Doré Doré

Rashi Airen UM18172

Shishir Singh UM18173
Shivam Goyal UM18175
Shivam Srivastava UM18176
Shivam Jolly UM18177
Shivangi Jaiswal UM18178
 TRADITIONAL OPERATION
 2OO pieces of same style and
colour, 8 different size in a batch
 Knitwear contained 55 sewing
machines, and staffed by 42
workers
 Machine operated 8 hrs/day and 5
days/week
 Time = 10 minutes of actual labour
CELLULAR MANUFACTURING
 Delivery time fell from 15 days to 1
day
 Flow rate of 2000 garments per day
reduced WIP from 30,000 to 20,000
units
 WIP Inventory fell by an estimated
1.23 FF Million

COMPARISON

Took no account Reduced product

of garment movement and
dependent cross-trained
workflow operators who
variability could switch
tasks
CHANGES REQUIRED

 REORGANISATION

 CROSS TRAINING

 OPERATION LAYOUT

 CONFLICT RESOLUTION
Motivation For
Converting To Cells
Reduction in Delivery Time WIP Reduction:

The average sewing throughput time of a garment • Work-in progress was reduced from 720 to 48
dropped from 15 working days to 1 working. • Reduced idle time and hence an increase in labor
utilization as well as machine utilization.

Autonomy Loyalty of Workers:

• Quality improves because each cell has 'ownership'
over production and cells often aim for 'zero defects'
and the elimination of waste ('Muda’)
• Workers become multi-skilled and are consequently
more adaptable and flexible to the changes in the
business
• Staff feel more involved in decision-making and the
variety of work and greater responsibility resulted in
better motivation
Teams remained together unless someone left the factory.
When a worker was absent, the rate of output dropped.
In the first cell, when one team member went on
maternity leave, the five remaining members decided not
to replace her, as she had promised to return.
Emphasizing the tremendous rise in loyalty by cell
members, Marguet noted that the worker had curtailed
the length of her maternity leave to return to the cell.
Cells in Hosiery
Production
Far more complicated than in knitting production Would not recommend the adoption of M. Enfert’s plan
 Improvement is marginal (and possibly incorrect)
• Hosiery requires four distinct operations, not all of considering the potential losses sustained through the use
which are compatible with the cell design of the cell system
• Only three out of four of the processes are compatible  No Cross-training
with the cell model  there may be rivalry between different cells and conflict
may arise if one cell is left to wait for output from another
Budget limitations:

Designing the cell was that ironing required an

expensive (350,000-800,000FF per machine), high-
capacity, extremely specialized machine.

If Enfert’s plan is to be tested, it should be tested

well after the implementation of the cell system in
the knitting operation, which will serve as a trial to
its effectiveness.