Making it Real: Implementing Your MES Roadmap

This is a continuation of the discussions related to “MESA to Change Direction?”   Before you implement your Roadmap for Change, it makes sense to find out what you have in your backyard that might support it today, and what you need to add or modify to support your plan.  It also makes some sense to make sure you have a team that can get you there.

Automation Data Capabilities and Requirements

One of the advantages of the MES Organic approach is that it is totally agnostic in relation to technologies.  MES capabilities may be fulfilled by one or many applications or systems.  In fact, some MES capabilities could be fulfilled by applications or systems that already exist.  Using the process flows and interface definitions from the workshops define what data is needed and what manufacturing activities need it.  By performing a Systems and Automation Data survey you can determine:

 

• Does the required data exist for use
• Does the system collecting the data provide access to the data
• Can the system be modified to provide the needed data
• Can the system be modified to provide the needed capability

 

MES capabilities rely on the particular data that is available from the automation and controls level.  For instance, getting the production count may be easy, but you’ll need a counter of some kind to perform the task, and the data from that counter has to be available to calculate yield or determine that the item count for an order has actually been reached.   By performing the above survey you will know if the current system can support your future state, if modifications are required, and if legacy systems can fulfill some of the future state requirements.

Implementing the Roadmap

Selecting and implementing a MES (or MES technologies) can be a daunting task.  Hopefully, by narrowing the number of capabilities you’ve selected, you’ve also reduced the complexity and effort required for implementation.  Having clear process flows and requirements for your future state also simplifies technology selection.  Framing these requirements in terms of ISA-95 defined capabilities and activities also provides a bridge to technology providers who have developed solutions compliant with the ISA-95 standard (and market their product that way as well).  While this doesn’t guarantee that their product will provide a complete solution, it does help you determine how well their product fits your requirements in terms that you are familiar with.

Integrate the Old with the New

• Extend Legacy Systems where appropriate
• Develop Automation capability where necessary
• Implement limited MES functionality with compartmentalized capabilities

 

Implementation isn’t all about technology selection though.  The project team will have significantly more impact on the success of your implementation than almost any other factor.

Getting MES Processes Right is a TEAM Effort

• MES isn’t an IT initiative, it’s a Team initiative
• Selected capabilities may dictate different SME’s, Operators, IT skills
• MES SUPPORTS Lean and Six Sigma Initiatives

 

Often MES initiatives begin as an IT initiative.  The glass wall between IT and Engineering is well known.   The solution is to empower all of the stakeholders.  Collaboration workshops accomplish some of this.  Another way to ensure buy-in is to find and assign a Project Champion from engineering, operations, or production.  Remember that it’s the process that’s important, not whose system is in charge.  Also remember that it may take subject matter experts from different areas and backgrounds to implement a holistic solution.

There may also be some resistance from Operations or Production if they own a Lean or Six Sigma initiative.  It’s often a mistaken assumption that a MES initiative is counter to Lean goals.  This is simply not true.  In fact, it is the opposite.  The information from MES initiatives can provide a firm foundation for the data needed for the Kaizen process.  MES technologies can also provide the framework for needed solutions.

Next Time:  How Do You Measure How Effective This Has Been?

How Do You See MESA?

I’ve received a few comments on the MESA series that seem to indicate that for manufactures who are just considering making use of MES capabilities, it is difficult to determine the value of MES, to understand it in terms of business activities, and to understand the material offered.  Some manufacturers feel like MESA is too focused on vendors and system integrators and not accessible enough.

I agree that MESA needs to be a lot more accessible. The intent of my posts is a kind of shot over the bow (more like a spit wad over an aircraft carrier) to anyone at MESA who might be interested, and readers who just don’t get what MESA might have to offer. I also agree that it tends to be a vendor centric view. For example, go to their website sometime. Finding anything of value is a real challenge. First just locating the information is a challenge, then making sense of the content is a challenge. If you already know MES and understand the different models it’s not too bad. If you’re a manufacturer unfamiliar with MES and trying to find out if where the value is, heaven help you. As far as conversation or dialogue is concerned, forget it. The impression is one of a one way street of education, they are the experts telling you how it is. I understand that they are trying to set up a value for membership model to pay for their content, but even so, I’m a basic member and it’s difficult to get to the content I need, and impossible to have any kind of idea exchange.

The original presentation by Matthew Littlefield was extremely revealing, showing that manufacturers in the general population actually fared well against MESA member manufacturers and better in certain critical areas, one of them being the involvement of C-level management in MES projects, the other being the inclusion of business process methods for implementing MES. I think this has been a blind spot for MESA from the beginning.

What are your thoughts?  Is this BS?  Do you think MESA is easy to work with?  Do you understand their MES value proposition?  Have you been able to incorporate other processes, like change management, into your overall MES implementation strategy using the MESA model?

Let’s stir the pot and see what comes up!

MESA Part 4 – Laying the Foundation for Change

This posting continues our discussion of how to apply Business Process Management methods to implementing MES. 

In previous discussions we talked about the materials we needed to prepare for a series of Consensus Workshops.  What are Consensus Workshops?  That requires a little background. 

What is a Consensus Workshop?

For the selected functional areas (see below) subject matter experts from each of the affected departments or functional areas are assembled to; review the current As-Is state and shortfalls, generate a To-Be state process flow, determine how the process flow addresses the shortfalls and the company objectives and strategy, develop a list of the gaps between the To-Be state and those shortfalls left unaddressed, and address the change management issues related to the future state processes.

What are the topics for the Workshops?

The full list of topics available for holding Workshops follows the ISA-95 Model:

1. Production Control
2. Quality Assurance
3. Maintenance Management
4. Material and Energy Control
5. Product Inventory Control
6. Production Scheduling
7. Procurement
8. R&D
9. Order Processing
10. Cost Accounting
11. Product Shipping

Some notes on this list:  You can usually combine Material and Energy Control with Production Inventory Control under a single topic Inventory Management (as it is in the MOM).  This allows you to address raw materials, WIP, and finished goods discussions in a single workshop.  If Energy Control is a significant topic, create a separate workshop for it.  Don’t discount the Cost Accounting and Order Processing discussions, they may be short but they can be significant.  For example, determining how product unit costs are evaluated can affect critical KPI’s and incentives.

How do we select the topics?

As you prepare the As-Is state process flows and gather shortfalls for the way you currently do business, a picture emerges of areas that need attention or present opportunities.  You could hold a workshop for each area of the ISA-95 model, one for all the activities in Production Control, one for all the activities in Quality Management, one for all the activities in Procurement, etc.  Do you need to hold a workshop for every area?  That depends on how comprehensively you intend to apply an MES system.  Another way to look at it is to identify those areas with the most problems and the most opportunity for payback.  It’s a trade-off, expediency and short-term payback versus comprehensiveness and longer term payback.

A few of the advantages of selecting a limited number of areas are;

• It is usually easier to determine the true ROI for change.
• It’s easier for participants to understand the value of the change. 
• It requires fewer resources to implement.  

Remember it’s a trade-off.  There are also advantages to the comprehensive approach;

• Having a full picture of the numerous and various interfaces between systems and implementing them one time is much more efficient, 
• Even if you don’t implement all of the future state or To-Be processes you will have a long-term plan to work towards,
• It’s easier to implement full-scale change while you have your foot on the gas.

Next Time:  Creating the Framework for Change

MESA to Change Direction?

It looks as if MESA might be rethinking their MES strategy. 

 A recent survey conducted by the Aberdeen Group showed several very interesting results.   The survey compared the general population of manufacturers versus those manufactures belonging to MESA.  One of the most striking themes showed that the top of class in the general population valued and made better use of Business Process Management methods when integrating/implementing MOM capabilities.  A correlating factor in that result showed that top management for the general population was more involved in MOM projects than MESA members.   It also showed that the general population payed more attention to integrating with other ERP and Supply Chain systems.  Hmmmm….  How does this cause MESA to pause and think?  I think the gist of it is that MESA will take a harder look at how to present and position Business Process Management methods relative to the MESA model and the ISA-95 model.  While the absence, and need, of Business Process methods may not be new to most MES practitioners, it is certainly a welcome sign that MESA now thinks so too.

Another interesting result showed that the bottom tier (the bottom 30%) from the MESA group ranked highest in adopting MOM technologies, even above best in class.  In addition to being the top technocrats, the bottom tier paid less and got better ROI.  This I think speaks to the fact that the best in class are the early adopters and pay a premium, while the bottom tier took advantage of competative pricing. 

The results were presented in a  recent MESA webinar; “Manufacturing Operations Management: Insights for MESA Members.”  It was presented by Matthew Littlefield from Aberdeen Group for MESA.

Now for something completely different…

When I thought about putting a blog together, there were 3 things I promised myself I wouldn’t do:

1. Sell Products – Nobody cares about yet another sales pitch for another MES product you can’t afford.
2. Sell Services – Yes I’m an integrator, contrary to popular belief, we are not the spawn of the devil.
3. Pretend I knew it all – I’ve been around long enough to know I don’t.

So, with that as my guiding principle, it’s time to decide what to do.  Hmmm… maybe this Blog thing is more work than I thought…

No matter, the MES world is a target rich environment.  From the beginning MES has been misunderstood, maligned, misbegotten, malformed, misused, and generally considered a Manufacturing luxury.  Well… Let’s start there then, eh?

Manufacturing Execution Systems, MES, have definitely been misunderstood.  From the Perdue Model to MESA’s latest Manufacturing Collaboration Model MES has been little understood by those who are supposed to use it.  Consider this, go to Wikipedia and type in MES.  You’ll find Manufacturing Execution Systems in a list, select it.  This is what you see:

This article is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. WikiProject Technology or the Technology Portal may be able to help recruit one. (November 2008)

Ok, that’s pitiful.  First, that the description and entry for MES was pitiful, and second, that no one has noticed that it needed updating until the last part of 2008,  including yours truly.  Unfortunately, this is the current state of affairs.  The vast majority of end-users get their information from product vendors.  While there are many really good products out there, and they do a great job of implementing MES capabilities, their message is still biased to the functions and processes that their product supplies.  Customers know that.  It’s difficult to determine what is smoke and mirrors when you have a blind-fold on.  So, where do you find out about what is MES and how can it help you?  I think the best current source is the ISA-95 model – http://www.isa-95.com.   Unfortunately, it takes a translator of the high-tech academic – geek dialect to understand what it’s saying.   Fortunately, when you get the translation, it’s actually incredibly useful.

Technoratic Claim – M5FQCMY6XJ5H