 2 and go up to 150 in some cases.  The bigger the yarn needed, the more raw material packages that will be required.  These raw material packages are put up onto fixtures, called Creels, that hold them while they feed out yarn.  The pictures show the creels in this case.

After loading the creels, the operator needs to install gearing that produces different levels of twist in the finished strand.  Creating a small sample allows the operator to perform a quick in-process check after changing the gears.  If it is okay, the operator puts in an empty bobbin and starts the machine.  If not, then he changes gears with engineering’s help (that’s what the ISO documentation says at any rate). Watching the video we put together this timeline, identifying the CURRENT STATE (i.e. the way in which it was currently being performed)External Setups in GREEN and the Internal Setups in RED:

• Get & read traveler (1 min.)
• Check prioritization (1 min.)
• Get gears (15 min.)
• Install gears (5 min.)
• Return gears to proper place (1 min.)
• Clean/grease machine (5 min.)
• Program computer (if necessary) (1 min.)
• Obtain/order material (45 min.)
• Creel placement (20 min.)
• Create material space (10 min.)
• Get/prepare cart (if necessary) (1 min.)
• Teardown (16 min.)
• Return material (several trips) (9 min.)
• Prepare & inspect creel (foam donuts, check eyelets, inc.) (2 min.)
• Check for/install small packages (10 min.)
• Get/install new packages (several trips) (22 min.)
• Untie packages & feed thru eyelets (38 min.)
• Setup distribution plate(s) (13 min.)
• Setup wax tank (if necessary)
• Locate & get proper die (5 min.)
• Install die (1 min.)
• Return old die to proper place (1 min.)
• Feed machine (6 min.)
• Run (.5 min.)
• Chalk for twist (TPF) (.5 min.)
• Stop & check TPF (.5 min.)
• Sign off by other person (.5 min.)
• Make adjustments (6.5 min.)
• Run (couple minutes)
• Stop & calculate weight/counts (repeat if necessary)
• Check traveler for QTY (.5 min.)
• Run Machine

—————————————————

76% Internal:  179 min = 2.98 hours

24% External:  58 min = .97 hours

Total Time:   237 min. = 3.95 hours

We then went through this list and created a ‘theoretical’ best case scenario that showcased the true Internal and External Setups.  Some of these are not even possible due to current technologies owned by the company:

• Get & read traveler (1 min.)
• Check prioritization (1 min.)
• Get gears (15 min.)
• Install gears (5 min.)
• Return gears to proper place (1 min.)
• Clean/grease machine (5 min.)
• Program computer (if necessary) (1 min.)
• Obtain/order material (45 min.)
• Creel placement (20 min.)
• Create material space (10 min.)
• Get/prepare cart (if necessary) (1 min.)
• Teardown (16 min.)
• Return material (several trips) (9 min.)
• Prepare & inspect creel (foam donuts, check eyelets, inc.) (2 min.)
• Check for/install small packages (10 min.)
• Get/install new packages (several trips) (22 min.)
• Untie packages & feed thru eyelets (38 min.)
• Setup distribution plate(s) (13 min.)
• Setup wax tank (if necessary)
• Locate & get proper die (5 min.)
• Install die (1 min.)
• Return old die to proper place (1 min.)
• Feed machine (6 min.)
• Run (.5 min.)
• Chalk for twist (TPF) (.5 min.)
• Stop & check TPF (.5 min.)
• Sign off by other person (.5 min.)
• Make adjustments (6.5 min.)
• Run (couple minutes)
• Stop & calculate weight/counts (repeat if necessary)
• Check traveler for QTY (.5 min.)
• Run Machine

—————————————————

11% Internal:  26.5 min = .44 hours

89% External:  210.5 min = 3.51 hours

This gave us a starting point for base lining and making improvements.  “How could we improve our current setup process to be as close to this as possible?”  First, we took all of the ‘current’ internal setups that were really external setups, and made them into external setups, changes shown in BLUE.  This saved about 25%:

• Get & read traveler (1 min.)
• Check prioritization (1 min.)
• Get gears (15 min.)
• Install gears (5 min.)
• Return gears to proper place (1 min.)
• Clean/grease machine (5 min.)
• Program computer (if necessary) (1 min.)
• Obtain/order material (45 min.)
• Creel placement (20 min.)
  • Preparation (10 min.)
  • Physical move (10 min.)
• Create material space (10 min.)
• Get/prepare cart (if necessary) (1 min.)
• Teardown (16 min.)
• Return material (several trips) (9 min.)
• Prepare & inspect creel (foam donuts, check eyelets, inc.) (2 min.)
• Check for/install small packages (10 min.)
• Get/install new packages (several trips) (22 min.)
• Untie packages & feed thru eyelets (38 min.)
• Setup distribution plate(s) (13 min.)
• Setup wax tank (if necessary)
• Locate & get proper die (5 min.)
• Install die (1 min.)
• Return old die to proper place (1 min.)
• Feed machine (6 min.)
• Run (.5 min.)
• Chalk for twist (TPF) (.5 min.)
• Stop & check TPF (.5 min.)
• Sign off by other person (.5 min.)
• Make adjustments (6.5 min.)
• Run (couple minutes)
• Stop & calculate weight/counts (repeat if necessary)
• Check traveler for QTY (.5 min.)
• Run Machine

—————————————————

57% Internal:  134.5 min = 2.24 hours

43% External:  102.5 min = 1.71 hours

So, after a few hours of suggestions, some time working the setup process on the gemba, we were able to make a second pass, saving around 72%!  We designed a new creel that could have one side loaded with the current job and a second side that could be prepared for the next job.  This required a 30 day list be made up and completed because of the nature of the maintenance work needed and a few other action items that were external to the SMED event itself:

• Get & read traveler (1 min.)
• Check prioritization (1 min.)
• Get gears (15 min.)
• Install gears (5 min.)
• Return gears to proper place (1 min.)
• Clean/grease machine (5 min.)
• Program computer (if necessary) (1 min.)
• Obtain/order material (45 min.)
• Creel placement (20 min.)
  • Preparation (10 min.)
  • Physical move (10 min.)
• Create material space (10 min.)
• Get/prepare cart (if necessary) (1 min.)
• Teardown (16 min.)
• Return material (several trips) (9 min.)
• Prepare & inspect creel (foam donuts, check eyelets, inc.) (2 min.)
• Check for/install small packages (10 min.)
• Get/install new packages (several trips) (22 min.)
• Untie packages & feed thru eyelets (38 min.)
• Setup distribution plate(s) (13 min.)
• Setup wax tank (if necessary)
• Locate & get proper die (5 min.)
• Install die (1 min.)
• Return old die to proper place (1 min.)
• Feed machine (6 min.)
• Run (.5 min.)
• Chalk for twist (TPF) (.5 min.)
• Stop & check TPF (.5 min.)
• Sign off by other person (.5 min.)
• Make adjustments (6.5 min.)
• Run (couple minutes)
• Stop & calculate weight/counts (repeat if necessary)
• Check traveler for QTY (.5 min.)
• Run Machine

—————————————————

21% Internal:  49.5 min = .825 hours

79% External:  187.5 min = 1.71 hours

We looked heavily into streamlining the leftover Internal Setups and determined that most of the streamlining had already been done. These machines (literally, these same machines) had been working in this plant since the 1940s and people had come up with quicker and better ways of doing things in that time.  Of course, we are still working towards streamlining and looking for those opportunities daily.

So, some team work, some more aware operators and better methods will allow us to service the internal customers of this process a lot faster, in the exact quantities they need and that means we can service a much greater variety of product lines within the same timeframe as before!

It is always important to recognize people’s efforts and to strengthen team building.  One way to achieve this is through the inclusion of memorabilia that states the purpose of a certain project or cross functional team, or even a company wide goal that may span years.  Here are a couple of examples of a button and a mug that were handed out during my days at General Cable.  The button, which lists the plant’s Lean Sigma goals of reductions in Scrap, Rejections and Inventory, were handed out to all associates working in the plant. 

The mug, which simply states “General Cable Lean Associate”, was given to anyone who participated in any Kaizen event.  Several other items were used for motivational purposes and to show the company’s gratitude.  I still have several golf shirts and a jacket that say similar things to these on them.

The main point is to allow every associate and every team member to feel that they are part of something bigger - something worth working towards.  Along the way, each one of these buttons, mugs, etc. remind you of the task at hand.  General Cable’s Lean Sigma program has worked well for the company since its launch back in 2002 (BGC).

Although SMED was clearly developed during the 1900s, there are several cases from throughout history that can be referenced when trying to explain SMED.  The very basic idea of SMED, i.e. preparing and completing External setups while the machine/process is working on the current job, while streamlining Internal setups, etc. (if you are new to SMED, check out my article SMED…What is SMED?), can be seen in common processes that are around us.

The most common of these, which is more or less the cliche reference now because it seems every Lean trainer uses it, is the quick changeover of tires witnessed by Nascar and Indy racing fans at every race.  When you think about changing a tire, you think of several elements, like:

1. Getting your tools
2. Loosening 4/5/6 nuts
3. Jacking up your car
4. Pulling off the old wheel
5. Putting on the new wheel
6. Individually picking up the nuts and resetting them
7. Tightening the nuts
8. Putting the old tire in the trunk
9. Putting your tools away

I assume it is something like that for most people.  Now, the quick connection they make here is that in an auto race, the pit crew is completely ready with their power tools, 1 guy jacks up the car, another takes the a) in cart racing, 1 (and only) nut off while maintaining it in the tooling head, b) in Nascar, the nuts are fixed to the wheel so only tightening is required, another guy removes and replaces the tire, and the nut(s) is tightened, etc.  You can see how that works.

Well, when thinking about SMED, there is a better example that I like to use.  So far, I’ve been a little on my own referencing this and some of my professors had a hard time grasping the concept of this being related to SMED.  Eventually, they saw my point and some of them use it in their classes to this day.  Unfortunately, this is not the most pleasant example of a SMED because of the nature of the resulting action, but it really gives a solid example of SMED.

Since the beginning of firearms, reloading has been a critical, essential, and frankly, a crucial aspect of warfare.  For any of you who are not that knowledgeable when it comes to the evolution of the gun, I’ll fill you in.  After the first couple hundred years of firearm development, the gun was stuck in a period of lackluster progression.  At the time of the American Revolution, muskets, a smooth bored muzzle loading rifle was the most widely used rifle in the world.  Due to the loading nature of the musket, a well trained infantryman could fire about 3 or 4 shots per minute.  Looking at this from a process standpoint, this gives us (assuming ~3 shots/minute):

• Setup time:  20 seconds (includes aiming)
• Cycle time:  ~1/10th of a second

The process for loading a musket, looks something like this:

1. Stand the musket on its butt end, with the open barrel facing the sky
2. Get out the gun powder (from a powder horn)
3. Pour the required amount of powder down the barrel
4. Put the powder horn away
5. Get out the ball (i.e. bullet) (from a snap enclosed pouch)
6. Put the bullet in the barrel
7. Pull out the rifle’s ram rod from its casing on the side of the barrel
8. Stick the ram rod in the barrel and push the bullet fully down
9. Put the ram rod back in the side casing
10. Pick up the musket
11. Cock the hammer (which contains a piece of flint for creating a spark)
12. Get out the powder
13. Pour some more powder on the flash pan
14. Put the powder horn away
15. Aim the rifle
16. Pull the trigger and hope the flint sparks and ignites the powder, firing the gun

That’s a lot to accomplish in 20 seconds. A small pictorial of an American Revolutionary War soldier is below (source:  http://www.americanrevolution.com/images/ContinentalArmy.jpg)

Like many processes, loading a rifle was held back because quicker changeovers were not possible due to technological issues and lack of progress in that area.  Slowly, the technology did improve and the flint-lock hammer was replaced with a preloaded percussion cap (like the kind you can buy in a toy store that makes a loud pop) that could easily be placed on a pin, before being struck by the hammer. 

This removed the clumsly action of pouring small amounts of gun powder into the flash pan while attempting to hold your composure.  Around the same time, ammunition companies began packaging the gun powder and the bullet in a paper encased packet that required the soldier to reach into only 1 compartment instead of 2.  The soldier would simply pull out the packet, bite off the end, and stick it in the front of the barrel.  So, after removing these small, but time consuming external elements, the process looked something like this:

1. Stand the musket on its butt end, with the open barrel facing the sky
2. Get out the paper packet
3. Bite off the top and place the rest of it in the barrel
4. Pull out the rifle’s ram rod from its casing on the side of the barrel
5. Stick the ram rod in the barrel and push the bullet fully down
6. Put the ram rod back in the side casing
7. Pick up the musket
8. Cock the hammer
9. Get out the cap
10. Place the cap on the pin
11. Aim the rifle
12. Pull the trigger

This type of rifle was used extensively around the time of the American Civil War.  At the same time, bullets were being improved through new packaging techniques that encased the bullets and powder in a metal shell that could be loaded into a moveable turret as you would expect to see on a revolver.  Much like the one pictured below:

It took another 25 years or so for this technology to be moved from pistols to rifles, but eventually, the rifle went from muzzle loaded to a pump action carbine to a bolt action rifle to the extremely fast firing machines guns used today.

With the development of the encased bullet, there was no longer a need for a percussion cap and the loading process looked something like this:

1. Preload a small batch of bullets into a ‘clip’ (does not need to be done during battle)
2. Attach the clip to the gun (again, the first clip can be done during down time)
3. Aim the rifle
4. Pull the trigger
5. Repeat steps 3 & 4, as necessary

So, as they do, things progressed and eventually you end up with a mechanism like we see today.  Almost all of the external setup elements have been removed from the gun loading process, however, there is always room for continuous improvement. 

An Uzi (shown), can fire up to 1,200 rounds per minute (rpm)!  That’s 20 rounds per second or .05 seconds per bullet!!  Some machine guns are capable of firing at rates up to 3,000 rpm.

By advancements in technology that allowed external setup times to be reduced and internal setup times to be eliminated (and the streamlining of all other internal setup times), firearms have seen a throughput increase of 40,000% (using the musket and uzi as examples - (1,200 rpm / 3 rpm) x 100%)!  That kind of increase is unheard of in most manufacturing operations, but can be seen from time to time when dealing with automation.

 How about that for an example of how much improvement you can get from a SMED?!

Over the years I have collected several quotes from various Lean and Six Sigma professionals, historians and trainers.  I have listed most of them below and will continue to expand the list as time goes on.  Enjoy!

“A bad system will defeat a good person every time.” – Deming 

Eliyahu M. Goldratt & Jeff Cox gave us several good quotes related to manufacturing in the book,  The Goal:  Excellence in Manufacturing (later called The Goal:  A Process of Ongoing Improvement).  The book, a work of fiction, leads readers into the concept of the Theory of Constraints through an easy to read novel setting.  These are some famous quotes from The Goal:

“Make the bottlenecks work only on what will contribute to throughput today … not nine months from now. That’s one way to increase capacity at the bottlenecks. The other way you increase bottleneck capacity is to take some of the load off the bottlenecks and give it to non-bottlenecks.” - quote from The Goal

“If we reduce batch sizes by half, we also reduce by half the time it will take to process a batch. That means we reduce queue and wait by half as well. Reduce those by half, and we reduce by about half the total time parts spend in the plant. Reduce the time parts spend in the plant and our total lead time condenses. And with faster turn-around on orders, customers get their orders faster.” - quote from The Goal

“An hour saved at the non-bottleneck is a mirage.” - quote from The Goal

“I say an hour lost at a bottleneck is an hour out of the entire system. I say an hour saved at a non-bottleneck is worthless. Bottlenecks govern both throughput and inventory.”  - quote from The Goal

Again, with any of the lean quotes I present, I try to be as accurate as possible.  If you see any discrepancies, please email me.

Taiichi Ohno (1912 - 1990) was a Toyota executive and one of the chief architects of the Toyota Production System.  He wrote several books about Toyota, most notably Toyota Production System:  Beyond Large-Scale Production and Workplace Management.

These are some famous Taiichi Ohno quotes:

“All we are doing is looking at the time line, from the moment the customer gives us an order to the point when we collect the cash. And we are reducing the time line by reducing the non-value adding wastes.” - Taiichi Ohno

“The only place that work and motion are the same thing is the zoo where people pay to see the animals move around” (not exact phrase) - Taiichi Ohno

“Where there is no Standard there can be no Kaizen” - Taiichi Ohno

“Why not make the work easier and more interesting so that people do not have to sweat?  The Toyota style is not to create results by working hard. It is a system that says there is no limit to people’s creativity.  People don’t go to Toyota to ‘work’ they go there to ‘think’” - Taiichi Ohno

“Costs do not exist to be calculated. Costs exist to be reduced.” - Taiichi Ohno

“The key to the Toyota Way and what makes Toyota stand out is not any of the individual elements…But what is important is having all the elements together as a system. It must be practiced every day in a very consistent manner, not in spurts.” - Taiichi Ohno

“The more inventory a company has, the less likely they will have what they need.” - Taiichi Ohno

“Data is of course important in manufacturing, but I place the greatest emphasis on facts.” - Taiichi Ohno

Again, with any of the lean quotes I present, I try to be as accurate as possible.  If you see any discrepancies, please email me.

Shigeo Shingo (1909 - 1990) was an Industrial Engineer who worked as a consultant with a number of companies before finally being brought in to further develop the Toyota Production System.  His most notable contributions and accomplishments include SMED (quick changeovers), Standard[ized] Work and methods of error-proofing.

These are some of his most famous quotes:

“The most dangerous kind of waste is the waste we do not recognize.” - Shigeo Shingo

“When you buy bananas all you want is the fruit not the skin, but you have to pay for the skin also. It is a waste. And you the customer should not have to pay for the waste.” - Shigeo Shingo

“A relentless barrage of ‘why’s’ is the best way to prepare your mind to pierce the clouded veil of thinking caused by the status quo.  Use it often.” - Shigeo Shingo

“Improvement usually means doing something that we have never done before.” - Shigeo Shingo

“The best approach is to dig out and eliminate problems where they are assumed not to exist.” - Shigeo Shingo

“Are you too busy for improvement? Frequently, I am rebuffed by people who say they are too busy and have no time for such activities. I make it a point to respond by telling people, look, you’ll stop being busy either when you die or when the company goes bankrupt.” - Shigeo Shingo

Again, with any of the lean quotes I present, I try to be as accurate as possible.  If you see any discrepancies, please email me.

How to calculate OEE: 

OEE stands for Overall Equipment Effectiveness and is the most comprehensive calculation used to determine how effectively you are utilizing your equipment.  It is an important part of total productive maintenance, can help better calculate efficiency losses, and is useful when incorporated into the cycle time calculations.

In order to calculate OEE, you will need to collect some data:

1. PERFORMANCE RATE - The Performance Rate is calculated by looking at the actual operating speeds of your machines in comparison to the operating speeds that they were originally designed for those machines or the products being run on them.
   • Product A was designed to run on Machine 1 at speed setting 10, the highest speed possible.  Due to the machine’s old age and fragile state, it can only run safely and produce good versions of Product A at a speed setting of 6.  The Performance Rate would then be 60% (i.e. 6 / 10
2. AVAILABILITY RATE - The Availability Rate is calculated by measuring any production losses due to downtime from equipment failing, breaking down, etc. as a portion of scheduled manufacturing time.
   • Machine 1 runs 36 hours for every 40 available manufacturing hours due to breakdowns.  The Availability Rate is then 90% (i.e. 36 / 40).
3. QUALITY RATE - The Quality Rate is calculated by determining the amount of losses due to quality issues like scrap and rework as compared to the total parts processed.
   • Machine 1 ran 100 pieces of Product A, but only 98 met the quality specifications.  The Quality Rate would then be 98% (i.e. 98 / 100).

 Now, once you have these 3 important measures, the calculation of OEE is very simple:

          PERFORMANCE RATE  x  AVAILABILITY RATE  x  QUALITY RATE

Using the examples from above (Performance Rate = 60%, Availability Rate = 90%, Quality Rate = 98%):

          60%  x  90%  x  98% = 52.9%

 Essentially, the OVERALL EQUIPMENT EFFECTIVENESS (OEE) is the % of effective use that you are getting out of your piece of equipment.  It is a compounding, thorough look at your true equipment uptime as a percentage of your total available manufacturing time.  This metric is important for loading workcenters and determining capacities because you are completely aware of a particular machine’s (or machine type) total ‘real’ uptime.

The Quality Paradigm:  Six Sigma

Born out of the 1980s and the need to improve Motorola’s quality, Six Sigma is the most recognizable quality program out there.  At the time when Bill Smith first developed the methodology behind Six Sigma, other quality programs were already spreading their way around the business world.  Most of these programs were referred to as “buzzwords” and never taken very seriously.

The true history of applied quality dates back to the early 1900s, with several main contributors like Walter A. Shewhart, Joseph M. Juran, Kaoru Ishikawa, and Genichi Taguchi.  While they played an important part in the foundation of statistical quality control thinking, they are not the most widely known, especially outside of Quality Engineering. 

During the 1950s and 60s, Dr. W. Edwards Deming was working with Japanese companies to help improve their quality and production processes.  He developed several basic quality and managerial ideas, first noted as his ‘14 Points for Management.’  Later, he would introduce what was termed the ‘Deming Cycle’, which is methodology for problem solving that followed a continuous, circular path:  Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA).  His ideas drastically improved the quality and efficiency of products coming out of Japan.  He would go on to win several awards until his death in 1993.

At the same time Deming was working in Japan, Armand V. Feigenbaum was developing his own set of quality initiatives at General Electric would come to be known as “Total Quality Control”.  This was the main subject in his book, Quality Control:  Principles, Practice, and Administration, which was later renamed, Total Quality Control.  In the years since, this has all been grouped into an idea called Total Quality Management (TQM).  TQM, which is commonly referred to as the precursor of much of Six Sigma, is a management approach to quality in which every customer concern is regarded in high esteem and every employee is responsible for maintaining the highest level of quality.

Six Sigma continues this approach with every employee’s interactions with products and the subsequent response from customers, both internal to the company as well as the end user.  There is a process, which is more or less the skeleton of Six Sigma, and closely related to the Deming Cycle:  the DMAIC process.  This process is a defined methodology to problem solving, where each letter stands for a different phase of a quality control project. 

In order of execution:

Define:  Define the problem at hand.

Measure:  Begin measuring the problem area or process to determine the current capabilities

Analyze:  Analyze the data from the Measure phase

Improve:  Develop and implement measures to correct the underlying problem as realized in the Analyze phase

Control:  Continue to monitor the implementations and repeat the process continually

 That, in a nutshell, is an overview of Six Sigma and its history.  At the present time, there are always companies trying to implement a Six Sigma program to improve their quality.  Just like Lean Manufacturing, sometimes they fail and sometimes they succeed, and it’s all determined by the management involved.  Six Sigma also incorporates the certification of several individuals within the company at various levels in a fashion similar to Karate, as there are Black Belts, Green Belts, Yellow Belts, etc.  This practice, which once grew Six Sigma, is now a haven for under trained and over certified individuals as you can get a Black Belt just by going online and paying a few dollars.  Sadly, many lazy managers will resort to hiring Black Belts to do the Six Sigma implementation instead of doing the work themselves. 

Questions people often have:  What are the long term effects of Lean Manufacturing?  What does Lean Manufacturing do for a company?  What are the benefits of Lean Manufacturing?, etc.  I guess the proof really is in the pudding.  People can deny it all they want, but Lean works.  This simple post, showcasing three stocks that have all had been significant in the progression (and in a lot of cases, regression) of manufacturing principles and techniques, tells the story.  In the chart below, I’ve overlaid the following stocks, Toyota (NSYE:  TM), Ford (NYSE:  F), and General Motors (NYSE:  GM) for the comparison of their performance over the past 30+ years.  Now, when you compare stocks, they are graphed by % gain over time, allowing you to see the real difference in the stocks. 

Look at how GM (BLUE LINE) remains rather flat, while Ford (YELLOW LINE) makes some gains and then retraces, and then, then look at Toyota (BLACK/RED LINE), who makes consistent gains, retraces ever so slightly, and then makes bigger gains, and so on.  That consistency and longterm growth is what all Lean companies are striving for; that is why you implement Lean.  Seriously, look at the difference in % gain (which essentially shows you what % you would have made on your money if you invested it at the time this chart began):  Toyota topped out at 9,500%!!!, F topped out at 1,200%, and GM barely cracked 200%.  It’s even more stimulating to see that at the present time (far right side of the chart), GM and F are both close to being a wash.  Well, in reality, you might have even lost money due to inflation, the time value of money, opportunity cost, etc.  And then look at Toyota at the present time, if you’d put money into this stock in 1974, you would be up a mere 6,500% - not bad for an automaker stock!!  This is always a good chart to show to anyone that doubts the significance of Lean Manufacturing and the exceptional company that Toyota has been, and will continue to be in the future.  An even better chart is this next one, which shows the difference in these stocks over the past 10 years. 

If you would have invested in Toyota 10 years ago, you’d have made 95% on your money, almost doubling it, assuming you still held it today.  In fact, at one point you could have sold it at the high time in early 2007 and made ~165% on your money.  And then there’s Ford and GM.  If you would have put your money into either one of these companies 10 years ago, you’re looking at losses of up around 60% for GM and 65% for Ford.  When the times got tough, Toyota started to diverge from F and GM, and both of these graphs illustrate this point perfectly. 

 I’m a fairly active trader always willing to make investments in companies just making the transition to Lean.  Now, a lot of companies do not come right out and say it, but you can sometimes find this information through press releases or news coming out of publicly held companies, either by information you gain from your trading company or by using a resource like BigCharts.com (which is where this chart was generated!).  Not only are Lean Manufacturing companies worth working for and doing business with, they are also very much worth a little piece of your portfolio.  Cheers!