The next step involved each firm completing its first prototype to sen terjemahan - The next step involved each firm completing its first prototype to sen Bahasa Indonesia Bagaimana mengatakan

The next step involved each firm co

The next step involved each firm completing its first prototype to send to Aisin for approval before volume production. It was a tiny second-tier supplier, Koritsu Sangyo, that first delivered its prototype on Monday, February 3, only two days after the fire.19 Denso, the largest and most famous supplier in Toyota’s group, was the second to deliver a prototype on the early morning of February 5, followed by Toyota and Taiho Kogyo later that day. Kayaba’s first prototype was ready on February 6, delivered from the sixteen-employee supplier, followed by those from the 110-employee and the six-employee suppliers on February 7 and February 8, respectively.

The operational speed of the firms reflected their familiarity with Aisin or with brake-related parts and their technical capabilities with machining centers and prototype making. In all cases, however, work was complicated by such difficulties as the lack of details in Aisin’s design drawings, appropriate equipment, and direct assistance from Aisin. As a result, in making many of the production decisions, firms had to experiment and exercise judgment, which explains the variety of methods used to manufacture P-valves; Taiho used two drills; Toyota used only one for a similar task. At Kayaba, two of the three suppliers, including the six-employee firm, ended up making their own drills.

Once the prototypes were approved, each firm moved to volume production. Koritsu Sangyo began volume production on February 4. Denso started volume production on the evening of February 5, with production volumes of 1,600 units a day (raised to 2,200 on February 11 under pressure from Toyota). Taiho started volume production the next day, beginning with low batches of about fifty units and gradually moving toward volumes of 2,000 units a day. Kayaba started on February 7 with a daily production volume of 520 units. Toyota began volume production on February 6.

Solving Technical Problems

The next step involved solving the technical problems that emerged during volume production. Since Aisin was unfamiliar with P-valve production by machining centers, it was unable to provide solutions on its own. A testimony to the firm’s impressive technical capabilities, Denso assumed an important role, with its engineers quickly solving one problem after another. Denso’s solutions were then disseminated to other participating firms during special problem-solving meetings organized by Aisin. Denso also modified Aisin’s design drawings and process instructions to make them more appropriate for machining centers, which Aisin passed on to other firms.

These problem-solving capabilities are the hallmark of firms ingrained with the principles of the Toyota Production System (TPS), or lean production. The capacity to disseminate solutions quickly is also characteristic of Toyota-group firms; they regularly do benchmarking studies and set up problem-solving study groups in Toyota’s supplier association, the Kyohokai, or as part of jishuken (voluntary study group) activities, usually in the presence, and sometimes under the supervision, of consultants sent free of charge by Toyota. These efforts, along with the meetings of company presidents, the training programs and internships held for lower-tiered suppliers’ employees, and the constant flow of employees among firms, permit rapid horizontal and vertical diffusion of best practices.

Despite these efforts to disseminate the newly found best practices and to standardize P-valve production, the diversity in practices persisted as some firms preferred to stick to their own methods. For example, Taiho declined five out of six design modifications proposed by Aisin because they created discrepancy problems with Taiho’s existing equipment.

Once the major technical problems were solved, the firms devoted their efforts to raising productivity and increasing volume through kaizen activities. Again, years of training in TPS principles ensured that the appropriate capabilities and routines were already in place. At Toyota, for example, cycle time was reduced from more than two minutes to one minute, twenty seconds, within a few weeks, by minimizing changeover times through the presetting of the machining centers (P-valve production was still relatively slow because of limits to increasing productivity in the absence of Aisin’s special-purpose transfer machines). The results of these efforts were then recorded on video to be stocked as “organizational memory” should the need to manufacture P-valves emerge again.

The ability of Toyota and the other firms to move quickly toward shortening set-up times and to resume full JIT production demonstrates how deeply ingrained the TPS is in these firms. For example, at Taiho, which used kanban to make P-valves and delivered them to Aisin in eight batches per day, managers stressed that this was the only way they knew how to do it.

Flexible employee deployment and procedures, which are also associated with Toyota and many other Japanese firms, were evident throughout the effort as well. At Aisin, with union cooperation, the majority of employees were mobilized for the recovery effort, which involved, for example, white-collar staff from public relations and accounting departments helping with plant operations. At Toyota, the situation often dictated that managers and workers make decisions and take action immediately without necessarily following normal procedures or obtaining permission from superiors or bookkeepers. Employees, after all, were thrown into exceptional circumstances that required overcoming the usual departmental divisions and relaxing many bureaucratic procedures (for example, regarding orders for machinery and materials without proper invoices or changing shifts of workers without prescribed prior notice).

The flow of employees also occurred among firms. For example, at least 300 Toyota employees from production control, maintenance, production engineering, purchasing, quality control, and materials handling could be seen at Aisin at any time during the first three weeks, helping Aisin set up more permanent P-valve assembly lines, among other tasks; other automakers sent about forty people to Aisin. Toyota employees (in particular from the maintenance department) were also sent to Denso to assist in the P-valve production process, staying until they observed that everything was in order; they also visited the machine-tool makers to help them repair Aisin’s damaged transfer machines, an effort that was completed by mid-March. Within the Aisin group, various flows of personnel also took place, for example, from Aisin suppliers to Aisin (about 250 people). In total, more than 500 employees from Aisin’s customers and suppliers as well as Toyota-group firms were on site at Aisin during the peak days of the crisis.

As these examples demonstrate, the P-valve recovery effort involved more than just individual initiatives to set up temporary production sites and increase productivity. The flow of employees within and among firms, the meetings organized to discuss and disseminate solutions to technical problems, and the group-level coordination efforts exerted by Aisin’s “emergency response unit” and Toyota’s production control department all contributed to a successful outcome that was more than just the sum of individual efforts. These capabilities for groupwide coordination and organizational learning were revealed once again several months after the incident, when Aisin Seiki published a booklet on how to organize the rapid recovery of production following a disaster such as a factory fire.20 Based on lessons learned during the crisis, the booklet was distributed to 500 firms, including all those that had joined the recovery effort and all remaining Kyohokai members. The gesture was a way of thanking the firms for their support and ensuring that mistakes would not be repeated. The lessons from the Aisin incident were thus recorded as organizational memory for all cooperating firms to use should the need ever arise.21
0/5000
Dari: -
Ke: -
Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1: [Salinan]
Disalin!
The next step involved each firm completing its first prototype to send to Aisin for approval before volume production. It was a tiny second-tier supplier, Koritsu Sangyo, that first delivered its prototype on Monday, February 3, only two days after the fire.19 Denso, the largest and most famous supplier in Toyota’s group, was the second to deliver a prototype on the early morning of February 5, followed by Toyota and Taiho Kogyo later that day. Kayaba’s first prototype was ready on February 6, delivered from the sixteen-employee supplier, followed by those from the 110-employee and the six-employee suppliers on February 7 and February 8, respectively.The operational speed of the firms reflected their familiarity with Aisin or with brake-related parts and their technical capabilities with machining centers and prototype making. In all cases, however, work was complicated by such difficulties as the lack of details in Aisin’s design drawings, appropriate equipment, and direct assistance from Aisin. As a result, in making many of the production decisions, firms had to experiment and exercise judgment, which explains the variety of methods used to manufacture P-valves; Taiho used two drills; Toyota used only one for a similar task. At Kayaba, two of the three suppliers, including the six-employee firm, ended up making their own drills.Once the prototypes were approved, each firm moved to volume production. Koritsu Sangyo began volume production on February 4. Denso started volume production on the evening of February 5, with production volumes of 1,600 units a day (raised to 2,200 on February 11 under pressure from Toyota). Taiho started volume production the next day, beginning with low batches of about fifty units and gradually moving toward volumes of 2,000 units a day. Kayaba started on February 7 with a daily production volume of 520 units. Toyota began volume production on February 6.
Solving Technical Problems

The next step involved solving the technical problems that emerged during volume production. Since Aisin was unfamiliar with P-valve production by machining centers, it was unable to provide solutions on its own. A testimony to the firm’s impressive technical capabilities, Denso assumed an important role, with its engineers quickly solving one problem after another. Denso’s solutions were then disseminated to other participating firms during special problem-solving meetings organized by Aisin. Denso also modified Aisin’s design drawings and process instructions to make them more appropriate for machining centers, which Aisin passed on to other firms.

These problem-solving capabilities are the hallmark of firms ingrained with the principles of the Toyota Production System (TPS), or lean production. The capacity to disseminate solutions quickly is also characteristic of Toyota-group firms; they regularly do benchmarking studies and set up problem-solving study groups in Toyota’s supplier association, the Kyohokai, or as part of jishuken (voluntary study group) activities, usually in the presence, and sometimes under the supervision, of consultants sent free of charge by Toyota. These efforts, along with the meetings of company presidents, the training programs and internships held for lower-tiered suppliers’ employees, and the constant flow of employees among firms, permit rapid horizontal and vertical diffusion of best practices.

Despite these efforts to disseminate the newly found best practices and to standardize P-valve production, the diversity in practices persisted as some firms preferred to stick to their own methods. For example, Taiho declined five out of six design modifications proposed by Aisin because they created discrepancy problems with Taiho’s existing equipment.

Once the major technical problems were solved, the firms devoted their efforts to raising productivity and increasing volume through kaizen activities. Again, years of training in TPS principles ensured that the appropriate capabilities and routines were already in place. At Toyota, for example, cycle time was reduced from more than two minutes to one minute, twenty seconds, within a few weeks, by minimizing changeover times through the presetting of the machining centers (P-valve production was still relatively slow because of limits to increasing productivity in the absence of Aisin’s special-purpose transfer machines). The results of these efforts were then recorded on video to be stocked as “organizational memory” should the need to manufacture P-valves emerge again.

The ability of Toyota and the other firms to move quickly toward shortening set-up times and to resume full JIT production demonstrates how deeply ingrained the TPS is in these firms. For example, at Taiho, which used kanban to make P-valves and delivered them to Aisin in eight batches per day, managers stressed that this was the only way they knew how to do it.

Flexible employee deployment and procedures, which are also associated with Toyota and many other Japanese firms, were evident throughout the effort as well. At Aisin, with union cooperation, the majority of employees were mobilized for the recovery effort, which involved, for example, white-collar staff from public relations and accounting departments helping with plant operations. At Toyota, the situation often dictated that managers and workers make decisions and take action immediately without necessarily following normal procedures or obtaining permission from superiors or bookkeepers. Employees, after all, were thrown into exceptional circumstances that required overcoming the usual departmental divisions and relaxing many bureaucratic procedures (for example, regarding orders for machinery and materials without proper invoices or changing shifts of workers without prescribed prior notice).

The flow of employees also occurred among firms. For example, at least 300 Toyota employees from production control, maintenance, production engineering, purchasing, quality control, and materials handling could be seen at Aisin at any time during the first three weeks, helping Aisin set up more permanent P-valve assembly lines, among other tasks; other automakers sent about forty people to Aisin. Toyota employees (in particular from the maintenance department) were also sent to Denso to assist in the P-valve production process, staying until they observed that everything was in order; they also visited the machine-tool makers to help them repair Aisin’s damaged transfer machines, an effort that was completed by mid-March. Within the Aisin group, various flows of personnel also took place, for example, from Aisin suppliers to Aisin (about 250 people). In total, more than 500 employees from Aisin’s customers and suppliers as well as Toyota-group firms were on site at Aisin during the peak days of the crisis.

As these examples demonstrate, the P-valve recovery effort involved more than just individual initiatives to set up temporary production sites and increase productivity. The flow of employees within and among firms, the meetings organized to discuss and disseminate solutions to technical problems, and the group-level coordination efforts exerted by Aisin’s “emergency response unit” and Toyota’s production control department all contributed to a successful outcome that was more than just the sum of individual efforts. These capabilities for groupwide coordination and organizational learning were revealed once again several months after the incident, when Aisin Seiki published a booklet on how to organize the rapid recovery of production following a disaster such as a factory fire.20 Based on lessons learned during the crisis, the booklet was distributed to 500 firms, including all those that had joined the recovery effort and all remaining Kyohokai members. The gesture was a way of thanking the firms for their support and ensuring that mistakes would not be repeated. The lessons from the Aisin incident were thus recorded as organizational memory for all cooperating firms to use should the need ever arise.21
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 2:[Salinan]
Disalin!
Langkah selanjutnya yang terlibat masing-masing perusahaan menyelesaikan prototipe pertama untuk mengirim ke Aisin untuk persetujuan sebelum volume produksi. Itu adalah kecil pemasok lapis kedua, Koritsu Sangyo, yang pertama disampaikan prototipe pada Senin, 3 Februari hanya dua hari setelah fire.19 Denso, pemasok terbesar dan paling terkenal dalam kelompok Toyota, adalah yang kedua untuk memberikan prototipe pada pagi hari tanggal 5 Februari, diikuti oleh Toyota dan Taihō Kogyo hari itu. Prototipe pertama Kayaba siap pada 6 Februari, dikirim dari pemasok enam belas karyawan, diikuti oleh orang-orang dari 110 karyawan dan pemasok enam karyawan pada tanggal 7 Februari dan 8 Februari masing-masing. Kecepatan operasional perusahaan tercermin keakraban mereka dengan Aisin atau dengan bagian-rem terkait dan kemampuan teknis mereka dengan pusat mesin dan pembuatan prototipe. Dalam semua kasus, bagaimanapun, pekerjaan yang rumit oleh kesulitan seperti kurangnya rincian di gambar desain Aisin ini, peralatan yang tepat, dan bantuan langsung dari Aisin. Akibatnya, dalam membuat banyak keputusan produksi, perusahaan harus bereksperimen dan melakukan penilaian, yang menjelaskan berbagai metode yang digunakan untuk memproduksi P-katup; Taiho digunakan dua latihan; Toyota hanya digunakan satu untuk tugas yang sama. Pada Kayaba, dua dari tiga pemasok, termasuk perusahaan enam karyawan, akhirnya membuat latihan mereka sendiri. Setelah prototipe disetujui, setiap perusahaan pindah ke volume produksi. Koritsu Sangyo mulai volume produksi pada Februari 4. Denso mulai volume produksi pada malam tanggal 5 Februari dengan volume produksi 1.600 unit per hari (diangkat ke 2.200 pada 11 Februari di bawah tekanan dari Toyota). Taiho mulai volume produksi pada hari berikutnya, dimulai dengan batch rendah sekitar lima puluh unit dan secara bertahap bergerak menuju volume 2.000 unit per hari. Kayaba mulai pada tanggal 7 Februari dengan volume produksi harian 520 unit. Toyota mulai volume produksi pada 6 Februari Mengatasi Masalah Teknis Langkah selanjutnya yang terlibat memecahkan masalah teknis yang muncul selama volume produksi. Sejak Aisin terbiasa dengan produksi P-katup oleh pusat mesin, itu tidak dapat memberikan solusi sendiri. Sebuah kesaksian kemampuan teknis perusahaan mengesankan, Denso diasumsikan peran penting, dengan insinyur dengan cepat memecahkan masalah satu demi satu. Solusi Denso kemudian disebarluaskan kepada perusahaan-perusahaan lain yang berpartisipasi dalam pertemuan pemecahan masalah khusus yang diselenggarakan oleh Aisin. Denso juga dimodifikasi gambar desain Aisin dan petunjuk proses untuk membuat mereka lebih cocok untuk pusat mesin, yang Aisin diteruskan ke perusahaan lain. Kemampuan pemecahan masalah ini adalah ciri khas dari perusahaan tertanam dengan prinsip-prinsip Toyota Production System (TPS), atau produksi ramping. Kapasitas untuk menyebarkan solusi cepat juga karakteristik perusahaan Toyota-kelompok; mereka secara teratur melakukan benchmarking studi dan mengatur kelompok belajar memecahkan masalah dalam asosiasi pemasok Toyota, yang Kyohokai, atau sebagai bagian dari jishuken (kelompok studi sukarela) kegiatan, biasanya di hadapan, dan kadang-kadang di bawah pengawasan, konsultan mengirim gratis oleh Toyota. Upaya ini, bersama dengan pertemuan presiden perusahaan, program pelatihan dan magang yang diselenggarakan bagi karyawan pemasok lebih rendah-tier ', dan aliran konstan karyawan antara perusahaan, memungkinkan cepat difusi horizontal dan vertikal dari praktik terbaik. Meskipun upaya ini untuk menyebarluaskan baru ditemukan praktik terbaik dan untuk membakukan produksi P-katup, keragaman dalam praktek bertahan sebagai beberapa perusahaan lebih suka menempel metode mereka sendiri. Misalnya, Taiho menolak lima dari enam modifikasi desain yang diusulkan oleh Aisin karena mereka menciptakan masalah perbedaan dengan peralatan Taiho yang ada. Setelah masalah teknis utama diselesaikan, perusahaan mengabdikan upaya mereka untuk meningkatkan produktivitas dan meningkatkan volume melalui kegiatan kaizen. Sekali lagi, tahun pelatihan di prinsip TPS memastikan bahwa kemampuan dan rutinitas yang tepat sudah berada di tempat. Di Toyota, misalnya, waktu siklus berkurang dari lebih dari dua menit untuk satu menit, dua puluh detik, dalam beberapa minggu, dengan meminimalkan kali changeover melalui presetting dari pusat mesin (produksi P-katup masih relatif lambat karena batas untuk meningkatkan produktivitas dengan tidak adanya mesin transfer tujuan khusus Aisin). Hasil dari upaya ini kemudian direkam pada video yang akan ditebar sebagai "memori organisasi" harus kebutuhan untuk memproduksi P-katup emerge lagi. Kemampuan Toyota dan perusahaan lain untuk bergerak cepat menuju memperpendek waktu set-up dan untuk melanjutkan penuh produksi JIT menunjukkan bagaimana tertanam TPS di perusahaan-perusahaan ini. Misalnya, di Taiho, yang digunakan kanban untuk membuat P-katup dan mengirimkannya ke Aisin dalam delapan batch per hari, manajer menekankan bahwa ini adalah satu-satunya cara mereka tahu bagaimana melakukannya. Penyebaran karyawan Fleksibel dan prosedur, yang juga terkait dengan Toyota dan banyak perusahaan Jepang lainnya, yang jelas di seluruh usaha juga. Pada Aisin, dengan kerjasama serikat, mayoritas karyawan dikerahkan untuk upaya pemulihan, yang melibatkan, untuk staf misalnya, kerah putih dari hubungan masyarakat dan departemen akuntansi membantu dengan operasi pabrik. Di Toyota, situasi sering menentukan bahwa manajer dan pekerja membuat keputusan dan mengambil tindakan segera tanpa harus mengikuti prosedur normal atau mendapat izin dari atasan atau pemegang buku. Karyawan, setelah semua, dilemparkan ke keadaan luar biasa yang diperlukan mengatasi divisi departemen biasa dan santai banyak prosedur birokrasi (misalnya, mengenai pesanan untuk mesin dan bahan tanpa faktur yang tepat atau mengubah shift pekerja tanpa pemberitahuan sebelumnya diresepkan). Aliran karyawan juga terjadi di antara perusahaan. Misalnya, setidaknya 300 karyawan Toyota dari pengendalian produksi, pemeliharaan, teknik produksi, pembelian, kontrol kualitas, dan penanganan bahan bisa dilihat di Aisin setiap saat selama tiga minggu pertama, membantu Aisin mengatur lini perakitan P-katup yang lebih permanen antara tugas-tugas lainnya; mobil lain mengirim sekitar empat puluh orang untuk Aisin. Karyawan Toyota (khususnya dari departemen pemeliharaan) juga dikirim ke Denso untuk membantu dalam proses produksi P-katup, tinggal sampai mereka mengamati bahwa segala sesuatu dalam rangka; mereka juga mengunjungi pembuat mesin-alat untuk membantu mereka memperbaiki mesin transfer rusak Aisin ini, upaya yang selesai pada pertengahan Maret. Dalam kelompok Aisin, berbagai arus personil juga terjadi, misalnya, dari pemasok Aisin ke Aisin (sekitar 250 orang). Secara total, lebih dari 500 karyawan dari pelanggan dan pemasok Aisin serta perusahaan Toyota-kelompok berada di lokasi di Aisin selama hari-hari puncak krisis. Sebagai contoh-contoh ini menunjukkan, upaya pemulihan P-katup yang terlibat lebih dari inisiatif hanya individu untuk mengatur lokasi produksi sementara dan meningkatkan produktivitas. Aliran karyawan dalam dan di antara perusahaan-perusahaan, pertemuan yang diselenggarakan untuk membahas dan menyebarkan solusi untuk masalah teknis, dan upaya koordinasi tingkat grup yang diberikan oleh "unit tanggap darurat" Aisin dan departemen pengendalian produksi Toyota semua berkontribusi untuk hasil yang sukses yang lebih dari sekadar jumlah dari upaya individu. Kemampuan ini untuk koordinasi groupwide dan pembelajaran organisasi yang terungkap sekali lagi beberapa bulan setelah kejadian itu, ketika Aisin Seiki menerbitkan buku tentang bagaimana mengatur pemulihan yang cepat dari produksi berikut bencana seperti fire.20 pabrik Berdasarkan pelajaran selama krisis , buku itu didistribusikan ke 500 perusahaan, termasuk semua orang yang telah bergabung dengan upaya pemulihan dan semua anggota Kyohokai tersisa. Gerakan itu adalah cara berterima kasih kepada perusahaan atas dukungan mereka dan memastikan bahwa kesalahan tidak akan terulang. Pelajaran dari insiden Aisin dengan demikian dicatat sebagai memori organisasi untuk semua perusahaan bekerja sama untuk menggunakan harus perlu pernah arise.21





















Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
 
Bahasa lainnya
Dukungan alat penerjemahan: Afrikans, Albania, Amhara, Arab, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahasa Indonesia, Basque, Belanda, Belarussia, Bengali, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Burma, Cebuano, Ceko, Chichewa, China, Cina Tradisional, Denmark, Deteksi bahasa, Esperanto, Estonia, Farsi, Finlandia, Frisia, Gaelig, Gaelik Skotlandia, Galisia, Georgia, Gujarati, Hausa, Hawaii, Hindi, Hmong, Ibrani, Igbo, Inggris, Islan, Italia, Jawa, Jepang, Jerman, Kannada, Katala, Kazak, Khmer, Kinyarwanda, Kirghiz, Klingon, Korea, Korsika, Kreol Haiti, Kroat, Kurdi, Laos, Latin, Latvia, Lituania, Luksemburg, Magyar, Makedonia, Malagasi, Malayalam, Malta, Maori, Marathi, Melayu, Mongol, Nepal, Norsk, Odia (Oriya), Pashto, Polandia, Portugis, Prancis, Punjabi, Rumania, Rusia, Samoa, Serb, Sesotho, Shona, Sindhi, Sinhala, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somali, Spanyol, Sunda, Swahili, Swensk, Tagalog, Tajik, Tamil, Tatar, Telugu, Thai, Turki, Turkmen, Ukraina, Urdu, Uyghur, Uzbek, Vietnam, Wales, Xhosa, Yiddi, Yoruba, Yunani, Zulu, Bahasa terjemahan.

Copyright ©2024 I Love Translation. All reserved.

E-mail: