Industry Insights

Profitability, A Byproduct of Standards and Process

By John C. Willis III

Have you ever marveled at how golfers hit balls so far without appearing to exert much effort, or how some maintenance providers seem to turn out projects on time, on budget, and without heroic effort? They have a lot in common and both start with a predefined, repeatable standard process.

So how do you define a process or standard and why do you need both to be successful? First, let's look at and understand the critical importance of a standard. We can never know if we are efficient at what we do without knowing how long it should take to be done correctly. Often when we repeat a task later we seem to take more or less time (negative and positive variation, respectively). Jobs like airframe inspections and avionics installations are generally bid and therefore your livelihood is at risk with negative variation. If there is too much positive variation from the industry or market norm you likely will not win the job twice.

The standard is the number of hours a job or task should take on a recurring basis. It assumes you work the assignment without rework or interruptions and have the proper tools available. Most published standards are established using process controls to make sure workers approach the task fully prepared. Others are developed locally by best shop practices.

So why is the standard so important? You win jobs by being able to compete successfully. Once a standard is established ensure that other external hours are not charged to the task. For instance, if an annual inspection says inspect, then inspect. If it says wheels need NDT every third inspection, make sure the removal, tear down, paint preparation, and NDT stay out of the standard. Often we see poorly documented logbooks on aging aircraft generate excessive manhours to research. The annual inspection standard never contemplated aged or poorly documented logs. Most maintenance company standards target 10 percent of the inspection time for document review and quality control, therefore you should anticipate having only 90 percent of the time for the production process, and you need to develop a plan accordingly.

How do you plan to achieve an inspection in only 90 percent of the allowable manhours? Just like a pro golfer plays under par, you break the inspection or task into logical sections, assign the target time for each section, and follow that order. Do not allow team members to take the tasks they like doing or overall efficiency will be lost. When you assign a task to a coworker, make sure they understand the task and time expectation and if they do not encourage them to ask for guidance. I have seen good people run over the standard 100 percent or more before asking for clarification or assistance. By then it is too late.

Once you have defined the appropriate task sequencing, sometimes aided by a task card system, you have defined a basic process flow. Real efficiency comes from preplanning that event so you have all the tools close by or in a specific inspection cart, have all the inspection parts in advance for the task at hand, and have the appropriate tech data in some form at the workstation. You are now starting to look like Tiger Woods. Have you noticed his tool (golf) bag has every tool he plans to use for that course, not always the exact same set, and it has the spare balls for the occasional hazard so he can stay focused on the task at hand, not chasing after a part or an additional club he forgot?

With the sequence of events mapped, the tools verified and readily available, and the inspections parts on hand, we are done with standards, right? No. Now it's time to sign the scorecard to keep from being disqualified. You need to review all the sub-tasks, inspection and log research hours, and document the variation. Say inspection hours are over the standard. Are they as a result of internal inefficiency or poor prior documentation? For variations on the production side, is it a result of the process, supervision, or employee training? Now we have the next set of actions to keep this from reoccurring. If prior documentation was a problem you have something to discuss with the customer. If you have production variation, you either have a training or process modification issue. Anything else is a discrepancy to be discussed with the customer.

So before you sign that next scorecard or work order be sure to review it against the standard and ask yourself, "Can we do better next time or are there items we need to discuss with the customer?" If discussions are necessary you will have the comfort of knowing why the variation occurred. I think you will find fewer costly heroic actions are required as a result.

John C. Willis III is president of consulting firm Aviation Management Solutions and was formerly head of Raytheon Aircraft's service center network.