By analyzing the OEE report, our leader was able to uncover the manufacturing issues. However, is the OEE a reliable indicator of production efficiency? Can the strategies chosen by operators significantly affect its parameters, thus altering the data? Let’s consider three machines and analyze different scenarios in which three operators performed the same task following different strategies:
Strategy 1 – numerous stoppages:
In the first scenario, the operator worked with above-average efficiency and produced no faulty items – all items were of excellent quality. However, there was a slight decrease in availability, possibly due to various factors such as frequent breaks, slow switchovers, or unplanned stops. Consequently, the machine’s OEE was 75%.
Machine 1 report. Source: ImFactory
Strategy 2 – high-speed operation:
The second operator decided to increase the pace of work. Performance rose to 125%, and availability remained high. There were no extended breaks, and all stops and switchovers were planned. Unfortunately, the high speed led to a decrease in quality, with only 50% of items being good quality. However, due to the increased pace, there were still a significant number of good items. As a result, the OEE remained at 75% as well.
Machine 2 report. Source: ImFactory
Strategy 3 – stable work:
The third operator opted for a steady working pace, not operating at the highest speed, and produced only good-quality items. There were no breaks or unplanned stops. This consistent approach resulted in an OEE of 75% as well.
Machine 3 report. Source: ImFactory
These examples demonstrate that regardless of the operator’s strategy, the OEE consistently reached the same level of 75%, indicating its reliability and immunity to malfunction.