De-bottlenecking Product and People Processes to Boost Volume at a Coatings & Pigments Manufacturer
Client Context
A manufacturer in the coatings and pigments industry needed to increase production volume to offset high fixed costs and improve profitability.
The company had spent six months in firefighting mode, struggling to meet volume targets and customer demand, despite strong and increasing demand. However, operations were hindered by:
- Low inventory levels.
- Long product cycle times, with most of the time spent as Work-in-Progress (WIP).
- Lack of a mature Sales & Operations Planning (S&OP) process, causing disconnects between planning and customer needs.
- Underutilized equipment, yet constrained by frequent changeovers.
- Labor shortages and high turnover, with ineffective compensation and training programs.
Key Challenges
- Significant order backlog due to poor planning and production inefficiencies.
- Extended WIP times impacting cycle times and throughput.
- Equipment underutilization while struggling to meet demand.
- Labor shortages and strong market competition for skilled workers.
Approach & Key Success Factors
EFESO conducted a detailed evaluation of production and S&OP processes and implemented a structured de-bottlenecking strategy.
1. Process De-Bottlenecking & Capacity Optimization
- Established a Command Center for short-interval control of production, downtime, and hiring targets.
- Implemented a Production Loss Accounting register to identify and prevent short stops, misses, and inefficiencies.
- Analyzed batch data to define the “Golden Batch”, optimizing cycle times and freeing up equipment capacity.
2. Reduction of Non-Value-Added Work
- Conducted cycle time studies, mapping the flow of people and products within the facility.
- Identified WIP hold-ups and reallocated labor to ensure full workforce utilization.
3. S&OP Process Implementation
- Worked with the site planner to define and implement a structured S&OP process.
- Improved alignment between production schedules and customer demand to systematically reduce backlog.
Results
8% annual capacity improvement
In one process area.
6% annual capacity improvement
In another process area.
Improved equipment uptime
And reduced dependency on additional labor.