How good are your Performance Review Meetings?
July 27, 2009 by samirshah
Have you ever wondered……
-
We have all the relevant performance reviews is place but I don’t know how effective they are?
-
We review our downtime regularly but I am not sure that we are focussing in the correct areas?
-
I am sure we can achieve more in the current performance reviews but I don’t know what I should be doing to make them better?
-
I believe that some of the meetings we have are a waste of my time and I am not sure what I am supposed to contribute in them?
Regularly, we come across sites that have these questions and don’t know what to do about it. For this reason we have developed an audit criterion that focuses on meetings objectives and outcomes and identifies areas that are being performed well and highlights improvement opportunities.
The first thing we would advice a client to do is to list all the current performance review meetings they have on site with the relevant outcomes required, purpose for the meeting, attendees with their required contribution, meeting frequency and consequences for non-attendance. This highlights gaps where by the relevant attendees are not correct or it is not clear why the meeting is in place. In some cases we have found that the meetings were put in place historically due to an unknown reason and are not relevant anymore. By clearly defining the items mentioned above makes everyone aware of the reason for attending a certain meeting and what will be required from them. This ensures that an attendance to a meeting is not just a waste of time.
Once all your meetings are clearly defined and everyone who attends knows the reason why they are there, you should set up an audit structure that enables you to understand how well the meetings are achieving the desired outcomes. By forming a habit of having a meeting audit timetable, it will ensure that your meetings are continuously delivering a positive result and any revamp of a meeting can be carried out should the objectives outlined are not being achieved.
Some of the things we look out for in a meeting that has been clearly defined with a purpose and objectives to find out if it is achieving its desired outcomes is listed below:
-
Was the meeting fully attended?
-
If not, were there any consequences for non-attendance?
-
Were actions from previous meeting reviewed for effectiveness?
-
Were there any consequences for not completing actions within allocated time?
-
Did the meeting run to time?
-
Was the meeting focused on objectives at all times?
-
Was accountability assigned to each of the actions?
-
Were targets assigned to each of the actions?
-
Was the meeting outputs documented in the relevant logs?
-
Were the overall objectives of the meeting achieved?
-
If further information was required, was it followed through to the area of the issue?
-
Was there an action in place to resolve the root cause if different to actions assigned above?
-
Did any coaching take place after the meeting? E.g. what went well and could be improved
-
Intent of Review -Did the review contribute towards a positive effect on line performance?
We mark each of the relevant questions above in a meeting and give it a score with a quality and effectiveness rating for the meeting. This enables the meetings to be reviewed and feedback given to the facilitator of the meeting to make it better.
This is all part of the continuous improvement philosophy and helps you keep track of all the relevant reviews you have in place to improve performance. If the performance reviews are not effective, your improvement efforts will be limited to the quality of these reviews.
We have several of these performance tools that can help you identify areas of improvement and enables you to progressively move forward. If you would like to know more about these tools, please get in touch and find out how we can help you achieve your desired outcomes.
Performance Management
November 24, 2008 by samirshah
The manufacturing environment is quite complex with a large number of processes involved, combined with teams of individuals, possibly across multiple shifts and different functions. To ensure that the various processes are on track, there are a number of measures applied. These are possibly reviewed at various intervals to ensure that they are on track. If management of these measures is not frequent and ongoing then there will definitely be a steady decline in results.
To effectively manage a manufacturing facility a number of different approaches can be taken. The results achieved will be proportional to three factors, namely:
- Information - that identifies current losses
- Focus - the amount of time spent understanding and formulating decisions
- Actions - that target resolution of the underlying losses
Therefore I.F. you ACT you get RESULTS whereby (Information x Focus) x Actions = Results
Regular performance management reviews (up to 24 hours) need to take place to focus on reacting to what is happening and ensuring that the team and engineers are focusing on the current biggest issues. The strategic reviews, usually weekly, are about targeting continuous and incremental improvements, identifying trends and patterns and tackling root cause and cause of cause issues.
The management of performance is reliant on good quality data to identify the greatest losses and possible solutions. The measures that enable identification of the greatest losses are:
1. Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) and The Six Big Losses (Breakdowns, Planned downtime, Minor stops, Speed, Quality in process, Quality on start up)
2. Machine downtime - split down by major stops and minor stops, Mean time between failure (MTBF) and individual equipment faults
3. Waste (quality losses) by machine area
This data could be collected manually and put into Excel (or similar), however the ultimate, is to have electronically collected pinpoint accurate data that is available in real time, from each machine. This data can then be analysed and displayed on the shop floor, in team meeting rooms, in fact anywhere in the manufacturing facility. A tool that does this extremely well is the XL800 System.
Decisions and resource planning that lead to action that are based on good quality data will yield results, whereas if based on perception, there is not necessarily a link between action and performance improvement. When this approach is followed habitually, and built into the daily routine combined with utilising quality data and taking action on issues identified, resolving them in a timely way, performance maintenance and improvement is almost guaranteed.
