Step 1: Align site leadershipÂ
Finance led the effort to unify leaders from various departments across all 60 plants, focusing on a common goal of maximizing value. They defined clear objectives that covered all aspects of production and support functions, promoting a strong culture of continuous improvement.Â
Key insight: Early involvement and clear communication helped create buy-in across the company, ensuring that each plant was committed to the initiative.Â
Step 2: Loss analysis introduction trainingÂ
Standardized training was provided to all plant leaders and area owners, focusing on identifying inefficiencies and using data collection tools. This allowed each plant to accurately collect and input data, creating consistency across the organization.Â
Key insight: Unified training ensured that data was collected consistently, enabling reliable comparisons and benchmarking across all plants.Â
Step 3: Collect and input loss data and generate reportÂ
Each plant systematically gathered data on inefficiencies, with area owners inputting this data into a shared platform. The resulting reports highlighted key loss areas, including downtime and material waste.Â
Key insight: This organized data collection process allowed the company to spot common inefficiencies across plants, making it easier to prioritize improvements.Â
Step 4: Loss state alignment and reportingÂ
Using the data, the company created “ideal state” scenarios for each plant, setting target efficiency levels. They assessed potential improvements, like reducing downtime by half, and prioritized actions based on feasibility and potential impact.Â
Key insight: Tailored scenarios provided a clear roadmap for each plant while aligning with the company’s broader goals.Â
Step 5: Define roadmap and business caseÂ
The team developed specific roadmaps for each plant, combining operational improvements and new technology. Business cases with financial estimates backed each intervention, setting timelines and assigning responsibility.Â
Key insight: A structured roadmap and financial backing made each plant’s goals ambitious yet achievableÂ
Step 6: Roadmap implementation governanceÂ
A governance structure was established to monitor the roadmap’s progress, with regular reviews to make real-time adjustments. Financial metrics tracked each action’s value, ensuring a focus on high-impact initiatives.Â
Key insight: Strong governance kept the initiative on track, addressing challenges swiftly and focusing on value-driven activities.Â
Step 7: Global enterprise benchmarkingÂ
Performance was benchmarked across all plants, highlighting top achievers and sharing best practices. This comparison revealed new opportunities to scale successful methods across other sites.Â
Key insight: Benchmarking fostered continuous improvement, with each plant aiming to match or exceed the best performers.Â
Step 8: Enterprise roadmap and strategyÂ
The initiative concluded with an enterprise-wide roadmap, balancing short-term wins and long-term returns, including ROI horizons. Financial and environmental impacts were carefully considered, with projects focused on reducing waste and energy use alongside boosting profitability.Â
Key insight: The roadmap combined financial and sustainability goals, supporting responsible growth while delivering value
Challenges in the implementation of the new value creation process transformationÂ
- Conflicting agendas: Different departmental priorities sometimes clashed, making investment prioritization essential.Â
- Challenges in alignment: Aligning department goals required constant coordination and clear communication.Â
- Finance as the “language of value”: Finance helped unite teams by framing actions in terms of financial impact.Â
- Tensions from technology choices: Choosing one tech solution over another led to tensions, needing transparent leadership decisions.Â
- Importance of change management: Clear roles and expectations were key to minimizing resistance and enabling new processes.Â