© 2013 IFS

PRODUCT: Success Story: Quality Assurance real customer case Are you a late adopter? The new Quality Assurance module has been bought and installed by many customers. In this session one of them shares with you how they run their processes using the new Applications 8 module.

© 2013 IFS

3

In 1899, John Miller I, a farmer in St Nazianz area & the great grand father of the current owner/president. founded a

hardware and implement store

Miller History

Miller History

The Company has roots in farm equipment dealership & distribution.

• 1981 : Small manufacturing began Miller Pro forage boxes

• 1998 : Began production of self propelled (motorized) sprayers

• 2004 : AG BAG product line was acquired

• We have one physical location, located in the small town of Saint Nazianz, WI

• We currently employ about 273 people

© 2013 IFS

6

MILLER HISTORY

© 2012 IFS

© 2012 IFS

MILLER HISTORY

© 2012 IFS

© 2013 IFS

13

© 2013 IFS

14

Great place for the ‘Bring your child to work’ day.

© 2013 IFS

15

HISTORY OF MILLER ERP SYSTEMS

• 2001 – The decision was made to migrate from our current ERP system (EMS) to

IFS (2001)

• 2005 – upgraded to IFS 2004

• 2009 – June – went live on IFS 7.5 SP1

• 2010 – July – went live on 7.5 SP5

• 2013 – June – went live on 8.0 SP1

HISTORY OF OUR ERP SYSTEMS CURRENTLY USING • IFS Financials

• IFS Supply Chain

• IFS Engineering

• IFS Manufacturing

• IFS Sales & Marketing (CRM)

• IFS Demand Planning

• IFS Business Intelligence

• IFS Quality Management - testing

LEAN • Part of Miller’s lean initiatives are to improve efficiencies and reduce

waste.

• 2011 – introduction of the iPad to our manufacturing floor

• The main area of use of the iPads was on our assembly lines

• All of our process sheets and work instructions were placed into SharePoint and made available on the iPads.

LEAN • The Quality Department plays a large role in the Lean initiative –

specifically in the waste area.

• Nonconforming products can be identified by anybody in the building, however Quality creates the Nonconformance Report (NCR), manages the disposition of the part, and uses the data to drive continuous improvement at Miller and also our suppliers.

GROWTH • Headcount

• How did the Quality group handle the massive production (and nonconformance) increase in 2011 and 2012?

2012 – heavy focus on supplier improvements

2013 – implemented an online Supplier Corrective Action System to free up Miller Quality resources.

Too much time being spent on ‘managing garbage’. We periodically asked ourselves how we can be more efficient so we could spend more time actually driving improvement.

© 2013 IFS

23

© 2013 IFS

24

We use an Access DB to track nonconformances.

The GOOD. We built the form to have the exact information that we want recorded. We have functionality built in to email specific records by part number, department, and supplier. We have many other fields ‘ready’ to be used if we want. This nonconformance report can be completed very quickly. Easy to use.

CURRENT SYSTEM

© 2013 IFS

25

© 2013 IFS

26

© 2013 IFS

27

The Bad: Size issues cause instability. This forces at minimum a yearly archiving of data. None of the fields are linked to IFS, so each field must be copied – wasteful, and creates errors. Supplier reporting calculation requires the number of nonconformances from the DB and number of receipts from IFS. This is a completely manual operation.

CURRENT SYSTEM

© 2013 IFS

28

We don’t have a good way to track what is on the Nonconforming shelf or in a rework loop once disposition has been determined.

Traceability is even worse once we return defective product to a supplier

OTHER ISSUES

© 2013 IFS

29

We don’t work with little parts. Each inspection, containment, or rework takes effort and quite often a fork-truck to move.

OTHER ADDED PAIN

© 2013 IFS

30

We have a large area to cover (and it is getting bigger).

Quite often, we have to make multiple trips across the plant when we document the nonconformance.

BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE

© 2013 IFS

31

© 2013 IFS

32

If looking at new system, must not lose any of the current capability.

Travel less around the plant.

Eliminate manual tracking of the rework and return loops.

Have a stable system regardless of how many active records are present

Be able to pull more than a single year of data when creating reports.

Eliminate redundant entries when creating the nonconformance report.

Create different supplier reports and their ratings simultaneously.

WHAT DO WE WANT?

© 2013 IFS

33

If looking at new system, must not lose any of the current capability.

Travel less around the plant.

Eliminate manual tracking of the rework and return loops.

Have a stable system regardless of how many active records are present

Be able to pull more than a single year of data when creating reports.

Eliminate redundant entries when creating the nonconformance report.

Create different supplier reports and their ratings simultaneously.

WHAT DO WE WANT?

© 2013 IFS

34

ABILITY TO CUSTOMIZE ORIGINAL NCR

© 2013 IFS

36

Missing Fields: Qty S/N Part S/N Machine Part Description

QUALITY ASSURANCE

User Defined Fields Added

Unwanted Fields Hidden

√ If looking at new system, must not lose any of the current capability.

Travel less around the plant.

Eliminate manual tracking of the rework and return loops.

Have a stable system regardless of how many active records are present

Be able to pull more than a single year of data when creating reports.

Eliminate redundant entries when creating the nonconformance report.

Create different supplier reports and their ratings simultaneously.

WHAT DO WE WANT?

© 2013 IFS

38

MOBILITY • We are using iPads out on the plant and also in the Quality department,

however, since we do not use Citrix, the iPad was not an option with IFS.

• IFS offers a Quality Assurance app for creating NCRs on the Android platform, but we are not currently using any Android devices in the production area.

• IFS Applications 8.0 is ”touch” friendly. So, our solution was to use a Microsoft Surface Pro device to enable the Quality Department to create NCRs at any point in the plant.

• The result of this? Only 1 trip to the nonconforming part or machine is needed to capture all information.

© 2013 IFS

40

QUALITY ASSURANCE

QUALITY ASSURANCE

√ If looking at new system, must not lose any of the current capability.

√ Travel less around the plant.

Eliminate manual tracking of the rework and return loops.

Have a stable system regardless of how many active records are present

Be able to pull more than a single year of data when creating reports.

Eliminate redundant entries when creating the nonconformance report.

Create different supplier reports and their ratings simultaneously.

WHAT DO WE WANT?

© 2013 IFS

43

WORKFLOW

© 2013 IFS

44

√ If looking at new system, must not lose any of the current capability.

√ Travel less around the plant.

√ Eliminate manual tracking of the rework and return loops.

Have a stable system regardless of how many active records are present

Be able to pull more than a single year of data when creating reports.

Eliminate redundant entries when creating the nonconformance report.

Create different supplier reports and their ratings simultaneously.

WHAT DO WE WANT?

© 2013 IFS

45

√ If looking at new system, must not lose any of the current capability.

√ Travel less around the plant.

√ Eliminate manual tracking of the rework and return loops.

√ Have a stable system regardless of how many active records are present

Be able to pull more than a single year of data when creating reports.

Eliminate redundant entries when creating the nonconformance report.

Create different supplier reports and their ratings simultaneously.

WHAT DO WE WANT?

© 2013 IFS

46

√ If looking at new system, must not lose any of the current capability.

√ Travel less around the plant.

√ Eliminate manual tracking of the rework and return loops.

√ Have a stable system regardless of how many active records are present

√ Be able to pull more than a single year of data when creating reports.

Eliminate redundant entries when creating the nonconformance report.

Create different supplier reports and their ratings simultaneously.

WHAT DO WE WANT?

© 2013 IFS

47

Data in IFS is linked by making connections to the NCR. No need to make multiple entries.

© 2013 IFS

48

√ If looking at new system, must not lose any of the current capability.

√ Travel less around the plant.

√ Eliminate manual tracking of the rework and return loops.

√ Have a stable system regardless of how many active records are present

√ Be able to pull more than a single year of data when creating reports.

√ Eliminate redundant entries when creating the nonconformance report.

Create different supplier reports and their ratings simultaneously.

WHAT DO WE WANT?

© 2013 IFS

49

√ If looking at new system, must not lose any of the current capability.

√ Travel less around the plant.

√ Eliminate manual tracking of the rework and return loops.

√ Have a stable system regardless of how many active records are present

√ Be able to pull more than a single year of data when creating reports.

√ Eliminate redundant entries when creating the nonconformance report.

√ Create different supplier reports and their ratings simultaneously.

WHAT DO WE WANT?

© 2013 IFS

50

Continue to test workflows with various departments.

Refine screens to allow visibility of NCR progress and make modifications to NCRs easy.

Create Reports

Go Live January 1, 2014

THE PLAN

© 2013 IFS

51

ANY QUESTIONS?

© 2013 IFS

52