Continue the current response of TMM. The routine was made an exception to the standard practice of investigating problems on the line, even at the expense of shutting down the line. Ask KFS pay more attention on the type of seats they send. No more wrong seats!
2. Stop the whole process to deal with the defective seats. And it was a good and effective way to find out the root cause. However, it was felt that stopping the line was too expense.
To compare with the two options, there are both advantages and disadvantages.
In the first option, the best advantage is the line was kept working. If we could find out the cause soon, the influence would be the smallest. The run ratio would recover as soon as possible.
Nevertheless, if the problem couldnt be handling in an easy way, as time went on, it would come out a large amount expense. Day by day, the defect cars were accumulated. Because we know the replacement of the seats need more time. Those made the plant have an extra inventory and the cost. With the increasing number of defect cars the staffs have to work overtime, the extra wages came.
In addition, there were two uncertain factors after the negotiation with the KFS. One was the quality with the seats; the other was whether the seats they send were the right type of replacement seats. Otherwise, we should talk about the compensation for our losses.
In the second option, there was no doubt that it would cause some immediate expenses when stopping the line for fixing error. But it might be a good all-around way to check every part of the line. Though it caused losses, it was more effective and direct. Meanwhile, KFS would have enough time to adjust their line to fit for the new produce situation. Or the plant could search for one or more new suppliers.
As for me, I would recommend the first option. I dont want my plant have such a direct loss without any exert or attempt. Anyway, if possible, the situation wo View More »