Putting it On the Line at MBUSI
Quality and efficiency are guiding principles of the Mercedes Production System pioneered at MBUSI in Alabama
Article by Susan Warner with Gary Anderson
Images from MBUSI Archives
When the history of the automobile is considered, most enthusiasts think of progress in design and technology of the vehicle itself. For example, milestones were marked by the lightweight internal-combustion engine and self-propelled vehicles invented by Gottlieb Daimler and Karl Benz in 1886, the Mercedes Simplex in 1901 – with its modern configuration of drivetrain, steering mechanism and passenger positions – the structural innovation of integral fenders of the Pontons in the early 1950s, and the succession of safety features that included collapsible safety cells, antilock braking systems and modern active safety systems after 1960.
But the success of the automobile as the preferred form of motorized transportation all over the world is dependent at least, if not more, on the process by which the automobile is manufactured. Without continuing advances to improve efficiency, reduce costs, enhance quality, and increase productivity, the automobile – if it continued to exist at all – would still be an artisan’s product enjoyed only by a very few and very wealthy individuals.
In a fascinating way, the evolution of automotive manufacturing methods has been as much a cultural process as a collective process. Innovation occurred first in the United States, and then in Europe, and was overtaken by Japanese innovation in the last part of the 20th century.
American manufacturing innovations
Although automobiles were constructed in most advanced countries within 15 years of the first breakthroughs in Germany, the two fundamental innovations that moved the industry from craft to manufacturing were developed in the United States and very rapidly adopted by the largest European automotive companies.
In 1908, Cadillac introduced standardized and interchangeable parts, without which the modern factory system would simply be impossible. Without the ability to produce multiple numbers of individual parts to common specification for assembly into a large number of cars, companies would have been limited to the skills and productivity of individual artisans.
The moving assembly line, along with the mass-production concept of automobile assembly (that is, assembly of the automobile with the simplest possible repeatable steps), was the brainstorm of Henry Ford with assistance from time-and-motion specialist Frederick Taylor. This process had two separate benefits: First, assembly productivity dramatically improved as wasted motions were gradually deleted from the system; and secondly, unskilled laborers could reach maximum productivity with minimal training.
Gradually adopted in Europe and Japan, this system became the common manufacturing process for all automobile companies within a few years, and the huge automobile factories replaced backyard workshops of the previous period. Any quality issues were simply handled by giving each vehicle a quick inspection and test at the end of the assembly line. Unacceptable products were fixed if possible, or disassembled and scrapped.
In basic terms, all control occurred at the point of output. Rather than interrupt workflow, company officials believed that the greatest efficiency would result if all inspections and repairs were conducted at the end of the line.
Quality specialists did recognize that worker training and motivation could reduce the amount of rework required, so attention was devoted to these issues. With its traditional education, apprenticeship system and pride in workmanship, Germany was generally acknowledged to be the leader in quality utilizing the basic assembly-line process. At the same time, Germany rapidly adopted automation – with robotics, high-tech inspection and calibration methods used to the greatest degree in the country’s plants – largely because of the capability and preparedness of its work force to adopt sophisticated manufacturing methods. In particular, the global marketplace recognized Mercedes-Benz as producing the highest-quality automobiles.
Japanese manufacturing innovations
The next significant round of innovations came from Japan. As the country rebuilt factories from rubble after World War II and gradually recovered economically, the automobile industry searched for sources of improvement – finding the key, ironically – in U.S. industrial engineering developments. Two processes, which the Japanese generally referred to as “kaizen” and “kanban,” became the core of Japan’s enviable quality and efficiency standards – and ultimately key principles for the manufacturing system that is today known as “Lean Manufacturing.”
Kaizen is the Japanese term for a method of continuous improvement in the manufacturing process, with every participant encouraged to look for opportunities to improve quality and efficiency; these bottom-up ideas are incorporated into the production process as quickly as possible.
Interestingly, important elements of the Japanese production system were enhanced by the work of W. Edwards Deming, an American who developed a system of statistical quality control for the U.S. war effort during World War II. After the war, he was assigned to General McArthur’s staff overseeing civilian transition of Japanese industry, and introduced his system of quality control throughout Japanese industry, but especially in the automobile sector. Largely ignored in the United States after his return, his methods were only adopted by U.S. manufacturers after 1981 when he was recognized by Japan for his contribution to the country’s economic revival.
The concept integral to the Japanese system was to control input by measuring output and then correct the sources of problems. When statistical sampling indicated that a particular flaw was occurring at an unacceptable rate, production managers – in co-operation with the work force – collaborated to identify changes and eliminate the problem.
Kanban is the Japanese term for the system of inventory reduction pioneered at Toyota, often called by the English term, “just in time.” Taking advantage of the decentralized Japanese manufacturing system, parts equal to one day’s requirements would be delivered in small baskets directly from the subsidiary producer to the point on the assembly line where they were needed. Cards (called “kanban”) affixed to them showed the supplier’s name and the quantity of components in the basket. In the system’s earliest form, when the basket was emptied, the card was returned to the supplier, which generated an order for another container with the same number of parts, becoming a form of mechanical inventory control as well as production efficiency.
In the more complex systems now using just-in-time inventory control, an order from a customer for a specific automobile, including color, trim, and accessories desired, is converted by the computer system into a set of orders for needed components, which are sent to their suppliers indicating when and where those items are to be delivered. Most parts are still often sorted, assembled and delivered in small plastic boxes with the order information affixed to them on small cards.
The results of this lean production system were exemplified by Toyota’s 1988 introduction of the Lexus in the United States. American reviewers judged this automobile to be the equivalent in quality to the very best of German and American automobiles. Moreover, with the efficiency of the Japanese system, the Lexus could be sold at a substantially lower price than the luxury competition. The Lexus – similar to the Mercedes-Benz and Cadillac cars before it – was a wake-up call to other countries’ automotive industries.
Mercedes Production System
Based on economic and marketing reasons, Daimler-Benz made the decision to expand its production facilities beyond Germany a mere four years later in 1992, and selected Vance, Alabama, as the site. The product would be the brand-new M-Class, considered a successor to the Geländewagen and designed to capitalize on the growing appetite in the United States for sport-utility vehicles.
As Don Erwin, one of the participants in the site-selection process said at the StarTech Pioneers Panel on May 19, Daimler-Benz decided to “produce a vehicle that had never been produced before, in a plant that had not existed before, in a region that had never produced an automobile before, with a workforce that had never even worked in an automobile plant.”
Perhaps the outcome was the response to the challenges presented by the Japanese auto industry and the opportunity to work with what designers describe as a “clean sheet of paper” and production managers call a “green-field project.” For whatever reason, designers and production engineers given the task of conceptualizing to reality the Vance production facility for the M-Class took maximum advantage of the opportunity.
The result is now known globally throughout Mercedes-Benz Cars as the Mercedes Production System (MPS) for modern vehicle production. The approach is one that builds on everything achieved before in automotive production systems: standardized parts, assembly-line systems, worker training and motivation, just-in-time inventory control, and continuous improvement. At the same time, all available technology – including robotics, sensors, automation, computer controls, and environmentally sensitive practices – would be employed in building the new facility and its production systems.
More than that, the engineers, designers, and managers weren’t content to build a new plant that would simply be equal to the best existing automotive plant in the world. Rather, they wanted to move the benchmarks forward by applying new innovations on top of state-of-the-art production systems and technologies.
As seen in the pictures accompanying this article, the tangible aspects of the manufacturing process are nothing short of breathtaking. In some parts of the plant, only a few team members can be seen, while an extravagantly complicated ballet of robots performs the actual manufacturing work. In other parts of the open production facilities, team members use a combination of human ability and computer-managed sensors and measurement systems to accomplish tasks and inspections in a manner that machines will never master.
But the true innovation is not visible; instead, it is a matter of the attitudes and practices that each of the team’s more than 3,000 members share. Very soon after the new site was selected in Alabama and the design of the M-Class was advanced enough to begin designing production systems, a goal was articulated for the new plant: “In order to survive … we must grow, change, and continuously improve.” The guiding principle was quality – the heritage trait of Mercedes-Benz – as well as efficiency, necessary for competitive success in a modern global economy.
Customized lean-production philosophy
The principles start with the concept of lean manufacturing – not much different from the Japanese just-in-time system overlaid on the American assembly line system. The goal is to manufacture without waste of time, materials, or capital.
Manufacturing is effected by a just-in-time basis, producing only what is needed, when it is needed, in the quantity and quality that is needed. Unlike traditional automotive manufacturing where production levels are maintained at a theoretically efficient level regardless of variations in demand, the principle of pull production is used at the Mercedes plant. Only after an order is received – either from a dealer on behalf of a specific customer, or by a dealer to fill a showroom slot for marketing purposes – is production initiated.
Combined with the just-in-time production method, the result is minimum inventory on hand at all times; there will never be an instance when acres of unsold cars fill storage lots.
At the same time, emphasis on quality becomes not only a means to assure “the best or nothing” for the customer, it becomes an integral part of the MPS philosophy of customized lean production. By producing only high-quality products, waste is reduced or eliminated. Within the plant, team members talk about a four-loop system of quality inspection and correction (Quality Feedback Loops) that ensures faults are detected and then corrected, either by fixing the unit or changing the system, as close to the source as possible.
In the first quality loop, team members performing a specific task are responsible for their own quality, meaning they follow standardized work patterns and inspect their own work to ensure “quality is built at the process” in every cycle: A component isn’t allowed to move on to the next team member or process until it is right.
In the second quality loop, if team members encounter a difficulty they can’t resolve, they signal the need for assistance from a supervisor to help resolve the issue. Whether it’s a panel that won’t fit properly or an imperfect component that has slipped through the inspection process when received at the plant, the problem is corrected before the component moves to the next process – i.e., the next internal customer. Working with the supervisor, a team member fixes the problem and decides whether it’s an anomaly or part of a pattern that needs to be corrected earlier on the line.
At the end of each phase of the manufacturing process – within the body shop, paint shop, and assembly shop – completed pieces are pulled off the line at statistically significant intervals and carefully inspected by workers and machines in the third quality loop to assure that the process on that line is within specification; problems are resolved before others appear.
In the fourth quality loop, completed automobiles are taken off the line and undergo a rigorous visual and mechanical inspection, then put through their paces on the test track outside the plant. If any issues are discerned, the flaw is corrected and inspectors determine if there is a pattern indicating an uncorrected problem at some stage of production.
Culture and continuous improvement
All team members are encouraged to work toward continuous improvement within the system. To provide both the motivation and a mechanism for that improvement, the Vance plant early on adopted a number of cultural policies that were unusual for automobile plants in general, and German plants in particular.
From the beginning, for example, all artificial barriers between managerial and worker levels were eliminated so team members wouldn’t be discouraged from identifying problems and suggesting solutions. Team members all wear the same standard uniform, called “team wear”– pants with tops that have the Mercedes logo and the team member’s first name embroidered on them. There is an “open office” atmosphere at the facility, encouraging open communication among work teams and departments. In addition, all team members eat in the same cafeteria and there are no reserved parking spaces for anyone.
Individual teams meet at the beginning of each shift so supervisors can share information of general importance, and to identify and discuss problems and solutions before starting production. The process of correction and improvement continues throughout each shift. This can be heard throughout the plant when easily recognized tunes signal a supervisor’s attention to a particular station where assistance is needed. The result is not merely motivation, but a high degree of communication that has produced a continuous succession of greater achievements toward the twin goals of efficiency and quality.
When the planned Vance plant was first announced, many industry commentators wondered if a previously agricultural region of the United States could maintain and support the quality for which the Mercedes-Benz company from industrialized Germany required for competitive success.
Today, that is no longer an issue. Instead, the Tuscaloosa plant is at the top of the global Mercedes network for efficiency and productivity, and the Mercedes Production System pioneered there has been introduced in every Mercedes-Benz plant worldwide. Meanwhile, other manufacturers examine and emulate principles of the world-class Mercedes-Benz Production System – a benchmark in innovative automotive manufacturing.
Top image: The first phase in the production process at MBUSI begins in the Body Shop where individual panels for the body and chassis are received from the outside suppliers, already pre-formed and stamped. Middle image: Next, the sides, floors, firewalls, roofs, and rear panels are brought together and welded, using a variety of welding and joining techniques to form the “body-in-white.” As the panels come together, sealer is applied between body panels for moisture protection and sound deadening. The body-in-white is the stage of the emerging vehicle when it begins to resemble the finished unit it will become. At MBUSI, the M-, GL- and R-Classes are produced on the same line, intermixed in production in the sequence that the orders are received from the global marketing network of Mercedes-Benz. Bottom image: In the Body Shop, team members oversee and maintain huge arrays of programmed robots. Watching the precision and complexity of this process is fascinating. Throughout the body shop, quality checks are performed in each process, at the end of each zone or line, and at the end of the Body Shop line prior to transport to the Paint Shop. Any problems that are identified are tracked back to their origin and corrected there. After leaving the Body Shop, the metal body enters the paint shop where it goes through several coating steps. Top Image: First, the body-in-white goes through a phosphate dip tank where a layer is applied to prepare it for the electrolysis coating (or E-Coat). Then the body travels through the E-Coat dip tank. The E-Coat is applied for corrosion protection (top image). Next begins the coating process. First the primer is applied by robot spray application. Middle Image: After each coating phase, the body is carefully checked with a combination of touch and vision under bright lights to make sure there are no imperfections. Note the clothing worn by the team member in the Paint Shop. These special suits are required of everyone entering the paint shop to ensure a dust/lint-free environment within the shop. Bottom image: After primer, the color coat or base coat is applied in booths by robotic spray application. The robots are programmed to choose the correct color for each vehicle, from any of the 12 paint colors available at any one time. The spray gun nozzles are purged, cleaned and switched after each color use. Finally, a clear topcoat is applied, again by robotic spray application, over the color coating for protection and shine. A chassis will travel three miles during its trip through the paint shop, including coating, drying, and inspections – moving automatically through the entire process.
After leaving the Paint Shop, the vehicle travels to the Assembly Shop where the wiring and fluid lines are installed, the windows are fitted, the interior is installed, and the chassis and drive train is “married” to the vehicle body. In the Assembly Shop Final Lines and Quality inspection area, the vehicle undergoes its first start-up and running tests before being approved for shipment. Note in these images that most of the work in the Assembly Shop is done by team members, in contrast with the previous two shops that are highly automated by robots. One major exception is that all windows are installed by robots capable of manipulating large components with high precision, a process that would be difficult for humans to perform. At each process or station of the assembly shop lines, the team member is responsible for completing the process within each work cycle as well as checking the quality of the work to ensure “quality at the process.” This is the first of four Quality Feedback Loops to ensure the vehicle is produced to Mercedes-Benz quality standards. Top to bottom: team members in all phases of production perform quality checks for each vehicle at several points throughout the process. Installation of wiring harnesses is done by hand. Doors are assembly separately to match each order, and then rejoin the original body on the final assembly line.
Top image: Door assembly is part of the current onsite manufacturing process at MBUSI. Metal stamping of body panels is still done offsite by suppliers, though that work is done in Alabama by nearby suppliers. Manufacture of the power train – engine, transmission, and differentials – is done in Germany and shipped to MBUSI for installation. The new C-Class will be done differently, with its drive train manufactured in the U.S. Nissan-Renault plant as part of a joint program with the Japanese-French company. Middle image: teamwork is an integral part of the Mercedes Production System, with minimal emphasis on rank and title. In this candid shot, MBUSI president and CEO Markus Schaefer (center) chats with a team member about her work. Schaefer, like his predecessors, spends several hours every day on the shop floor, wearing the same “team wear” as the other team members. Schaefer has been CEO since April 2010, and on July 1 passed his duties to the new CEO, Jason Hoff, who was vice president, logistics, at MBUSI before spending the last three years in Germany organizing global procurement for the new C-Class. Bottom image: In the final processes, the vehicles are programmed, started and put through a run test before shipment to the customer.
Quality and efficiency are guiding principles of the Mercedes Production System pioneered at MBUSI in Alabama
Article by Susan Warner with Gary Anderson
Images from MBUSI Archives
When the history of the automobile is considered, most enthusiasts think of progress in design and technology of the vehicle itself. For example, milestones were marked by the lightweight internal-combustion engine and self-propelled vehicles invented by Gottlieb Daimler and Karl Benz in 1886, the Mercedes Simplex in 1901 – with its modern configuration of drivetrain, steering mechanism and passenger positions – the structural innovation of integral fenders of the Pontons in the early 1950s, and the succession of safety features that included collapsible safety cells, antilock braking systems and modern active safety systems after 1960.
But the success of the automobile as the preferred form of motorized transportation all over the world is dependent at least, if not more, on the process by which the automobile is manufactured. Without continuing advances to improve efficiency, reduce costs, enhance quality, and increase productivity, the automobile – if it continued to exist at all – would still be an artisan’s product enjoyed only by a very few and very wealthy individuals.
In a fascinating way, the evolution of automotive manufacturing methods has been as much a cultural process as a collective process. Innovation occurred first in the United States, and then in Europe, and was overtaken by Japanese innovation in the last part of the 20th century.
American manufacturing innovations
Although automobiles were constructed in most advanced countries within 15 years of the first breakthroughs in Germany, the two fundamental innovations that moved the industry from craft to manufacturing were developed in the United States and very rapidly adopted by the largest European automotive companies.
In 1908, Cadillac introduced standardized and interchangeable parts, without which the modern factory system would simply be impossible. Without the ability to produce multiple numbers of individual parts to common specification for assembly into a large number of cars, companies would have been limited to the skills and productivity of individual artisans.
The moving assembly line, along with the mass-production concept of automobile assembly (that is, assembly of the automobile with the simplest possible repeatable steps), was the brainstorm of Henry Ford with assistance from time-and-motion specialist Frederick Taylor. This process had two separate benefits: First, assembly productivity dramatically improved as wasted motions were gradually deleted from the system; and secondly, unskilled laborers could reach maximum productivity with minimal training.
Gradually adopted in Europe and Japan, this system became the common manufacturing process for all automobile companies within a few years, and the huge automobile factories replaced backyard workshops of the previous period. Any quality issues were simply handled by giving each vehicle a quick inspection and test at the end of the assembly line. Unacceptable products were fixed if possible, or disassembled and scrapped.
In basic terms, all control occurred at the point of output. Rather than interrupt workflow, company officials believed that the greatest efficiency would result if all inspections and repairs were conducted at the end of the line.
Quality specialists did recognize that worker training and motivation could reduce the amount of rework required, so attention was devoted to these issues. With its traditional education, apprenticeship system and pride in workmanship, Germany was generally acknowledged to be the leader in quality utilizing the basic assembly-line process. At the same time, Germany rapidly adopted automation – with robotics, high-tech inspection and calibration methods used to the greatest degree in the country’s plants – largely because of the capability and preparedness of its work force to adopt sophisticated manufacturing methods. In particular, the global marketplace recognized Mercedes-Benz as producing the highest-quality automobiles.
Japanese manufacturing innovations
The next significant round of innovations came from Japan. As the country rebuilt factories from rubble after World War II and gradually recovered economically, the automobile industry searched for sources of improvement – finding the key, ironically – in U.S. industrial engineering developments. Two processes, which the Japanese generally referred to as “kaizen” and “kanban,” became the core of Japan’s enviable quality and efficiency standards – and ultimately key principles for the manufacturing system that is today known as “Lean Manufacturing.”
Kaizen is the Japanese term for a method of continuous improvement in the manufacturing process, with every participant encouraged to look for opportunities to improve quality and efficiency; these bottom-up ideas are incorporated into the production process as quickly as possible.
Interestingly, important elements of the Japanese production system were enhanced by the work of W. Edwards Deming, an American who developed a system of statistical quality control for the U.S. war effort during World War II. After the war, he was assigned to General McArthur’s staff overseeing civilian transition of Japanese industry, and introduced his system of quality control throughout Japanese industry, but especially in the automobile sector. Largely ignored in the United States after his return, his methods were only adopted by U.S. manufacturers after 1981 when he was recognized by Japan for his contribution to the country’s economic revival.
The concept integral to the Japanese system was to control input by measuring output and then correct the sources of problems. When statistical sampling indicated that a particular flaw was occurring at an unacceptable rate, production managers – in co-operation with the work force – collaborated to identify changes and eliminate the problem.
Kanban is the Japanese term for the system of inventory reduction pioneered at Toyota, often called by the English term, “just in time.” Taking advantage of the decentralized Japanese manufacturing system, parts equal to one day’s requirements would be delivered in small baskets directly from the subsidiary producer to the point on the assembly line where they were needed. Cards (called “kanban”) affixed to them showed the supplier’s name and the quantity of components in the basket. In the system’s earliest form, when the basket was emptied, the card was returned to the supplier, which generated an order for another container with the same number of parts, becoming a form of mechanical inventory control as well as production efficiency.
In the more complex systems now using just-in-time inventory control, an order from a customer for a specific automobile, including color, trim, and accessories desired, is converted by the computer system into a set of orders for needed components, which are sent to their suppliers indicating when and where those items are to be delivered. Most parts are still often sorted, assembled and delivered in small plastic boxes with the order information affixed to them on small cards.
The results of this lean production system were exemplified by Toyota’s 1988 introduction of the Lexus in the United States. American reviewers judged this automobile to be the equivalent in quality to the very best of German and American automobiles. Moreover, with the efficiency of the Japanese system, the Lexus could be sold at a substantially lower price than the luxury competition. The Lexus – similar to the Mercedes-Benz and Cadillac cars before it – was a wake-up call to other countries’ automotive industries.
Mercedes Production System
Based on economic and marketing reasons, Daimler-Benz made the decision to expand its production facilities beyond Germany a mere four years later in 1992, and selected Vance, Alabama, as the site. The product would be the brand-new M-Class, considered a successor to the Geländewagen and designed to capitalize on the growing appetite in the United States for sport-utility vehicles.
As Don Erwin, one of the participants in the site-selection process said at the StarTech Pioneers Panel on May 19, Daimler-Benz decided to “produce a vehicle that had never been produced before, in a plant that had not existed before, in a region that had never produced an automobile before, with a workforce that had never even worked in an automobile plant.”
Perhaps the outcome was the response to the challenges presented by the Japanese auto industry and the opportunity to work with what designers describe as a “clean sheet of paper” and production managers call a “green-field project.” For whatever reason, designers and production engineers given the task of conceptualizing to reality the Vance production facility for the M-Class took maximum advantage of the opportunity.
The result is now known globally throughout Mercedes-Benz Cars as the Mercedes Production System (MPS) for modern vehicle production. The approach is one that builds on everything achieved before in automotive production systems: standardized parts, assembly-line systems, worker training and motivation, just-in-time inventory control, and continuous improvement. At the same time, all available technology – including robotics, sensors, automation, computer controls, and environmentally sensitive practices – would be employed in building the new facility and its production systems.
More than that, the engineers, designers, and managers weren’t content to build a new plant that would simply be equal to the best existing automotive plant in the world. Rather, they wanted to move the benchmarks forward by applying new innovations on top of state-of-the-art production systems and technologies.
As seen in the pictures accompanying this article, the tangible aspects of the manufacturing process are nothing short of breathtaking. In some parts of the plant, only a few team members can be seen, while an extravagantly complicated ballet of robots performs the actual manufacturing work. In other parts of the open production facilities, team members use a combination of human ability and computer-managed sensors and measurement systems to accomplish tasks and inspections in a manner that machines will never master.
But the true innovation is not visible; instead, it is a matter of the attitudes and practices that each of the team’s more than 3,000 members share. Very soon after the new site was selected in Alabama and the design of the M-Class was advanced enough to begin designing production systems, a goal was articulated for the new plant: “In order to survive … we must grow, change, and continuously improve.” The guiding principle was quality – the heritage trait of Mercedes-Benz – as well as efficiency, necessary for competitive success in a modern global economy.
Customized lean-production philosophy
The principles start with the concept of lean manufacturing – not much different from the Japanese just-in-time system overlaid on the American assembly line system. The goal is to manufacture without waste of time, materials, or capital.
Manufacturing is effected by a just-in-time basis, producing only what is needed, when it is needed, in the quantity and quality that is needed. Unlike traditional automotive manufacturing where production levels are maintained at a theoretically efficient level regardless of variations in demand, the principle of pull production is used at the Mercedes plant. Only after an order is received – either from a dealer on behalf of a specific customer, or by a dealer to fill a showroom slot for marketing purposes – is production initiated.
Combined with the just-in-time production method, the result is minimum inventory on hand at all times; there will never be an instance when acres of unsold cars fill storage lots.
At the same time, emphasis on quality becomes not only a means to assure “the best or nothing” for the customer, it becomes an integral part of the MPS philosophy of customized lean production. By producing only high-quality products, waste is reduced or eliminated. Within the plant, team members talk about a four-loop system of quality inspection and correction (Quality Feedback Loops) that ensures faults are detected and then corrected, either by fixing the unit or changing the system, as close to the source as possible.
In the first quality loop, team members performing a specific task are responsible for their own quality, meaning they follow standardized work patterns and inspect their own work to ensure “quality is built at the process” in every cycle: A component isn’t allowed to move on to the next team member or process until it is right.
In the second quality loop, if team members encounter a difficulty they can’t resolve, they signal the need for assistance from a supervisor to help resolve the issue. Whether it’s a panel that won’t fit properly or an imperfect component that has slipped through the inspection process when received at the plant, the problem is corrected before the component moves to the next process – i.e., the next internal customer. Working with the supervisor, a team member fixes the problem and decides whether it’s an anomaly or part of a pattern that needs to be corrected earlier on the line.
At the end of each phase of the manufacturing process – within the body shop, paint shop, and assembly shop – completed pieces are pulled off the line at statistically significant intervals and carefully inspected by workers and machines in the third quality loop to assure that the process on that line is within specification; problems are resolved before others appear.
In the fourth quality loop, completed automobiles are taken off the line and undergo a rigorous visual and mechanical inspection, then put through their paces on the test track outside the plant. If any issues are discerned, the flaw is corrected and inspectors determine if there is a pattern indicating an uncorrected problem at some stage of production.
Culture and continuous improvement
All team members are encouraged to work toward continuous improvement within the system. To provide both the motivation and a mechanism for that improvement, the Vance plant early on adopted a number of cultural policies that were unusual for automobile plants in general, and German plants in particular.
From the beginning, for example, all artificial barriers between managerial and worker levels were eliminated so team members wouldn’t be discouraged from identifying problems and suggesting solutions. Team members all wear the same standard uniform, called “team wear”– pants with tops that have the Mercedes logo and the team member’s first name embroidered on them. There is an “open office” atmosphere at the facility, encouraging open communication among work teams and departments. In addition, all team members eat in the same cafeteria and there are no reserved parking spaces for anyone.
Individual teams meet at the beginning of each shift so supervisors can share information of general importance, and to identify and discuss problems and solutions before starting production. The process of correction and improvement continues throughout each shift. This can be heard throughout the plant when easily recognized tunes signal a supervisor’s attention to a particular station where assistance is needed. The result is not merely motivation, but a high degree of communication that has produced a continuous succession of greater achievements toward the twin goals of efficiency and quality.
When the planned Vance plant was first announced, many industry commentators wondered if a previously agricultural region of the United States could maintain and support the quality for which the Mercedes-Benz company from industrialized Germany required for competitive success.
Today, that is no longer an issue. Instead, the Tuscaloosa plant is at the top of the global Mercedes network for efficiency and productivity, and the Mercedes Production System pioneered there has been introduced in every Mercedes-Benz plant worldwide. Meanwhile, other manufacturers examine and emulate principles of the world-class Mercedes-Benz Production System – a benchmark in innovative automotive manufacturing.
Top image: The first phase in the production process at MBUSI begins in the Body Shop where individual panels for the body and chassis are received from the outside suppliers, already pre-formed and stamped. Middle image: Next, the sides, floors, firewalls, roofs, and rear panels are brought together and welded, using a variety of welding and joining techniques to form the “body-in-white.” As the panels come together, sealer is applied between body panels for moisture protection and sound deadening. The body-in-white is the stage of the emerging vehicle when it begins to resemble the finished unit it will become. At MBUSI, the M-, GL- and R-Classes are produced on the same line, intermixed in production in the sequence that the orders are received from the global marketing network of Mercedes-Benz. Bottom image: In the Body Shop, team members oversee and maintain huge arrays of programmed robots. Watching the precision and complexity of this process is fascinating. Throughout the body shop, quality checks are performed in each process, at the end of each zone or line, and at the end of the Body Shop line prior to transport to the Paint Shop. Any problems that are identified are tracked back to their origin and corrected there. After leaving the Body Shop, the metal body enters the paint shop where it goes through several coating steps. Top Image: First, the body-in-white goes through a phosphate dip tank where a layer is applied to prepare it for the electrolysis coating (or E-Coat). Then the body travels through the E-Coat dip tank. The E-Coat is applied for corrosion protection (top image). Next begins the coating process. First the primer is applied by robot spray application. Middle Image: After each coating phase, the body is carefully checked with a combination of touch and vision under bright lights to make sure there are no imperfections. Note the clothing worn by the team member in the Paint Shop. These special suits are required of everyone entering the paint shop to ensure a dust/lint-free environment within the shop. Bottom image: After primer, the color coat or base coat is applied in booths by robotic spray application. The robots are programmed to choose the correct color for each vehicle, from any of the 12 paint colors available at any one time. The spray gun nozzles are purged, cleaned and switched after each color use. Finally, a clear topcoat is applied, again by robotic spray application, over the color coating for protection and shine. A chassis will travel three miles during its trip through the paint shop, including coating, drying, and inspections – moving automatically through the entire process.
After leaving the Paint Shop, the vehicle travels to the Assembly Shop where the wiring and fluid lines are installed, the windows are fitted, the interior is installed, and the chassis and drive train is “married” to the vehicle body. In the Assembly Shop Final Lines and Quality inspection area, the vehicle undergoes its first start-up and running tests before being approved for shipment. Note in these images that most of the work in the Assembly Shop is done by team members, in contrast with the previous two shops that are highly automated by robots. One major exception is that all windows are installed by robots capable of manipulating large components with high precision, a process that would be difficult for humans to perform. At each process or station of the assembly shop lines, the team member is responsible for completing the process within each work cycle as well as checking the quality of the work to ensure “quality at the process.” This is the first of four Quality Feedback Loops to ensure the vehicle is produced to Mercedes-Benz quality standards. Top to bottom: team members in all phases of production perform quality checks for each vehicle at several points throughout the process. Installation of wiring harnesses is done by hand. Doors are assembly separately to match each order, and then rejoin the original body on the final assembly line.
Top image: Door assembly is part of the current onsite manufacturing process at MBUSI. Metal stamping of body panels is still done offsite by suppliers, though that work is done in Alabama by nearby suppliers. Manufacture of the power train – engine, transmission, and differentials – is done in Germany and shipped to MBUSI for installation. The new C-Class will be done differently, with its drive train manufactured in the U.S. Nissan-Renault plant as part of a joint program with the Japanese-French company. Middle image: teamwork is an integral part of the Mercedes Production System, with minimal emphasis on rank and title. In this candid shot, MBUSI president and CEO Markus Schaefer (center) chats with a team member about her work. Schaefer, like his predecessors, spends several hours every day on the shop floor, wearing the same “team wear” as the other team members. Schaefer has been CEO since April 2010, and on July 1 passed his duties to the new CEO, Jason Hoff, who was vice president, logistics, at MBUSI before spending the last three years in Germany organizing global procurement for the new C-Class. Bottom image: In the final processes, the vehicles are programmed, started and put through a run test before shipment to the customer.