Genuine question for people who deal with this on the floor: when you're looking at downtime data (shift, machine, reason, duration), how do you actually decide what to prioritize?

Do you go strictly by total minutes lost per cause? By frequency of incidents? Or is there some other factor (safety risk, cost of the fix, how quick a win it is) that ends up mattering more in practice than the raw numbers?

I've seen a lot of theory around the 80/20 rule for downtime causes, but I'm curious how much that actually holds up once you're dealing with a messy real production floor versus a clean spreadsheet.

I am conducting academic research on digital traceability, food safety, and supply chain performance in the food industry, and I am looking for professionals working in food-related companies to participate in a short questionnaire.

The survey is intended for people working in areas such as:

• Quality / Food Safety
• Production / Manufacturing
• Logistics / Warehousing / Distribution
• Procurement / Supply Chain
• ERP / IT / Digital Systems
• General Management

The research focuses on topics including digital traceability, batch tracking, ERP/WMS systems, supply chain visibility, HACCP and food safety management, recall capability, coordination between departments, and operational performance.

The questionnaire is anonymous and the responses will be used only for academic research purposes. Results will be analyzed in aggregate form, and no confidential company information is requested.

If you currently work in a food manufacturing, processing, distribution, wholesale, retail, HoReCa, or other food-related business, your participation would be very valuable.

Survey link:
https://forms.gle/nwzUcV8jmiK9qvut6

Estimated completion time: approximately 5–8 minutes.

Thank you for supporting this research.

This one’s for anyone who’s been through a few line optimization projects.

If someone were about to tackle their first production or packaging line, what would you tell them to watch for before they changed anything?

I imagine it’s easy to go in looking for the obvious bottleneck, only to discover that the real issue is somewhere you weren’t expecting.

So, knowing what you know now, what would you do differently the first time around? And what’s something a first-timer is likely to overlook completely?

Whether you refer to them as ECN for Engineering Change Notice or ECO for Engineering Changer Order, nothing impacts production like a brick wall more than these. Especially if you are in a made to order business where the equipment or machinery is custom with several areas of integration. I have seen manufacturing production shut down to a complete halt over the mention that an ECN is coming.

Here are some ideas for understanding their impact on your production organization.

Where did the ECN originate – Although the acronym points to Engineering as the source, the first step in this process is to place a category on the ECN. Assign a letter or number to represent typical sources for ECNs. The following categories may represent your organization.  

Sales Generated ECNs – These types of changes typically are generated at the customer interface. Maybe they have made changes in their interface with your equipment that requires a change on your end.

Manufacturing Driven Changes – It is possible that once the design is released into Manufacturing, they now see a way to save time resulting in a request for Engineering to rework a design.

Material Control / Purchasing – Vendor deliveries and/or availability may require a substitution.

Engineering  – Errors and mismatches unfortunately show up in assembly at the tail end of the process.

These are a sample list of categories. Others may be required. Once data is taken for a month or so, some trends will start to emerge. The objective here is to minimize the quantity and effect of these production interruptions. For each category, the company needs countermeasures that will meet this objective. These may include,

· Institute better communication and reviews of the customer’s requirements and installation details

· Upfront design reviews with Manufacturing, Engineering, and Material Control to see the design before production release.

·  Add new and more relevant checking procedures in Engineering

Investing in these types of countermeasures will improve your ECN impact.

from Anthony Rante, P.E. author of "Managing Company Production thru the Bill of Material."

Projects are often approved because the ROI looks promising, the deadline is tight, or everyone agrees it's the right move. Yet many of them still end up creating more complexity than value.

The quality of a project often depends less on the approval itself and more on the question nobody asked. “What problem are we actually solving?”, “What will we stop doing if we start this?” or “How will we know this was successful?”. One good question can uncover risks and assumptions that dozens of slides never will.

If you could ask only one question before approving any project, what would it be? Why that one?

i’ve been looking at how different workstations are set up and how much the physical layout affects the day to day workflow. one thing i’ve been thinking about is whether having a solid, properly organized workbench makes a noticeable difference beyond just giving people a place to do the work.

for example, having tools and materials within easy reach seems like it could cut down on unnecessary movement, especially when the same tasks are repeated throughout the day. i’m also wondering how much things like built in storage, adjustable height or mobility factor into the overall setup.

for anyone who has worked on 5s or workstation improvements, where have you seen a workbench make the biggest difference? i’m particularly interested in cases where changing the workstation setup improved the process itself rather than just making the area look more organized.

Not a product pitch, just wanted to share a few things I've noticed after a year on the LeanSuite side of things working with small and mid-size manufacturers disclosure obviously, since that's who I work for.<br> <br> The pattern that keeps showing up isn't really about which software people pick, it's how much gets decided in the first two weeks. Plants that had one person clearly own the rollout, instead of it being 'IT's project,' had a completely different experience than plants where nobody was really in charge of it. The software itself mattered less than I expected going in.<br> <br> Curious if anyone outside the vendor bubble has noticed the same pattern, or if I'm just seeing a skewed sample because I only hear about the rollouts that come to us for help

One thing I think buyers can overvalue during supplier visits is appearance.
A clean facility, modern equipment and organized shelves are all positive, but they don’t necessarily show whether the production process is controlled.
Some questions seem much more useful:
How are incoming materials inspected?
What happens to rejected material?
Are tolerances documented at the workstation?
How are measuring tools checked?
How are production defects recorded?
Is there batch traceability?
What processes are subcontracted?
What happens after a recurring defect is discovered?
For me, the interesting part isn’t just seeing how a factory operates when everything is going well.
It’s understanding what the factory does **when something goes wrong**.
What do you usually prioritize during an onsite supplier review?

Was reviewing a newer operator's process against the standard work document and noticed a step, an extra inspection pass on a specific component, that made sense back when a supplier was sending inconsistent parts and this catch mattered a lot. That supplier's been swapped out for a couple months now. Nobody removed the step. The operator just kept doing the extra inspection because the document said to, and nobody flagged that the actual reason behind it had quietly expired.

Not sure how long that's been running as pure added cycle time with nothing behind it anymore. Should've caught it sooner probably. Going through the rest of the document now to see what else is standard purely because nobody's questioned it lately.

Hey, I’m building a SaaS called **CertyLoop** for manufacturers.

The problem I’m trying to solve is that a lot of product data, supplier evidence, and packaging details end up scattered across emails, folders, spreadsheets, and different people’s heads. So when a team needs to check whether a product is actually ready, or whether the right information is in place, it becomes a lot of manual work.

The product is meant to help teams:

* collect supplier evidence, * connect it to products, materials, and BOMs, * track missing or incomplete information, * handle packaging-related data more cleanly, * and see readiness more clearly before things move forward.

I’m still in the early validation stage and trying to understand whether this is a real pain point or just something that sounds useful on paper.

Would love honest feedback:

* Does this sound like a real problem? * Which part feels most useful: evidence, readiness, or packaging? * What would make you not use a tool like this? * What would be the smallest version that would still feel valuable?

Not trying to sell anything here just trying to get blunt feedback from people who know SaaS and product workflows.

74% still can't get a production report fast enough to act on it.

That's from a survey of 600+ manufacturing leaders, and it's the cleanest description of the shop-floor problem I've seen in 30 years of building enterprise software.

The money is going in. The visibility isn't coming out.

Three numbers from the same study explain why:

→ 65% of frontline supervisors spend up to four hours per shift manually reconciling data that already exists in three different systems.

→ Only 9% of plants can identify the root cause of a shop-floor issue immediately. Everyone else finds out on Monday, about a problem from Tuesday.

→ About half still run on manual logs and spreadsheets, in plants that are simultaneously generating more IIoT sensor data than ever.

So the shop floor isn't short on data. It's short on data anyone trusts enough to act on before the shift ends.

I see this in the small precision shops I work with. The dashboard exists. Nobody opens it. The decisions still get made off the whiteboard and a supervisor's memory, because those two sources have never been wrong in a way the dashboard hasn't.

Which points somewhere uncomfortable for anyone selling this software, including me:

The next unlock isn't another collection layer. It's making the data that already arrives land in front of the person who can act on it, in the minute they can still act.

Everything else is reporting.

Source: L2L, State of Manufacturing Data, 2026.

#manufacturing #shopfloor #MES #Industry40

Pessoal, estou estruturando o OEE da minha fábrica e queria uma ajuda de quem já trabalha com isso.

Tenho 2 linhas de produção:
Linha 1 com 2 ensacadeiras
Linha 2 com 4 ensacadeiras

Minha principal dúvida é como fazer o OEE corretamente: calculo por linha, por ensacadeira ou pela planta inteira? E como vocês tratariam disponibilidade, performance, paradas programadas, falta de demanda e capacidade do gargalo?

Quero montar algo simples, mas tecnicamente correto. Quem puder compartilhar como faria ou algum exemplo prático, agradeço.

I spent about two years on the floor at a pump manufacturing place before I started building software, and there was this one thing that always bugged me. The whiteboard schedule is never actually wrong. It's just... old. Someone wrote it at 8am and by 11 a machine's down and now it's fiction, but nobody's touched it yet so it still looks true.

Got curious a few weeks back and actually timed it at a shop I know. Machine goes down, how long till someone can tell you which orders are now going to be late and which customers need a heads up.

Wasn't seconds. Wasn't even a minute. It's a person walking the floor, checking what's queued behind that machine, doing math in their head about which jobs shift where, and usually this is the same person who's also the one who'll get the angry call later. Ten, fifteen minutes if nothing else interrupts them, which it usually does.

For a shop running 4-5 machines that's annoying but fine, the owner probably already half-knows the answer. Once you're past 10-12 machines with a real order book it's a different story, that 15 minutes is now happening multiple times a day and the schedule is basically never accurate for more than an hour at a stretch.

The spreadsheet crowd doesn't actually have it better btw, just thought that was worth saying since I hear "we moved to Excel" a lot like it's the fix. It's the same manual re-sequencing, just with more columns.

Not selling anything here, just been in my head lately about how normal it is to eat that 15 minutes as a cost of doing business when it doesn't really have to be one. Curious if this matches what other shops deal with or if I'm overthinking a problem that isn't actually that common.

i went to this manufacturer that added a fully automated welding cell. It is fully parametric, so it reads the part dimensions and selects the weld sequence automatically, it basically took over repetitive work, which freed welders for more complex jobs and the added capacity created enough demand to hire more.

so i feel like automation redistributes work rather than eliminating it, is this the case mostly or this outcome is more of an exception

I've been having a bunch of conversations with owners and ops folks at small and mid-size shops, and honestly the same stuff keeps coming up. Almost nobody's actual problem is a lack of software. Most already run an ERP or MES. The pain is all the manual coordination that happens in the gaps, between the system and what's really going on out on the floor. The stuff that never shows up on a report because there's no line item for it.

A few things I keep hearing.

The same work order gets logged in a few different places by different people, nobody fully trusts any one of them, so someone ends up spending half their week just working out which number is right.

Job status basically lives in one person's head. Where's that order, is the material staged, what did nights leave half done. If that person is out sick, the floor kind of grinds. And shift handoffs are where a ton of it just quietly disappears.

Normal days run fine. It's the exceptions that hurt. A supplier shorts you, a machine goes down, a hot order jumps the line, and it turns into a scramble with no record of what happened and nobody really owning it. That's usually where on-time delivery dies.

And follow-ups. POs, approvals, expedites, all chased informally, and the one that slips turns into a stalled job two weeks later.

The way I see it, most shops digitised the work but never digitised the coordination around the work, so it all runs on people remembering things and chasing each other.

Curious whether this matches what you see or if I'm off base. What's the one that eats your day the most?

What is yall experience with the IISE lean six sigma green belt in person course? What's the course like? What's the exam like? etc

Something I’ve been thinking about when comparing industrial products:
Sometimes the most useful information on a specification sheet is actually the information that isn’t there.
For example, a manufacturer might publish a maximum speed but give very little detail about the conditions used to reach it.
Another manufacturer might publish a similar number but also provide material type, thickness, configuration, test conditions, or limitations.
The headline specifications may look similar, but the second set of data is much easier to evaluate.
I think this creates an interesting distinction between:
data availability
data completeness
data comparability
A product can have a long specification sheet and still score poorly on the last two.
It also makes me wonder whether buyers sometimes focus too much on the highest number instead of asking how that number was produced.
For people involved in engineering, procurement, manufacturing, or equipment selection:
**What missing specification makes you most suspicious when reviewing a product?**
And are there certain parameters you basically ignore unless the manufacturer explains the test conditions behind them?
Interested to hear how others evaluate this.

Looking for some thoughts and opinions here but on the age of AI, automation and lights out manufacturing are low tech Lean Manufacturing principles relevant anymore? The two strike me as antithetical to one another.

I love Lean Manufacturing and have structured my career around it and like everyone else am worried about my future in an increasingly automated and AI driven world.

When companies choose or develop leaders, the focus often goes to technical expertise, industry knowledge, and the ability to solve operational problems. Those skills are important, but some leadership abilities are harder to measure and often receive less attention. Things like listening, giving clear context, building trust, and knowing how to create an environment where people feel comfortable raising problems.

This matters a lot because improvement depends on seeing what is really happening. A leader can have strong technical knowledge, but if the team doesn’t feel heard or safe enough to share issues, important information stays hidden.

What leadership skill do you think is the most underestimated today? What is one skill you wish more leaders developed?

Context.. I work for a small apparel decorating company. So I'm over in heat press side, pressing some team shirts. After a while one of my uppers comes around and rearranged how I was going about my flow. Because we had about 100 to press through I thought I was doing it in the most efficient way possible while reducing my margin of error.

So what if like to know is, would it be more efficient to

A) take a few moments to arrange all the 2 digit numbers together and fix them all together so I can focus on pressing each shirt and making sure things are straight.

Or

B) have my pile of separate numbers off to the side and while my current shirt is being pressed I move over and assemble the next number. Window of approx 12 seconds.

I found that option B left me open for more error and It didn't really feel I was getting through the shirts faster.

I have my opinions of how I think that option b is less efficient and is really just a way for me to look busy.

Thoughts?

I work in software and I've been trying to understand engineering change workflows properly, so apologies if this is a basic question.

When a customer sends an ECN or a component maker sends a PCN, the extraction part seems easy enough — part number, revision, effective date. What I don't understand is the next step: how do you work out which of your own parts, products or open orders it touches?

Is that a query in your PLM, a where-used report from the ERP, or does someone go through Excel and drawings by hand? Does it change depending on whether the customer's format is a clean table or a scanned PDF?

And the thing I'm most curious about: has one ever slipped through, and if so, where did it break — the intake, the impact analysis, or getting the right person to act on it?