Automation: It’s Not All-or-Nothing
Gains over time and incremental changes can make all the difference
If your operation is mature, up-and-running, and delivering results, is it possible to automate individual steps and achieve excellent ROI? The answer is yes — but only in cases where your process is well-defined and correctly segmented into steps you can analyze for productivity gains. This kind of localized productivity is often the intersection of productivity and automation.
What gains are possible?
Imagine a sequence of activities in your process flow.
For a manufacturing operation, that may look like this:
- Induction of raw materials or parts into a production line.
- The line moves between workstations, where components are installed or assembled.
- At each station, manual work is being done: picking, installing, assembly.
- Finished goods emerge from the end of the line.
- Goods are palletized or packaged for shipping or the next process step.
- Then, goods are conducted to the next step — a shipping dock, reserve storage, etc. if the finished good is a feeder component, it may enter another workflow; the process could repeat.
This is an extremely simple “thousand-foot” view of a process. The line may extend into other areas. It may be fed by carts, conveyed or hand-carried. Each step includes sub-processes that can be automated or semi-automated. Even before induction, you can look at staging, storage, restocking and other upstream processes.
Order-picking operations offer a similar flow, depending on the order-picking strategy. For simplicity, a pick-and-pass system may induct a picking tote or carton, which is then filled as the order passes various SKU locations. Once the order is completed, it moves to the next steps: packing, packaging, shipping, etc.
Understanding each step thoroughly allows you to evaluate where incremental gains can happen. Stability and definition are where it starts.Â
Each step in the process can be improved for localized optimization
If your sequence is well-defined, productive and stable, you can then work towards optimizing each step. This may allow you to combine steps as you find ways to simplify the process. For instance, could packing and quality control be combined? Could pickers at the final station seal cartons or do quick counts? These steps may or may not be served by automation, but this analysis lets you make those decisions.
Processes are easier to optimize the more stable they are and the longer they’ve been in place. You’ll have data. You’ll have results. You’ll have customer and employee feedback. You’ll know where the snags are, and where thing are running smoothly.
Inertia is the enemy. After all, why change a long-term, functional, working process?
Fight the tendency to target only your problems. If you’re reacting to apparent issues, and pump your energy, time and capital into “fixes,” you aren’t actually improving. Your opportunities for significant gains do not come from putting out fires. They come from the deeply embedded, repeatable steps in the sequence. If you pick the same suite of parts every day, thousands of times, and it’s working well, there is every reason to concentrate on that process. It’s where the money is.
You may have to contend with the “we’ve always done it this way” mindset in your organization. There will come a day when the status quo doesn’t work anymore and the fact that you’ve always done it that way becomes the problem.Â
What is your review process? How do you validate your assumptions? Is the process actually working?
How do you prioritize? Of course, you must deal with pressing issues. You can’t let those fester. This is the classic “must-do” vs. the “want-to” task. You must fix issues, but that cannot consume you, or improvement is impossible. Taking the long view that improvements must continue, even for working processes is a long process. It takes time to define, understand and conceive of improvements that can drive productivity gains.
It can be months or years between the day you start and the day you are confident that your plan of action is systematic, not anecdotal. Doing this hard, analytical work means you won’t make expensive capital investments you don’t need, or can’t return your investment. It may let you buy time as you deal with issues like labor shortages.
What can simple process improvements do?
Can you update the process in ways that improve the situation with minimal capital investment? This may be as simple as rearranging the process flow to reduce transit time between workstations, tweaking controls or adding ergonomic storage positions that let people get more done with less effort. Can you involve your workers in the concept of improvement over time? Can you incentivize them to contribute more ideas?
As difficult as it is to add labor, would (for example) one quality control checker reduce production kinks and increase quality? Can you ensure that your specifications are met this way, with minimal investment in time and capital?
When to consider automation
Incremental automation cannot replace good processes and in fact demands that those processes be stable, working and repeatable. Process analysis will help you identify the areas where automation, semi-automation or similar upgrades can enable improvements. The key is that the automation must synchronize with, supplement and improve the process.
People define automation in ways that can include everything from full robotics to cobots to simple conveyor loops that reduce human involvement. Whatever you call these upgrades, they must synchronize with your process.Â
Automation vs. manual work
When machinery does work at its best, it excels at power and precise work. It can be much faster than people for repeatable steps. People, on the other hand, are superior when it comes to work that requires dexterity and perception. They can pick small parts with minute differences better than machines. They can rotate both the part and its destination better than any type of automation.
Power vs. dexterity vs. precision vs. perception: decision factors
- If a sorter can quickly and accurately divert packages to the right destination, human skill and dexterity have little value. In this way, automation can be more precise and fluid than people executing the same task.
- Palletizing robots are ideal for speed, throughput and power. They remove people from strenuous and dangerous tasks.
- When picking very small parts or working at fine detail levels, people outperform automated systems despite improving vision systems and machine dexterity.
- Machinery should perform brute force functions, such as palletizing heavy bags or lifting beefy components.
- AGVs can transport (and store) pallets or unit loads from point to point, which fits the power concept.
For automation to make sense, it must be impactful and cost-effective. You should focus on proven technology with large-scale implementations that have endured the test of time and functionality. Your existing workforce shouldn’t require extensive technical training to work with the new systems, although you may need new staff who maintain and tweak the automated solution.
For instance, light-directed picking systems strive to simplify the picking task and to reduce the training curve.
Most importantly, automation must become part of your proven workflow without disrupting the process. Its impacts up and downstream should be evaluated so that it becomes an enhancement, not a replacement. This is how incremental gains are established, and how you can focus on productivity incrementally, rather than an entirely new system.
More resources
- Warehouse Automation: The Cost of Doing Nothing
- A Quick Guide to Order Picking Methods & Productivity
- Options for Manufacturing Cost Reduction
Scott Stone is Cisco-Eagle's Vice President of Marketing with more than thirty years of experience in material handling, warehousing and industrial operations. His work is published in multiple industry journals an websites on a variety of warehousing topics. He writes about automation, warehousing, safety, manufacturing and other areas of concern for industrial operations and those who operate them.