How to deal with an uncooperative production team?

[Pack34]

I work at a small instrument manufacturer and I've been having an extremely difficult year.

It takes way too long to build our products so I made an automated application in MATLAB to reduce build times from days to minutes. I've also updated designs to be more reliable and flagged quality issues from our PCB assembler. They can't even provide capability information because they outsource it overseas and didn't know.

The automated tools were never used, updated designs never ordered, and they refuse to audit the supplier or even do some test runs with someone else.

Now it looks like I'm getting into some hot water and they refuse to provide any information regarding yields or issues.

Has anyone else been in a similar situation?

[IanB]

You're probably working the problem in the wrong direction.

If you have management authority over the team (i.e. you are above them in the chain of command--not sideways--and they report up to you), then you can manage that team and get them to do what you want.

If you are not in their management chain, but are sideways, or in a different department, or even junior to their manager, then you are fighting a losing battle trying to get them to do your bidding and you should choose a different strategy. What you have to do is manage upwards through your management until you find a point of convergence with their management ladder (e.g. the VP of product delivery or operations or whatever), and then get the necessary requirements to descend down on the production department from above.

The way you do this is to construct solid business arguments about the problem (cost, quality, time) and show how this impacts the bottom line. Get these arguments coherently expressed to someone high enough in management to appreciate them and then you will see results.

But don't try to fight the battle yourself as a foot soldier in the trenches. Infantrymen get shot at.

[rstofer]

There's a problem with pronouns like 'they'.  Which 'they'?  Your in-house people or your suppliers?

If your in-house people don't want process improvement, it's time for you to look for job improvement.  There are companies, like GE, where process improvement is never complete.  It goes on continually under their 6-Sigma program.  It's amazing the kinds of things that are institutionalized (we always did it that way) and can be removed or replaced.  Look for a company with an active QC or 6-Sigma program.

[rstofer]

One other thought:  Never try to teach a pig to sing.  It wastes your time and annoys the pig.

[Pack34]

You're probably working the problem in the wrong direction.

If you have management authority over the team (i.e. you are above them in the chain of command--not sideways--and they report up to you), then you can manage that team and get them to do what you want.

If you are not in their management chain, but are sideways, or in a different department, or even junior to their manager, then you are fighting a losing battle trying to get them to do your bidding and you should choose a different strategy. What you have to do is manage upwards through your management until you find a point of convergence with their management ladder (e.g. the VP of product delivery or operations or whatever), and then get the necessary requirements to descend down on the production department from above.

The way you do this is to construct solid business arguments about the problem (cost, quality, time) and show how this impacts the bottom line. Get these arguments coherently expressed to someone high enough in management to appreciate them and then you will see results.

But don't try to fight the battle yourself as a foot soldier in the trenches. Infantrymen get shot at.

The production team reports to the VP of Operations. I was the engineering manager and reported directly to the CEO. I took my concerns to the CEO and was told to stop complaining.

[Pack34]

There's a problem with pronouns like 'they'.  Which 'they'?  Your in-house people or your suppliers?

If your in-house people don't want process improvement, it's time for you to look for job improvement.  There are companies, like GE, where process improvement is never complete.  It goes on continually under their 6-Sigma program.  It's amazing the kinds of things that are institutionalized (we always did it that way) and can be removed or replaced.  Look for a company with an active QC or 6-Sigma program.

The only They that's directed outside the organization was about the Assembly House's PCB capabilities. The VP Ops seems to be all about process but only stuff he directly controls. Anything from outside his fiefdom gets roadblocked.

[Pack34]

If the production team screwed up, big time, big consequence, then you can propose your solution and be a hero. Before that, nobody in the production team will give a shit to someone in the engineering team. That's called corporate bullshit politics.

The problem is that they screw up and I get burned for it.

[rstofer]

Find another job.  Your skills and input aren't valued so it's time to find a place where they are.

[mikeselectricstuff]

Probably only way to make progress is work out and document exactly how much money they are wasting and how it could be improved, and present it to top management.

[jpanhalt]

You're probably working the problem in the wrong direction.

If you have management authority over the team (i.e. you are above them in the chain of command--not sideways--and they report up to you), then you can manage that team and get them to do what you want.

If you are not in their management chain, but are sideways, or in a different department, or even junior to their manager, then you are fighting a losing battle trying to get them to do your bidding and you should choose a different strategy. What you have to do is manage upwards through your management until you find a point of convergence with their management ladder (e.g. the VP of product delivery or operations or whatever), and then get the necessary requirements to descend down on the production department from above.

The way you do this is to construct solid business arguments about the problem (cost, quality, time) and show how this impacts the bottom line. Get these arguments coherently expressed to someone high enough in management to appreciate them and then you will see results.

But don't try to fight the battle yourself as a foot soldier in the trenches. Infantrymen get shot at.

The production team reports to the VP of Operations. I was the engineering manager and reported directly to the CEO. I took my concerns to the CEO and was told to stop complaining.

Time to find a new job.

[TerraHertz]

Keep a detailed diary. What problems you recognized, what solutions you proposed and to whom, what were the results.
This should include business cost/benefits, so far as you are able. It's such a shame audio recordings are illegal, despite being so easy to make.

Your CEO's "stop complaining" suggests the CEO is either working with incomplete/biased information, or incompetent. This can easily be due to others in the company structure covering their arses, and being better at social engineering than you, the actual engineer.
Make sure the CEO has a correct understanding of the situation. Give it to him in writing, with easily comprehensible diagrams.

If you can present the CEO with incontestable facts that support your position, and you still get that 'stop complaining', then leave. Enjoy watching the company burn down (metaphorically speaking) due to the cascading incompetence, while you are comfortable in knowing you did your best and it's not your fault.

[vk6zgo]

If the production team screwed up, big time, big consequence, then you can propose your solution and be a hero. Before that, nobody in the production team will give a shit to someone in the engineering team. That's called corporate bullshit politics.

The problem is that they screw up and I get burned for it.

I think I used to work for that company!
 
I became "an enemy of the people" for suggesting simple improvements to processes, which would have saved a lot of time & money.
The silly thing is that they raved on about ISO 9000, whilst still doing their best to build errors into each unit they made.

[nctnico]

Time to find a new job.

I agree. Just reading the story makes me want to quit that job instantly and I'm not even working there! Some people are so set in doing things in inefficient ways they don't even realise it. I like CNBC's 'The Profit' in which a business man tries for fix companies. This series features businesses with the exact same problem the OP is describing.

[T3sl4co1l]

So take the product and go make your own.

If the company is so confident in their business plan that they don't need your input, they'll do fine without you.

If your concerns are spot on, you'll kill them in competition.

That's how business works.

Issues like copyright and IP rights are small -- you have a right to work (give or take local laws), and since you (presumably) have intimate knowledge of the product, you know exactly what changes are needed to avoid a lawsuit.

Lawsuits, by the way, are just another operating cost; factor that into your business plan.  Prepare for the worst, hope for the best!  (On that note, business insurance covers expenses and actions such as these -- it's legal coverage for you and your company, and worth shopping for if you go ahead with this.)

Tim

[mikeselectricstuff]

updated designs never ordered, and they refuse to audit the supplier or even do some test runs with someone else.

Might it be that there are external factors like your boss and the assembly place owner being old friends ( or the latter having some dirt on the former..!)

[Electro Detective]

Drop the concerned employee/production hero thing,

grab your paycheck every week and 'leave the company to their own devices'

It's their money, their decision making, their profit or loss,

and they are making it quite clear it's not your business, concern nor problem


Enjoy the 'hired help' benefits of mediocre wages, sleeping easy    and enjoying weekends.   

[SL4P]

The bottom line to the CEO and directors/shareholders is that ‘production’ make products -> sales -> money
They’re a profit centre.

Engineering is the opposite... a cost centre.
You need to explain the relationship and benefits of the senior managers working the two together.
The VP operations needs to be “spoken to” by the CEO.

[daqq]

I'd say that instead of trying to fix the horrible mess you should just leave, unless you have severe reasons not to. Since even the CEO has this kind of attitude, I'd say that the problem is embedded deep within the company culture.

It might be possible to fix it, eventually, after lots of stress, conflict etc. but you should ask yourself whether it is worth it.

[Jeroen3]

I work at a small instrument manufacturer and I've been having an extremely difficult year.

What are you hired for?

[Seekonk]

I worked for a place that was ISO9000. Many products used the same circuit board. They would be just stuffed with different components.  To pull parts to build a prototype I had to create a product number. Sometimes a customer would call trying to rush a shipment.  I would be at my desk still working on the prototype. Production would come in all mad with a box of failed modules and say my design didn't work.  They managed to build and test the product using preliminary parts list another products test procedure.

Engineering did not have to sign off on a product before it went into production.  Never could change that.  And I was the ISO auditor!  Repeatedly told to back off on the issue by management.

[Pack34]

I work at a small instrument manufacturer and I've been having an extremely difficult year.

What are you hired for?

I was hired to fill the responsibilities of the VP-ENG/ENG-MGR and lead EE. Hardware, Firmware, and FPGA.

[Mr. Scram]

The production team reports to the VP of Operations. I was the engineering manager and reported directly to the CEO. I took my concerns to the CEO and was told to stop complaining.

Time to move shop.

[IanB]

The production team reports to the VP of Operations. I was the engineering manager and reported directly to the CEO. I took my concerns to the CEO and was told to stop complaining.

If you can't interest the CEO in the problems then either you are not explaining it right, or the problems are not as significant as you think they are, or the CEO is incompetent.

For example, if you have data showing excessive costs (of missed shipment dates, of warranty rework on customer returns, on internal costs of wasted time) and these don't interest the CEO, then you should probably be looking for another job.

[bd139]

If you want to piss on the party, go to the CEO with a cost saving via outsourcing it directly. He/she won't ignore anything that affects the bottom line.

Start the ball rolling then walk away from the company while it descends into a pile of shit, leaving existing production team to manage it all.

Then buy their assets from them when they are cash desperate for virtually nothing after non delivery.

Then start a new company and production.

Then hire the old CEO as your personal bitch.

This is how the company I currently work for got off the ground 

[mc172]

It goes on continually under their 6-Sigma program.  It's amazing the kinds of things that are institutionalized (we always did it that way) and can be removed or replaced.  Look for a company with an active QC or 6-Sigma program.

Six Sigma is a Ponzi scheme. I have never experienced this being implemented correctly. It always seems to end up with some muppet whose sole purpose in life is to convince the management that he should remain on a ridiculous salary or even employed.

One bloke I had to work with, who was a 6 Sigma ninja warrior, said that he had improved the efficiency of production of a particular product by reducing the amount of distance it had to travel around the building. He said he had reduced it to something like 24 metres. The product had to go from one side of the building to the other (goods in to goods out), absolute minimum distance. The building was over 100 metres long. Before his intervention it left the building at the same end that it arrived at.
All the while, the rest of the manufacturing process was not made any more efficient.

Another Six Sigma nutcase at another company said it would be more efficient if we cease production for six months while we dig up the floor and fit a complicated conveyor belt type thing on rails to move around some military trucks on an assembly line, where the trucks arrive driveable and leave driveable. They are at no point in their assembly, not driveable. You can just drive them around the building. But nope, this is more efficient.

Anyway... OP, be mindful that people don't like to be proven wrong. I have tried to go to CEOs and others with hard evidence, scientific facts etc. pertaining to why something won't work or isn't more efficient... They mostly don't want to know. I've even been told by a CEO that I don't know what I'm talking about when it comes to a mains transformer because my job is to design electronics not to manage the site facilities.