Developing and prioritizing lean key performance indicators for plastering supply chains

Oliveira, Ana Carolina de; Silva, Wesley Douglas Oliveira; Morais, Danielle Costa

doi:10.1590/0103-6513.20220054

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Research Article • Prod. 32 • 2022 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6513.20220054 copy

Developing and prioritizing lean key performance indicators for plastering supply chains

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Paper aims

The aim of this study was to propose a hybrid approach to develop and prioritize the indicators which should be used to monitor the development of plastering supply chains while using lean manufacturing practices.

Originality

This approach proposed the integration of a Balanced Scorecard (BSC) - a multi-perspective tool for performance evaluation and strategic planning, and FITradeoff for the ranking problematic – a multicriteria method that features a robust axiomatic structure and uses partial information.

Research method

The results showed that the approach provided a set of indicators to assist the company’s manager to monitor and improve the company's competitiveness and sustainability.

Main findings

The results showed that the approach was able to provide a set of KPIs to assist the company’s manager to monitor and improve the plastering company management in terms of competitiveness and sustainability.

Implications for theory and practice

The results allowed evaluation of important issues for the strategic, economic, and environmental stability in complex business environments.

Keywords
Balanced Scorecard; FITradeoff; Lean Manufacturing

KPI	Description
% Profit on Revenue	Profit calculated on sales revenue
Loss of Gypsum on Calcination	[(Kg real gypsum in a month / Gypsum produced in a month) - (Kg real gypsum in a month / Theoretical value of monthly gypsum)]* 100
Loss of Plaster in Bagging	(Number of bags burst in the bagger)
% Block Sector Effectiveness (TEEP)	(Actual production time / Programmed production time) * 100
% NC Product by sector	(Product NC sector / Total production) * 100
Productivity by Sector	(Total production in a month / hours available for production)
Overall Equipment Efficiency (% OEE)	(% availability X% performance X% Quality)
Conforming Parts in a Time Period	(Number of batches produced in quality standards/ work shift)
% Integrated and Motivated Collaborator	(Number of satisfied employees / Total employees) * 100
% Training Hours per Year	(Number of hours trained per month / Hours worked per month) * 100
Water consumption per unit produced	(Water used in m³ / m² Block produced per month)
Process Lead Time	(Actual production time / Programmed production time) * 100
Cycle time	Time needed to produce a product
Number of work accidents per hour worked	Number of accidents / hours worked
CO₂ Emission (Kg/month)	(Average monthly electricity consumption + Average monthly gas consumption / total number of employees)
Employee perception through internal research on the organization's maturity regarding Lean Manufacturing concepts	(Number of Lean practices implemented / Number of Lean practices planned) * 100

Perspective	Indicator	Reference
Financial	Operational Cost. Inventory Cost	Azevedo et al. (2012)Azevedo, S., Carvalho, H., Duarte, S., & Cruz-Machado, V. (2012). Influence of Green and lean upstream supply chain management practices on business sustainability. IEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 59(4), 753-765. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2012.2189108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2012.21891... , Aguado et al. (2013)Aguado, S., Alvarez, R., & Domingo, R. (2013). Model of efficient and sustainable improvements in a lean production system through processes of environmental innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 47, 141-148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.11.048. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012... ; Pampanelli et al. (2014)Pampanelli, A., Found, P., & Bernardes, A. (2014). A lean & Green model for a production cell. Journal of Cleaner Production, 85, 19-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013... , Alves & Alves (2015)Alves, J., & Alves, J. (2015). Production Management model integrating the principles of lean manufacturing and sustainability supported by the cultural transformation of a company. International Journal of Production Research, 53(17), 5320-5333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1033032. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.... , Verrier et al. (2016)Verrier, B., Rose, B., & Caillaud, E. (2016). Lean and Green strategy: the lean and Green house and maturity deployment model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 116, 150-160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.022. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015...
Consumer	Number of Social Responsibility Actions. Number of people impacted by Social Responsibility Actions promoted
Internal Processes	Power Energy Consumption. Water Consumption. Waste Generated. Productivity. Unnecessary movements. Process Lead Time. Cycle time. Self-sufficiency of Water for the Production Process. Effluents Launched (m³/month). CO₂ Emission (Kg/month)
Learning and Growth	Number of work accidents per hour worked. % Training Hours per Year. % Employee satisfaction through internal research. Employee perception through internal research on the organization's maturity regarding Lean Manufacturing concepts

ID	KPI	Description
A₁	% Profit on Revenue	Profit calculated on sales revenue
A₂	% sales monthly average (in Tons to powder)	(Sales Average per month of powder products / Total sales) * 100
A₃	% sales monthly average (in m² for Blocks)	(Sales Average per month of block products / Total sales) * 100
A₄	Loss of Gypsum on Calcination	[(Kg real gypsum in a month / Gypsum produced in a month) - (Kg real gypsum in a month / Theoretical value of monthly gypsum)]* 100
A₅	Loss of Plaster in Bagging	(Number of bags burst in the bagger)
A₆	Eletricity Consumption (in kWh/T)	(kWh/ ton produced per month per unit)
A₇	% Block Sector Effectiveness (TEEP)	(Actual production time / Programmed production time) * 100
A₈	% NC Product by sector	(Product NC sector / Total production) * 100
A₉	Productivity by Sector	(Total production in a month / hours available for production)
A₁₀	Overall Equipment Efficiency (% OEE)	(% availability X% performance X% Quality)
A₁₁	Conforming Parts in a Time Period	(Number of batches produced in quality standards/ work shift)
A₁₂	% Integrated and Motivated Collaborator	(Number of satisfied employees / Total employees) * 100
A₁₃	% Training Hours per Year	(Number of hours trained per month / Hours worked per month) * 100
A₁₄	Inventory Cost	(Ordering cost + Transport cost + Maintenance cost)
A₁₅	Number of Social Responsibility Actions	(Number of social responsibility actions implemented per year)
A₁₆	Number of people impacted by Social Responsibility Actions promoted	(Number of people impacted by annual social actions)
A₁₇	Water consumption per unit produced	(Water used in m³ / m² Block produced per month)
A₁₈	Unnecessary movements	Chronoanalysis
A₁₉	Process Lead Time	(Actual production time / Programmed production time) * 100
A₂₀	Cycle time	Time needed to produce a product
A₂₁	Number of work accidents per hour worked	Number of accidents / hours worked
A₂₂	CO₂ Emission (Kg/month)	(Average monthly electricity consumption + Average monthly gas consumption / total number of employees)
A₂₃	Employee perception through internal research on the organization's maturity regarding Lean Manufacturing concepts	(Number of Lean practices implemented / Number of Lean practices planned) * 100

ID	Criterion	Description	Objective	Scale
C₁	Cost	Cost of implementing the indicator	Minimize	1-Very Low Cost to 5-Very High Cost
C₂	Time	Indicator put into practice time	Minimize	1 - Very Fast to 5- Very Slow
C₃	Urgency	The urgency of implementing the indicators	Maximize	1- Little urgent to 5- Very urgent
C₄	Amplitude	The impact generated by the indicator on internal and external customers	Maximize	1-Very Small to 5- Very Large
C₅	Operationalization	Difficulty in adapting the indicator to the company	Minimize	1 - Very easy to 5-Very Difficult

Alternative	Criterion
	C₁	C₂	C₃	C₄	C₅
A₁	2	2	5	4	1
A₂	1	1	5	4	1
A₃	1	1	5	4	1
A₄	1	3	5	3	3
A₅	1	2	3	3	2
A₆	1	1	3	5	1
A₇	2	3	4	3	3
A₈	1	1	3	4	1
A₉	1	1	3	3	1
A₁₀	3	4	5	4	4
A₁₁	1	1	3	3	1
A₁₂	3	4	3	3	4
A₁₃	1	3	3	3	1
A₁₄	3	4	5	3	3
A₁₅	2	4	2	2	3
A₁₆	3	4	2	2	4
A₁₇	1	1	3	4	1
A₁₈	3	3	4	4	4
A₁₉	1	3	4	4	2
A₂₀	1	2	3	4	2
A₂₁	1	1	3	3	1
A₂₂	3	4	3	3	3
A₂₃	3	4	4	4	4

Associação Brasileira de Engenharia de Produção Av. Prof. Almeida Prado, Travessa 2, 128 - 2º andar - Room 231, 05508-900 São Paulo - SP - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: production@editoracubo.com.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] * wesleydosilva@gmail.com