First-run success achieved
Lean Six Sigma · DMAIC · Manufacturing
Increasing First-Run Parts from 60% toward 90%
An interactive process-improvement case study focused on reducing first-run defects, eliminating handoff waste, improving workplace organization, and shortening order lead time.
Project Outcome
0%
First-run success
Baseline60%
→
Achieved87%
The stated project goal was 90%; the documented result reached 87% while the new process continued to stabilize.
Defects per day
Estimated sigma level
Average process days
Executive Summary
A manufacturing problem translated into a measurable improvement system
The baseline process produced correct first-run parts only 60% of the time. Errors included wrong holes, incorrect locations, wrong material, incorrect part size, and programming-number issues.
40%
Baseline first-run failure rate
Scrap and rework increased cost, delayed customers, and created avoidable stress across production teams.
3
Verified root-cause areas
Excessive order-process time, assembly handoffs, and an unorganized Finn Power work area were supported by the project evidence.
5S
Workplace organization plus process redesign
The project used visual controls, flow changes, shadow boards, targeted cross-training, and removal of non-value-added steps.
87%
Documented first-run success rate
Performance rose from 60% to 87%, daily defects fell from 12 to 2, and lead-time indicators improved.
01 · Define
Clarify the problem, scope, business impact, and goal
Problem Statement
First-run parts were correct only 60% of the time
Defects included incorrect holes, wrong locations, incorrect materials, incorrect part size, and wrong program numbers—creating thousands of dollars in weekly loss.
Goal Statement
Increase first-run success from 60% to 90%
The target date documented in the goal builder was June 20, 2025, with the project framed around defect-rate improvement.
In Scope
- Production process flow
- Finn Power CNC punch press area
- Blueprints and programming workflow
- Storage and visual organization systems
Out of Scope
- New enterprise software
- New tooling purchases
- Broad cross-training program
DMAIC Timeline
DefineJan 17
MeasureFeb 02
AnalyzeFeb 28
ImproveMar 28
ControlJun 03
Interactive SIPOC
Hover or focus on each stage to explore the process
Select a stage to view its role in the system.
02 · Measure
Establish the baseline and quantify the size of the opportunity
Before Lean
After Lean
Documented reduction in defects per million opportunities.
Reported project estimate after Lean improvements.
The presentation identifies this as one of the largest process gains.
Lead-Time Trend
Orders moved through the process faster
The project recorded a decline from an average of roughly 32 process days toward 25 days, with later observations reaching approximately 20 days.
32Baseline days
25Later average
20Best observed
03 · Analyze
Separate assumptions from verified causes
Interactive Fishbone
Select a category to inspect contributing factors
Choose a category below.
Long manufacturing cycle time
Root-Cause Hypothesis Review
Click each row to see the verification result
Select a hypothesis to display its evidence.
Value-Added Flow Analysis
Most opportunity existed in waiting and handoffs
The largest opportunity identified in the project was reducing wait time between departments.
04 · Improve
Redesign the flow and make the correct process easier to follow
5S the Finn Power area
Organize tools and information, reduce motion waste, and make abnormalities visible.
Add visual controls
Use shadow boards and whiteboards to create clear tool locations and work status.
Restructure handoffs
Remove redundant approval loops and prevent parts from returning to the same person twice.
Targeted cross-training
Strengthen execution where the solution matrix showed practical value and employee support.
Before / After Process Map
Use the slider to compare process complexity
−2 unnecessary steps
−1 day estimated wait
Before
Order
→
Floor Manager
→
Shop Manager
→
Programmer
→
Assembler Approval
→
Finn Power
→
Assembler
→
Shipping
After
Order
→
Shop Manager
→
Programmer
→
Finn Power
→
Assembly
→
Shipping
↔
Solution Selection Matrix
Relative weighted scores
Shadow board
172
Cross-training for Finn Power
146
Whiteboard for tooling
118
Update blueprints
96
Blueprint training
71
Add employee
62
05 · Control
Transfer ownership and protect the gains
Standard Work
Document the revised process and keep visual controls in place.
Ongoing Monitoring
Track first-run yield, daily defects, DPMO, and order lead time.
Process Owner Handoff
Confirm ownership, training, documentation, and continued review.
Sponsor Sign-Off
Close the project after the operational owner accepts the new process.
Final Results
The process improved substantially, although the 90% target was not fully reached
The documented result of 87% demonstrates a strong gain from the 60% baseline. The project also reported lower defect frequency, shorter lead times, improved morale, and reduced customer waiting.
Review Full Project PDFLessons Learned
Improvement depended on process clarity and employee involvement
“We have always done it this way” resistance can be reduced when employees see the process become easier.
5S should be maintained as an operating discipline, not treated as a one-time cleanup.
Include people from every part of the process and recognize progress visibly.
Project Resources
Ready for GitHub Pages and portfolio integration
This site is fully static, responsive, and requires no build system.