W20_LUCKY_Addressing
Incessant Compressor Package Failures using Force Field Analysis
1.
Problem
Recognition
In recent times, there has been an incessant failure of the
compressor packages at one of our plants. This submission is being prepared to
address the human factor aspect of this failure at this time.
2.
Problem Definition
Why is there a lack of
predictive maintenance culture at this plant? Will change management going to work at this
plant?
a.
Assumptions
There are no assumptions to
begin with. We will attempt to use Force Field Analysis technique that is
widely used in change management and process improvement circles.
3.
Feasible
Alternatives
Feasible alternatives
include:
A.
Address
the human factor concerns
B.
Do not
address the human factor concerns
4.
Development of outcomes for each alternative
The problem solving tool to be
adopted is the Force Field Analysis Technique.
5.
Selection Criteria
There is a need to institute a change management to imbibe a high
predictive maintenance culture.
The selection criteria are all factors that can be classified as human
factors under restraining forces in the figure 1.
6.
Analysis and Comparison of the alternatives
Alternative
B is not acceptable in the resolution of this problem.
Alternative
A is the plausible alternative requiring further examination.
The
factors that can be classified as directly linked to the human are as follows:
1.
Service personnel ability to use AccPac service manager software – this factor
relates to the service personnel, and as such falls under the human factor
concern
2.
Service personnel willingness to change – this factor is a human factor concern
3.
Willingness to change –this factor is human factor concern
4.
Technical know- how of service personnel – this factor is inherent in the human
concerned
5. Work
attitude of service personnel – this factor, too, is a human factor concern.
The
following factors have been classified as not directly linked to the human
factor:
1.
History of past failures – this factor is not considered directly related to
the service personnel even though the service personnel may have contributed to
the making of the history.
2.
Availability of relevant OEM manuals – this factor is considered an aftermath
of the service personnel or his manager’s inaction or otherwise and as such
considered not directly linked to the human factor.
3.
Access to technical knowledge data base – this factor could be institutional
although ultimately linked to the system set up by the organization. However,
it not considered directly linked to the human factor as proposed in this
submission.
4. Lack
of Expat trainer – This is considered a system’s issue although ultimately
comes down to the personnel at the home office whose responsibility it to set
this up
5.
Inadequate training – This factor is considered systemic as against being
directly related to the human factor.
7.
Selection of preferred alternative
The
need to institute a change management culture that would encourage a predictive
maintenance culture is seen from the total score of 33 of the driving forces as
against the total score of 25 of restraining forces (See figure1).
The
following are the selected factors under the selected human factor alternative
that requires immediate attention to address the incessant compressor packages
outages:
1.
Service personnel ability to use AccPac service manager software – teach the
personnel - experiential learning – to use the AccPac service manager software.
2.
Service personnel willingness to change – Embark on change management induction
for all service personnel
3.
Willingness to change – Embark on change management induction for all service personnel
4.
Technical know- how of service personnel – teach the personnel - experiential
learning – on the technical aspects as required.
5.
Work attitude of service personnel – Embark on change management induction for
all service personnel
8.
Performance monitoring and post evaluation of results
The effect of the prescribed solutions to the
identified human factors will be closely monitored in going forward. The
purpose is to quickly build on the positive effects once recognized and to make
changes to those solutions yielding undesirable effects soon enough.
Reference
1.
Brassard,
M. & Rither, D. (2010).Force Field
Analysis (pp. 86 -90). The Memory Jogger
2: Tools for Continuous Improvement and Effective Planning (2nd edition). US: Goal/QPC.
2.
Force
Field Analysis - Kurt Lewin. Retrieved from http://www.change-management-coach.com/force-field-analysis.html
3.
Force Field Analysis: Analyzing
the Pressures For and Against Change. Retrieved
from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTED_06.htm
Nice case study, Lucky but too bad you didn't first conduct a Root Cause Analysis?
ReplyDeleteHere is how I would approach it. FIRST, do a Pareto Analysis to find out WHY the compressor plant keeps failing. SECONDLY, I would urge you to conduct a ROOT CAUSE analysis. THEN you can do your force field analysis. And the last step (7) would be to use a Pareto Analysis to see if the interventions you had implemented had worked or not. (See Memory Jogger 2, pages 122 to 135 for examples of how to set up a "before" and "after" analysis.)
Bottom line- while I like your case study a lot, I think there is a lot more you could have done with it by combining Pareto, Root Cause and Force Field into a comprehensive and fully integrated approach. I will accept this posting but would urge you to expand it in a future blog posting.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta
Dr. PDG,
ReplyDeleteI would do that - 'bafore' Pareto Analysis, then Root Cause Analysis, then Force Field and 'after' Pareto Analysis at the last step (7).
Thanks.
Regards,
Lucky