New Old Challenges for Transit Agencies

Metro Magazine’s annual Bus Maintenance Survey published in the Metro Magazine, May 2012 edition indicates parts availability and obsolescence to be the number one concern for maintenance personnel in Bus Maintenance workshops.

Metro’s survey was based on the questionnaire sent to 200 transit agencies with a list of questions ranging from biggest challenges and most frequent issues they meet in the shops to training and new ways to perform services.

One of the respondents noted that “Consistent parts availability and obsolescence avoidance is an ongoing concern being addressed through product testing and alternatives, working closely with manufacturers and vendors” Another one explained that it is really hard for them to determine the spare parts ratio because of the different lead times for different types of buses. He mentioned that many of their older buses require local fabrication shops to make parts for them, as they are no longer available from manufacturers or vendors.

This approach makes it almost impossible to predict the life cycle of bus parts to be able to plan preventive/predictive spare parts replacement and significantly increases the total cost of ownership for older buses. Consequently, it increases the number of road calls because of the increased number of external service failures.

The survey also indicates that workshop managers are facing a challenge arising from transit agencies’ strategy of transferring to cleaner burning engines with new, alternative propulsion systems.

This requires significant changes in repair procedures and knowledge management. More versatile fleet requires better planning and generally increases the cost of maintenance because of the new, specialized equipment needed and more complex organization of work in all segments from procurement of spare parts to the actual repair work by mechanics.

This survey has shown the need for better long term planning of capital investments in transit agencies. What is the cut-off age of the fleet when the total cost of ownership over the remaining life cycle of a bus becomes higher than selling the vehicle and investing in a new one? What are the costs of the more complex organization and smaller spare part batches ordered because of the more versatile fleet and how fast do we want to homogenize the fleet to reduce the related costs?

These are the types of questions management of transit agencies will have to answer to successfully overcome the challenges they are facing today.

DMAIC and Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives

ASQ’s Quality Progress magazine for May 2012 features an article titled “On the right course” which discusses the use of DMAIC road-map for implementing Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives in organizations. In this case DMAIC is applied as a high level tool used by organizations to lead their decision making process in CSR implementation. DMAIC (Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control) is a proven project management tool used by six sigma practitioners on a project level for measurable processes, but the main question in case of CSR is “What to measure”. Sounds familiar?

Authors of the article have pointed out that: “More organizations have become actively engaged in social initiatives, and many are proud to promote their activities and accomplishments in annual corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports”.

In all of these, usually called, “sustainability reports” companies present their achievements on a corporate level measured by company-wide KPIs. In these reports, CSR is presented in multiple categories such as: Environmental Management, GHG Emissions, Energy Consumption, Water Consumption, Recycling, Social Impact and Diversity. The biggest issue in implementing CSR initiatives in organizations is how to deploy the strategic CSR goals on the operational level.

In the case of implementing Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives, a wider continuous improvement framework is necessary to make these changes sustainable.

“A big ship traveling at full speed requires distance and time to turn around”. (Deming)

Calyptus Consulting has helped multiple clients in several industries (Mining, Manufacturing, Financial Services) in aligning their strategic goals and implementing a sustainable continuous improvement framework using its Policy Deployment procedure. Using this procedure we have been able to analyze and develop/redesign clients’ KPIs (Including CSR) and help them deploy their strategic objectives to the operational level. KPIs have been deployed horizontally and vertically encompassing multiple organizational tiers (depending on a client size and structure) and a reporting system has been implemented to roll up the KPIs from the operational level to the system wide KPIs.

The main goal of this approach is to align company objectives from the bottom all the way to the company vision and mission and empower the organization with sustainable system able to self-direct its initiatives across the organization to fulfill strategic objectives and stay “on the right course” as the title of the article implies.

Does Delta know more than the oil specialists?

By acquiring the oil refining facility from ConocoPhillips, Delta is replacing its fuel hedging strategy with backward integration but at the same time entering a particularly challenging market.

Oil RigThe refining business once was dominated by integrated oil companies, which both produced the oil and refined and sold the final product. But as refining and marketing became less profitable than production of crude oil, some big oil companies began spinning off and selling or shutting down refineries.

In 2011, Delta spent $11.7 billion on fuel, which accounted to 36% of its operating costs. In 2010 fuel accounted for 30% of Delta’s expenses. In a written statement, Richard Anderson, Delta Chief Executive said: “This modest investment, the equivalent of the list price of a new wide-body aircraft, will allow Delta to reduce its fuel expense by $300 million annually and ensure jet fuel availability in the Northeast.”

Since the amount of Jet fuel produced in this refinery is not large enough to cover its needs, Delta will exchange gasoline and other refined products from the complex for jet fuel from Phillips 66 and BP through multi-year agreements.

Two questions come to mind after reading all that has been said recently about Delta’s new business adventure.

  • Is the profit margin of a crude oil producer so much higher than the margin of an airline that a refinery can be interesting to an airline while the oil company wants to shut it down? If this is true what can we conclude about the price structure of crude oil?
  • Is there a synergetic value between a jet fuel producer and an airline company like Delta?

I must say that I don’t see it. I do not see how a specialized company with years of experience in the industry can be less profitable than a newbie. Can Delta utilize some of their underutilized assets or increase the efficiency of the supply chain to decrease the overall expenses of Jet Fuel production? Even if it does reduce the costs of refinement, Delta still has only a part of the Jet fuel production value chain under control. Volatility of crude oil price is still a significant factor that is out of their control since the refinement process only accounts for 12-18 percent of the Jet Fuel price. The focus should be on the total costs of ownership and the level of fuel supply control.

On the other hand investors seem to support Delta’s decision – the company’s shares went up by 10% since the rumor about the acquisition of the refinery started to spread.

I guess we will soon find out if this was the right decision but I am sure that other airline companies are very interested to see the outcome of this venture.

Moving production back

The Economist, April 2012. The third industrial revolutionThe article in the April 21st edition of the Economist indicated the underlying costs for an Apple iPad. In studying this information, I continue to be amazed about a point that many miss: that materials costs are the largest element, accounting for 44% of the costs and 31% of the sales price. Direct labor and overhead are miniscule. Distribution and retail costs are 22%of the costs and 16% of the retail price.

The implications of this information are profound: companies in the U.S. are the most advanced in the concept of purchasing and supply management. We can find materials locally and produce locally and not pay the high costs of transportation, have less flexibility in the use of materials, and can have better inventory positioning.

I have made this case before. Is anyone listening? I can show from a total cost standpoint that U.S. manufacturers can be competitive, even more competitive, than Asian and Chinese suppliers. We need to change the mindset about this to improve control, cost management, and flexibility.

What is wrong with GSA? It is much more than what happened in Las Vegas

So we now know that happened at the GSA conference in Las Vegas. The press has thoroughly covered the conference and the unnecessary expense of over $800,000.

But what is missed are the true problems at GSA:

Read more of this post

Outsourcing is not new: The U.S. has done it for 50 years

Today’s Boston Globe (http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/04/05/president-barack-obama-faults-mitt-romney-for-outsourcing-policies-bain-and-beacon-hill/Er2DiGHPRfP7iaT9krGRjO/story.html) included an article about the chastisement of Mitt Romney regarding purported outsourcing initiatives he pushed that hurt the American Economy. I say give the man a break. Why? The United States has purchased products and services from other countries since the mid-60s. We bought computer chips and memory from Japan. We purchased specialized equipment from Germany. We bought automotive parts from many regions of the world.

Read more of this post

5S Techniques can be effectively applied to Procurement

After a number of Procurement System Reviews performed by Calyptus Consulting Group in the last six months and witnessing how many public sector companies (both large and small) struggle to standardize their work through policies and procedures to be compliant with the Government requirements, it is hard not to notice an overarching rule:

If a company relies on written policies and procedures that are collecting dust on the bookshelf and has no mechanism for ongoing accountability – the procurement process is not sustainable, and its deterioration becomes inevitable. All the deviations from the standardized work have to be corrected as soon as they appear because allowing a staff member to ignore a requirement is a signal to all others that that kind of behavior is acceptable. From that point on, you can only expect things to get worse.

Read more of this post

A new way to evaluate Supplier Capability

I just finished reading the article by Upson, Connelly, Ketchen, and Ranft entitled “Competitor Analysis and Foothold Moves” published in the Academy of Management Journal. (www.aomonline.org)
The authors identify the strategy employed by suppliers that establish a small capability in a market so that it can be recognized as a minor player. Once a major player announces a new product or service, this “foothold” supplier can then introduce a feature or features that can undermine the new release. Too often, organizations use standard vendor lists or rely on companies to self-register. The notion presented here is that the market assessment of suppliers is an aggressive endeavor and requires independent research and analysis.
Oftentimes, the procurement executive does not evaluate the minor players and focuses on the major players due to critical mass, installed base, and reputation. Using this strategy does have the disadvantage in that the “foothold” is not evaluated or given a chance to participate in a large procurement.
The lesson here is that a complete market analysis of potential suppliers include those that have established a foothold in the market and could be a great resource for market change, innovation, and competitive advantage.

Value of Training and Human Resource Development

A few weeks ago I read an article about how companies that invested in human resource development activities before the downturn in 2007-2009 fared much better over the last two-three years. This seems right.

Now comes the latest edition of Training Magazine. In this edition, it details the top 125 firms in terms of training resources being expended. Verizon turns out to be ranked Number 1 followed by Farmers Insurance. Verizon did not publicly disclose its budget but Farmers spent $121 Million.

Are we learning our lesson now? How can we rely on trying to hire experienced staff to be productive? Customers and markets change so rapidly now that a learning organization is critical.

Our business is supply chain management. Investment in training is almost non-existent. We are falling very far behind as a profession and are not growing the staff. In Federal Acquisition, there is a massive exodus due to retirement. The message is that the profession, both represented by private and public sector participants, is not venturing forth with new ideas and trained/competent staff.

Who else is concerned??

Bring home manufacturing

I am glad that we are finally admitting that the rush to outsource to the far reaches of the globe was not particularly smart. While I agree that outsourcing makes sense if the suppliers are capable, and there is a considerable amount of labor involved in providing the service or making the product, I have always had the view that many decisions were “knee-jerk” reactions and not based on total costs.

My project team and I were recently in Gary Indiana, a town that has diminished in size in the last two years. The smokestacks of the nearby steel mill are active and there is production, and I wonder why we just can’t get back to business, forming close relationships with NAFTA suppliers and making products that are cost-effective. This philosophy can and should be applied to other industries.
Let’s bring back manufacturing based on the factors of efficient supply chain management, low total costs, product and process control, and better inventory management.
A procurement manager in 2000 told me ” We have been told by our President to outsource to China. He did not want to discuss it. We had no choice and it doesn’t make sense”
Hopefully, we are still making sound business decisions but I feel that we need to make better choices.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.