Watervliet Arsenal

Assignment 3
Julian Cowper
Student number: 714102
 Background
• Watervliet Arsenal (WA) manufactures cannons

• WA faced issues regarding:

– Poor quality of chrome plating of cannon bores
– Lack of consistency in high precision machining during the manufacturing process

• Prior to resolving problems, the WA culture was primarily focused as a

“Functional View”

• WA wants to change from a Functional View to a Systemic View

• In 1980, WA decided to focus on improving their product quality and

organisation operations through:
– Statistical Process Control (SPC), and
– Systems Thinking
 Problems faced
1. Quality of chrome plating cannon bores to
obtain high velocities of cannon balls

2. Production process areas that required high

level of machining (e.g. milling of slots for
aiming device) could not be regularly
obtained with current cutting tools that were
being purchased
 Problematique
• Poor quality control of products during
production processes
– Using wrong tools or not wanting to adopt new
methods
• Departments only interest in optimising own
process
Naïve picture Cannons/
artillery

Safety Military

Testing/ firing
Navy
range

US
War
Watervliet Department
Arsenal of Defence

Precision (in
US
manufacturing
Government
and in use)

International
Ammunition
market
Precious
metals
Hierarchy

Government

US Minister of Defence

Owner of Watervliet Arsenal

Department/process managers

Process line employees

Machining
tools
Cannon
 Summary of Issues ( Ishikawa
Diagram)
Method/Process Machining
- Old, outdated methods - Wrong tools
- Not willing to try innovative - Lack of planning
methods - Ordering too many tools in
- Little to no planning with organisation
other departments to - Low precision
streamline production
- No data capturing
Poor quality

Culture
- Focus on own department
performance/ output
- No communication with
other departments (siloed)
- Ignorant/ not willing to
make changes/ adapt
 SWOT-e Analysis – Change Agent
Weaknesses
Strengths
might have no/lack of knowledge of certain aspect.
credible Needs to learn a lot for each project
encourage/backed by company (otherwise group would • one individual (overshadowed or undermined by
not have been created) managers who "know more")
wants to implement change for good for whole company
• makes more than 1 department work together for
change (not single track minded)

Change Agent
Opportunities Threats
improve systems/process in departments, company departments/managers not wanting to change (naive)
culture change does not generate sustainable competitive
gains knowledge/credibility through projects advantage
• creating new methods/processes to overcome ordeals • departments revert back to original process after
intervention

Environment
• Hierarchical
• Fear of change
• Silo departments
• Precision
• Functional thinking
 SWOT-e Analysis – Watervliet Arsenal
Strengths
• Old company with much experience and contacts
• Reputable with their past performance
• Have large facilities and machinery to deal with large orders
• Connected directly with the US Military
Weaknesses
• Old style of thinking/ business operating
(functional/hierarchical)
• Use of old methods and machinery (trial basis – produces a
lot of waste)
• Departments are siloed – only interested in their own
section of work
• US Military/ Government may prevent WA from doing
business with several potential customers

Watervliet Arsenal
Opportunities Threats
• Collaboration between departments to improve production • Other manufacturers
efficiency and quality • Governments / international treaties
• Produce for international military groups • Activists against war
• Produce other weapons other than just cannons • Only really active when there is turmoil/ war
• Produce ammunition for weapons
• Produce vehicles for weapons
• Reduce waste produced

Environment
• War • Hierarchical
• Weapons development • Silo departments
• International market and • Precision
warfare • Functional thinking
• National security • Government regulations
 Rich US
Government

Picture
Minister
regulations
of
Warfare
Defence

Shipping
US Gov.
Safety Treaties

International
militaries
Security
Activists/
humanitaria
Firing n
range

US
Materials Military US
Warehouse
Army
“Big Gun
Shop”

Mobility US
Cannon Aiming Navy
tools
Managers

Ammunition
Spare Maintenance
Machinery parts Employees
 Root definition (CAPETOWN) –
As is
C – US Army/Navy (US Military Defence groups), suppliers of
materials/parts
A – WA department managers, WA employees, US
Government, US Minister of Defence, United Nations, activists
against weaponry/armoury/war, humanitarian groups
P–
• Cannon fire rate
• Distance artillery can shoot (velocity of bullet)
• Number of shots before maintenance is required
• Number of cannons produced
• Amount of material utilised
• Lifespan of cannon
E – War, weapons development, international, national
security, hierarchical, silo departments, precision,
functional thinking, warehouse (Big Gun Shop)
T – Departments are optimising the
development/construction of their respective part of a
cannon by themselves
O – Owner of Watervliet Arsenal
W – Through prioritising individual departmental
processes the required KPIs can be met without
worrying about other departments
N – Open, negative, purposeful, HAS, siloed,
hierarchical, functional
 Root definition (CAPETOWN) – To be
C – US Army/Navy (US Military Defence groups), suppliers of materials/parts,
international militaries/defence forces
A – WA department managers, WA network, WA employees, US Government, US
Minister of Defence, United Nations, activists against weaponry/armoury/war,
humanitarian groups, change agents (SPC unit),
P–
• Cannon fire rate
• Distance artillery can shoot (velocity of bullet)
• Number of shots before maintenance is required
• Number of cannons produced
• Amount of material utilised
• Lifespan of cannon
• Reduction in material utilised through better data collection and analysis
• Recycling all waste material
• Customer expectations met
• Higher precision in processing methods
• New/improved methods utilised/learnt through production
• Reduction on costs
• Performance to schedule
E - war, weapons development, international, national
security, hierarchical, silo departments, precision,
warehouse (Big Gun Shop), technology enhanced,
collaboration, systemic thinking
T – Change Agents to promote departments on
collaborating to optimise the development, construction
and performance of the cannon
O – Owner of Watervliet Arsenal
W – Through collaboration as a whole, all departments can
reach maximum KPIs at a company level instead of at
departmental level
N - Open, negative, purposeful, HAS, siloed, hierarchical,
functional, adaptable/ dynamic, technological,
collaborative, network, systemic
 Issues/Concerns
Issues/Concerns
a) No use of technology/ relying on old
methods and experience
b) No collection of data for comparisons
c) Poor machining precision
d) Ordering of too many ineffective parts
e) Departments set own KPIs at expense
of other departments
f) Separated work stations
g) Waste of materials
h) Poor quality product
 Objective Matrix
OBJECTIVE
Develop a systemic approach to how WA develops/constructs cannons
RESULTS TO ACHIEVE RESULTS TO AVOID
1. Improve use of data • Departments developing alone
2. Improved training to all employees • Purchasing too many machines that become
3. Utilise new methods/ procedures redundant
4. Collaboration between departments • Purchasing too many tools/parts that don’t get
5. Improved machining precision used
6. Ordering of correct parts • Utilising highly complex methods that can’t be
7. Departments make use of same machinery/ parts taught across departments
8. Improve quality of products
9. Reduce/recycle waste

AVAILABLE RESOURCES CONSTRAINTS

• Change Agents • Activists
• Current infrastructure (“Big Gun • Global policies
Shop”) • United Nations
• Governments
 Self-Interaction Matrix

7. Departments make use of same machinery/ parts

4 .Collaboration between departments
2. Improved training to all employees
OBJECTIVES

3. Utilise new methods/ procedures

5. Improved machining precision

8. Improve quality of products

6. Ordering correct parts

9. Reduce/recycle waste
1. Improved use of data
 ISSUES/CONCERNS
a) No use of technology/ relying on old methods and experience X X X X X   X    
b) No collection of data for comparison X X X   X     X X
c) Poor machining precision X X X   X X X X X
d) Ordering of too many ineffective parts       X X X X X  
e) Departments set own KPIs at expense of other departments   X X X X   X X X
f) Separate work stations     X X   X X    
g) Waste of materials X X   X X   X   X
h) Poor quality product X     X X     X  
 “What” Affinity Diagram
PEOPLE FACILITIES EQUIPMENT ORDER POLICY
PROCESSING
Department Segregated Poor precision No collaboration or Use enough
managers focusing workshops/ rechecking that material to get
on own department production line parts ordered are desired outcome
the correct ones

WA management Ordering of Deliver and

incorrect/ too many optimise on
parts individual
department KPI and
processes rather
Experienced cannon No data collection than as a company
makers
Interrelationship Diagram (As is)
WA Management

Rely on Department
experience managers
cannon makers
Use enough
Segregated
material to get
workshops/
desired outcome
production line
No data
collection on
process No collaboration
Focus on own on parts
KPI ordering

Ordering
Poor production Poor machining wrong/ too
precision tools many parts
 “How” Affinity Diagram
Technology Training Manufacturing Ordering
(A) Data collection (D) Problem solving (G) Collaboration (I) Communication
when constructing/ on types of parts
(B) Material (E) Error prevention developing parts and materials
improvements required

(C) Precision (F) Machine (H) Precision to (J) Order as a

machining tools applications reduce waste company, not as
departments
Prioritisation Matrix from “How” Affinity
A B C D
Diagram
E F G H I J Total %
A 5 1/5 1 1 5 1 1 10 1 25,2 13,7
B 1/5 1/5 1/5 1 1/5 1 1/5 1/10 1 4,1 2,2
C 5 5 5 1 1 1/5 1 1 5 24,2 13,2
D 1 5 1/5 1 5 1 5 5 5 27,2 14,8
E 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 4,9
F 1/5 5 1 1/5 1 1/10 1 1/5 1/10 8,8 4,8
G 1 1 1/5 1 1 10 5 1 1 21,2 11,5
H 1 5 1 1/5 1 1 1/5 1/10 1/10 9,6 5,2
I 1/10 10 1 1/5 1 5 1 10 1 29,3 15,9
J 1 1 1/5 1/5 1 10 1 10 1 25,4 13,8

1 = equal
5 = significantly more important
10 = very significantly more important
1/5 = significantly less important
1/10 = very significantly less important
 Tree Use of technology

Diagram
Data collection Comparison of
methods

Research and
development
Material
improvements
Use of new
methods

Extensive training
Problem solving
and error
prevention Use of check
procedures

Machine
applications Training on how
to operate
Improved
precision Change KPIs

Manufacturing
collaborating
Change viewpoint
of managers

Change
workspace
Improve
machining
techniques
Precision to
reduce waste
Use of new
methods

Standardise
procedure

Communication Stock checks

between
departments

Substantiate
order
requirements
 “How” Prioritisation
ID How Score (%)
I Communication on types of parts and materials required 15,9
D Problem solving 14,8
J Order as a company, not as departments 13,8
A Data collection 13,7
C Precision machining tools 13,2
G Collaboration when constructing/ developing parts 11,5
H Precision to reduce waste 5,2
E Error prevention 4,9
F Machine applications 4,8
B Material improvements 2,2
 “How” Recommendations
How Details
Communication on types Standardise order forms
of parts and materials Departments must substantiate order requirements
required Stock/inventory checks should be done regularly

Problem solving Improve training – cross departmental

Improve collaboration and team work between departments

Order as a company, not as Set a single day per week/month as a deadline for all orders
departments Compare department expenditures
Set company budget

Data collection Use of new technology

Improve testing regimes
Increase research and development procedure
Compare production to research more thoroughly
Precision machining tools Purchase multifunctioning precision machining tools
 How Details
Collaboration when Change KPI from departmental level to company level
constructing/ developing Encourage managers to have an open mindset on change and
parts that the change will benefit the entire company, not just their
department
Change work stations to include more processes –
uncompartmentalized
Have managers change their mindset about optimising the
company as a whole rather than their own department
Precision to reduce waste Use better machining equipment
Improve training on machinery usage
Use newer methods to utilise material better
Recycle waste
Error prevention Set quality checkpoints at each milestone/ step
Improve training to all employees
Improve knowledge or processes in each department to all
employees
Machine applications Train multiple employees across all departments on how to
utilise machinery for all purposes
Material improvements Research and development to find stronger - cheaper material
Use new methods that will utilise new materials to improve
product performance