OTRAS CONSIDERACIONES

The results achieved by the new plant can be focused upon from different perspectives. Due to the closure of the factory in Uddevalla, only short term effects could be observed, though there are several indications of fa-

vourable long term potential as well. Focus will be put on competence and organisation, firstly on the results in the short run and secondly the long run potentials.

4.1 The performance of the Uddevalla plant: Competence Work content

In most assembly plants there are short cycle work tasks of about one to two minutes in duration. One such cycle is called a ‘balance’. ‘Multiskilled’ workers on an assembly line are responsible for up to ten ‘balances’, which means that they have a good command of about 20 minutes of assembly work. In these plants, the assembly line controls the pace and work is measured by the number of minutes, and not by its content related to the total assembly of a car. In the Uddevalla plant, all workers knew how to assemble at least one quarter of a car, which means that all workers controlled the assembly of at least one ‘assembly-functional group of materials’. One quarter of a car equals about two hours of work. One point in a ‘reflective production system’, is that work content is superior to time. Other competence derived fundaments are the understanding of a meaningful whole, overview over the work object and tasks of the work day. Also, that control over the work distribution and pace in the teams is essential for a successful result. All this means that quality is what matters most, time and volume are mere restrictions.

Flexibility at work

In the Uddevalla factory there was a great flexibility concerning competence and work performance. It was possible, although it was not common, for teams to form subgroups. It was easier in the newer product shops, those who were equipped according to the ergonomic/efficiency idea, where the car was completed on one work station, than in the three older product shops where the car was assembled on two different work stations. As indicated above it was possible for two persons to assemble the whole car, if they had the appropriate competence.

In addition, when the Uddevalla factory closed down, approximately 25 persons mastered the assembling of a complete car, with high quality and within the full production pace. In fact they could control the same work content that is distributed over hundreds of persons in an assembly line fac-

the basic competence equals the compentence of at least 60 workers taken together in a plant with an assembly line.

Improving competence

Improving competence is a fundmental task in industry. In the beginning of the Uddevalla factory’s production, there were problems other than those which appear in a factory with a serial product flow. The unusual parallel flow pattern in Uddevalla caused some problems in the beginning. First, there were some problems related to the independence between the parallel teams in the product shops, making the diffusion of improvements diffi-

cult. Second, there were problems related to the independence between the parallel product shops, each of them eager to create a productive milieu by itself.

There were also problems caused by the high level of dependence between the material shops and the product shops as they were linked to each other in a serial flow. The problems that appeared between the teams and between the product shops respectively, were mainly caused by the absence of a smooth information flow. Two measures were taken which led to success. One of them, was to flatten the organization in the plant, so that the product shop leaders, all were put into the leading group of the factory (only three levels in the plant). This gave the product shop and the material shop leaders better insights into each others working conditions and bottle neck problems. The second measure, aimed at improving the diffusion of experiences and new and better ways to arrange the assembly work. Here, the production techni-

cians were decentralized into the product shops, where their work time was divided between two tasks. One, was to do their production technical work in the office and to keep in touch with and spread improvements to the other parts of the entire factory. The other work task to be performed by the tech-

nicians, was to work with the teams in their product shop, in the assembly work. This made them more skilled in the various assembly tasks and made them think in ‘real categories’ rather than in ‘administrative categories’. In this way, a process of very rapid and well structured improvements in the entire factory was started. Some good results were yielded immediately and the probability of more seemed likely to come.

Employment strategy

The employment strategy used was closely related to the principles of com-

petence growth and competence utilization. The strategy was also meant to lead to a reduction in sick leave and an increase in teamwork. The person-

nel in the Uddevalla factory were brought together in several ways. There were about 40 percent women, a blend of ages, and in the beginning Volvo looked for former shipyard workers. The goal was to employ 25 per-cent of

the employees of the age of 25 years and younger, 50 percent between 25 and 45 years and another 25 percent over 45 years of age, and 40 percent were to be women. Each team was composed so that both sexes and more than one age group were represented. The aim was to make use of the fact that people are different and that they have different positive and negative qualities. The sick leave was lower than in other factories in the Swedish auto industry, but not as low as many persons had hoped, during the plan-

ning phase.

Flat organization

The objective was to form a flat organization in the Uddevalla factory. In the beginning there were four levels in the organizational scheme; plant manager, production leader, product shop leaders and teams. During the last year of the life of the factory, there were only three levels namely, plant manager, product shop leaders and teams. Therefore, the flow of informa-

tion between the top manager and the shop floor was very rapid, compared to any other assembly plant.

In the product shops, the teams were put in focus. There were eight teams in every product shop. In the teams there were two kinds of tasks to be met by the team members. The most important one was car building, as there would be no plant without production. All team members thus were car builders. There were also complementary specialist taks to be mastered by the teams. Team members who had expressed interest in performing specialist tasks, were taught to perfom these taks. The tasks were for example, personnel issues (information, recruitment and planned days off), as well as mainte-

nance and teaching. There was also a role as team leader, who per-formed most of the work tasks done by foremen in traditional factories. The team leader was appointed by the team members and the product shop leader together. The team leader role was rotated among the team members, who had aquired the relevant competence and skills required for the role. The team leader as well as the other specialists of each team were all involved in the car building during most of the working day.

As indicated above, each product shop had a production technician, who was the most skilled specialist in technical aspects related to the product shop. The technician was also responsible for spreading technical as well as organizational improvements, to all teams in the product shop and to his/her collegues, as well as to the production technicians in the other product shops. To succeed and keep his or her own practical knowledge in car building up to date, the technicians worked in the teams for a portion of every week.

The wage system was created to increase according to additional com-

petence. There was also a basic wage, dependent on the time worked at the job and the individual skills in basic car building. Extra pay for increased

competence in car building was added per hour for every additional quarter of the car mastered in assembly. In addition to this, there was extra amount for each specialist competence (personnel, technician, maintenance and teach-

ing), and for the team leader competence. Then there was also a bonus system (measured on quality and quantity), based on the team performance.

Comments on quality, production volume, productivity and model changes

The quality index followed a positive curve from 1988 (before the opening

of the factory), up till the closure of the plant. The highest quality ratings occurred during the spring of 1993, the period when people knew that they would be unemployed within some months.

Due to the falling sales figures for Volvo during the period when the Uddevalla factory was fully trimmed in, the production volume never

reached the total capacity level. But, the figures in the production plans were achieved.

The productivity showed a positive development. In the autumn of 1992,

before the decision to close the factory was made, the productivity figures for some weeks was far better in the Uddevalla plant than in the old Tors-

landa plant.

The Uddevalla factory was the most successful in changing from one year model to the next. The same results appear whether you compare time

or costs for the changes. The Uddevalla factory made the fastest changes, three years in a row and the factory also made the changes to the lowest cost per car. This is due to the high competence level and the low level of mechanization.

4.2 Potentials of ‘Reflective Production Systems’ indicated by the Ud- devalla plant

Some long-term potentials, derived from the ‘Reflective Production Sys-

tem’, were fit for use in Uddevalla during the last half year, before the de- cision to close down the factory. Revolutionary steps were taken in relation to the market. First, the factory only produced cars that were already sold. No stock cars at all were being produced in the Uddevalla factory during this period. Second, a number of customers were invited to follow the production of the car they had bought. This procedure was favourable for Volvo. Where else in the world could a customer follow the birth of his own car, and get an overview over the process? It was also favourable to the customer to recieve the personal touch, which strengthened the incentives for the teams to make superior quality. It was also favourable to the team, who have personal rela-

tions with a customer which made the job still more stimulating.

The production planning in the factory was a factor of flexibility and right time delivery. The customer could make changes in his order to the factory,

for example orders for new special options, and this resulted in negligtible delays. Changes in orders did not cause the replanning of the entire produc-

tion program, or to put the changed car at the end of the production program. Any of these actions would cause delays in delivery. Thus, the production planning could be used as a tool for flexibility, and it made it easier to pro-

duce cars exactly adapted to the demand of the customers.

Another long term potential concerns the relation between production and preproduction, which is a field of increasing importance in the automobile industry. The Uddevalla factory had unique possibilities to use the complex and skilled knowledge of all its competent team members in order to im-

prove products as well as, tools and processes. This potentiality becomes clear only to those who adopt the thinking behind the ‘Reflective Production System’. Others, will not be able to recognize it. They will think rather that the ‘Reflective Production System’ is at best, a local Swedish improvement in production for social purposes. It indeed was true that the social factors worked in favour of the Uddevalla factory, but it also proved to be a good investment for high productivity, effectivity and flexibility.