Leadership and Production: Toyota Seat Problem Case Study Analysis

This case study examines a seat problem at Toyota Motor Manufacturing (TMM), focusing on the perspective of Doug Friesen. The analysis involves understanding the issue through discussions with key personnel, reviewing the Toyota Production System (TPS), and employing the "Five Whys" exercise to identify the root cause. The solution emphasizes establishing quality control measures, particularly through Andon pulls. The options for addressing the overflow parking area are discussed, with a recommendation for prioritizing Quality Control to ensure customer satisfaction and prevent future problems. The study contrasts the current handling of defective seats with TPS principles, highlighting deviations from Just-in-Time (JIT) and Jidoka principles. The core problem identified is product proliferation, which has increased the complexity of seat variations. The case explores specific issues like cross-threading and hook breakages, and the costs associated with the modifications. The assignment provides insights into leadership, production, and quality management within a manufacturing context.

Case study : Toyota Motor Manufacturing
What would you do to address the seat problem ? Where would you focus your attention and
solution efforts?
As a Doug Friesen , I will learn all the situation from key people who are connected to assembly
line to supplier. I will spend more time with the managers of TMM and managers of KFS and
review Toyota Production System (TPS).
I focus my attention on ‘Five Whys’ exercise which helps in identifying root cause.I would focus
on establishing quality with the help of Andon Pulls. I called a meeting with group leaders to
take preventive measure to stop the occurrence of the problem and the team leaders to respond
rapidly.Major focus rely on the overflow parking area.
What options exist? What would you recommend ? why ?
There are many options like Andon pulls, Assembly operations, Production control, Quality
control, purchasing with all these factors .We also have just-in-time, jidoka, Heijunka, Kanban
cards, Replacement seat.
I would recommend QUALITY CONTROL because the department of quality control always
seeked to attain goal by setting quality standards. Quality Control inspected vehicle as per
customer experience. Quality Control engineers are called by assembly group leader to solve out
assembly control problems . QC provided quick feedback so that operations could flow easily til
final assembly. QC had a unique function i.e. proactive which helped in preventing problem in
the first occurrence.
Quality control department coordinated with production control deptt. for the delivery of
material on time and quality problem directly with suppliers of parts.
Where,if at all,does the current routine for handling defective seats deviate from the principles of
the Toyota production system?
Toyota Production System had an intention to reduce cost by eliminating waste. TPS provided
two principles to identifying what was waste in reality. Just-in-Time principles and Principle of
Jidoka.These principles reflected two assumptions-
● Actual needs would differ from a production plan which were unpredictable, no matter
how it has been planned.
● Problems identified instantly on the shop floor which deviate planned operating
conditions.

TPS encouraged continuously planning process by alerting plant people because TPS depended
on human infrastructure ,Principles of JIT and Jidoka were inclined to shutdowns and would be
paralyzed without capable person who would solve present problem promptly.
A healthy discussion of a problem would start with “let’s go see it” and then tend to meet at a
point i.e. “Five Why” exercise.This exercise resides of getting the answer of “Why” questions
until core cause was discovered.
Current routine handling where team member used the andon cord which provided help to report
the problem to the concern team leader before installation of defective seat.After that Team
leader used the andon cord to signal okay and tagged the car so that quality control inspector
could be alert about seat problem. As usual then his car went through the rest of the assembly
line with defective seat in it.Then the car was send to clinic area upon the line -off only if
problem was correctable there .If problem is for replacement seat then the car was transferred to
overflow parking area where order of replacement seat was done and the car was remained for
KFS’s special delivery. Defective seat were returned to KFS.
Investigating problems on the line was an exception to standard practice at the expense of shut
down the assembly line. We have reason to stop the line-
● Final assembly employees already aware about the problem
● There were possibilities to complete production of car without assemblies of seat.
What is the real problem facing friesen?
Product Proliferation is the real problem. Camry (old model) seat had four colors and three styles
.1992,Camry offered only three seat colors but had five styles. The real problem identified when
TMM launched Camry Wagons with variations of eight seat but served to whole market is the
biggest challenge
Cross - threading is the only problem they could think of was occasional incidents i.e. when
member of team shot a bolt. Team leader were able to fix this problem in 30 seconds with the
help of re-tapping tool. When any member would damage the seat accidently covering with
hand tools,but they were not able to recall any current occurrences.In the installation of Rear
side bolster, a hook extended from the back of that part but hook broke off sometime.
Three facts are learned from QC -
Modification in the pertinent tooling for the hook would cost $50,000 to KFS
Tsutsumi had not reported problem

At the time of new model introduction, hook breakage incidence had gone towards the bottom .