A work‐based research assessment of the impact of ‘lean manufacturing’ on health and safety education within an SME

Abstract

Globalisation has had a major impact on the engineering industry as Pacific Rim countries undercut manufacturing costs and provide a more cost‐effective location for many businesses. Engineering in Northern Ireland has mostly declined owing to increased competition from these countries. Engineering companies are now forced to streamline their production processes and employ cost‐reducing practices in order to meet customer demands at reduced prices. This article aims to analyse the effects of one such streamlining endeavour which was first introduced after World War II in Japan – ‘lean manufacturing’. ‘Lean manufacturing’ aims to reduce all wasteful activities within the production process in order to improve productivity, while reducing manufacturing costs. The work‐based project under consideration was concerned with the impact ‘lean manufacturing’ may have on health and safety performance and education within an engineering company. The focus of the project was to determine through work‐based research, and quantitative analysis, the employee perception on health and safety: has it changed (either positively or negatively), as a consequence of implementing ‘lean manufacturing’.

Keywords:

• work‐based learning
• globalisation
• lean manufacturing
• assessment
• health and safety
• workplace

Notes

1. SME is a popular shorthand for small and medium‐size companies (up to 250 employees).

2. The process can be generalised as follows: a metal bar is inserted into a computer controlled numerical machine. The employee programmes the machine computer with the component dimensions, and the machine cuts the component to customer specifications. The component is then degreased, which is a cleaning process to remove oil and is then polished using polishing machines to remove rough edges. Chemical cleaning is then used to remove foreign bodies. A coat of lacquer is applied to the component to provide a corrosion resistant veneer. The final production step is the ultimate assembly of the component, quality inspection and packing.

3. Seven wasteful activities identified as not essential:

• Over‐production: this relates to producing in excess of customer orders, and is a waste of materials and resources as the products are not required by the customer.

• Inventory: this refers to excessive materials stored within the company and is considered a waste of resources and capital.

• Transportation: any unnecessary movement of materials from the production zone to other areas results in a longer production time and does not add value to the product.

• Waiting: during manufacturing there are a number of processes to complete the final product. If there is a delay in one of these steps there is an increased production time without adding value.

• Movement: when operators move out of their production zone to another area it is considered an unnecessary movement and does not add value to the final product.

• Defects: if the final product does not conform to customer specifications the customer may return the product, which may require rework or replacement. This is a waste of resources.

• Over‐processing: this refers to processing a material more than is necessary to meet customer specifications (which does not add value to the final product).

4. Burton (2003) explains the meaning of the 6 S’s as follows:

• Sort – the operator must separate the required equipment from those which are not necessary and keep only what is required for their specific work activity.

• Set in order – the operator must arrange and identify parts, processes, and tools so they are located in one area for ease of use.

• Shine – the operator must clean their workstation incorporating the principle: ‘a place for everything and everything in its place’.

• Standardise – the new properly arranged workplace must be the norm.

• Sustain – the operator must maintain the other 5 S principles, achieved through training to change attitudes.

5. The number of cuts was six in financial year 2005–06, six in financial year 2006–07, three in financial year 2007–08 and six in financial year 2008–09.

6. The authors would support that this is because of the fact that there has been a stringent safety eyewear policy introduced in 2008, where all employees have to wear safety eyewear in certain processing areas within the company. Failure to do so is a disciplinary offence, therefore eye injuries have been reduced.

7. RIDDORs (Reportable Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences), which are part of the health and safety regulations in Northern Ireland. Under this legislation it is necessary to report incidents to the Health and Safety Executive (e.g., a work‐related injury where an employee is off work for more than three days, or when an employee suffers from a work related disease such as ‘occupational dermatitis’).

8. All interviewees discussed the fact that all employees in ‘Zone 1’ adhered to the company Safety Eyewear Policy. However, this may be because of the threat of disciplinary action resulting from non‐compliance rather than the introduction of ‘lean manufacturing’.