This weekend was the 50th Anniversary Rolex 24 at Daytona, a 24-hour sports-car endurance race, at the great Daytona International Speedway. Each entry requires 3-5 drivers to trade shifts, as well as a host of mechanics, technicians, and engineers.
In a 24-hour race, there is bound to be many caution flags and technical issues. Throughout the race, car after car was set back by, or even dropped out of the race due to engine, transmission, and gear box troubles. And I began to realize why there is so much emphasis on the manufacturer of the winning team, as Ford swept the podium this Sunday.
As I watched Ford take home 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, I remembered an article I read in the Wall Street Journal a couple years ago – “At Ford Racing, Quality (Control) Is Job One.” (I would suggest to read it if you have the chance!) The article discusses the impact Mary Ann Mauldwin has had as the director of operations at Roush & Yates Racing Engines, Ford’s primary NASCAR-engine builder.
Ms. Mauldwin has worked with Pelton & Crane (a dental equipment company) and Thorlo (a sock manufacturer) – both of which have a little or nothing to do with automobiles. And apparently she is part of a larger trend in NASCAR. (See article, “For decades, the sport was dominated…”)
I saw this as testament to the universal application of the operations management principles we have learned in class. Ms. Mauldwin had said, “building engines was no different from making athletic socks.” A lot of what she had done is basic inventory management. She created a new inventory tracking system, standard bill of materials, and an improved forecasted inventory demand. Her new system has cut the time it takes engine builders to gather parts from four hours to 45 minutes, which would be a 533% increase in laborer productivity. She also improved supply chain management, as she worked with suppliers to improve the quality of parts and turned their used-parts sales into a lucrative business.
In class we stressed the importance of standardization. She utilized standardization to identify whether a change represents a real & consistent improvement.
“She required engine builders to submit an engineering change form if they wanted to alter anything in the building process… Mr. Yates, the CEO, also started to see improvements in the quality and the consistency of the company’s engines. His five primary engine builders had each put an engine together a little differently. After Ms. Mauldwin standardized the process, “we were turning out nearly identical engines in terms of performance and reliability,” he said.”
What other advantages are there to a standardized process?
Lastly, due to the topic & since this will be my last post, I felt inclined to post a couple other NASCAR related operations questions: What do you believe is the usual bottleneck of a pit crew? What do you think they can/already do to remove this bottleneck? Also, how might inventory management come into play for a pit crew?
Since standardization promotes processes to occur in the same way each time I think this one of the other benefits it brings, other than efficiency and high productivity, comes along with HR and on job training. I think these standardization practices can make things a lot easier on management and hiring because everyone is being taught the same thing and common problems/questions that arise can be answered properly and rapidly. I’m not super familiar with NASCAR but I would assume the the usual bottleneck, based off what I’ve seen, would be the changing of tires. I think the easiest way to eliminate this bottleneck is plenty of practice when it comes to loosening the bolts of the tires and making sure the tools used to loosen them are in proper order? That’s really the best I can come up with!
Standardization is not always the best choice for production of goods, but that definitely differs between one product and another. I agree that when it comes to cars the standardization of the mechanics is very important to ensure their consistency and quality. What Ms. Mauldwin did for Ford is great in terms of boosting performance and reliability, by cutting down engine building time and increasing productivity. It is clear to see that Ms. Mauldwin is an organized person, who although she had no background in cars, has exceptional experience with operations management which helped in improving Ford’s quality and consistency of engines, as well as winning the race.
I think that standardization is always the best choice especially if you have a high turnover rate in the industry. It not only increases efficiency but it also makes the life of the requirement department much easier in the future, so in the long run it definitely is the best options after all where humans not machines!! We won’t last forever!!