OREY
OEE gaps across production sites
Illustrative data and paraphrases
Process & gap mapping / Production sites

Where OEE is lost and what could be recovered

OEE by site, the process gaps behind it and the potential value of closing them

Potential value at stake

EUR 0.76m a year

Potential, not realised savings. Basis: 66 line hours a week x 46 weeks x EUR 250 per line hour

Biggest gap

Site F: 61% OEE

Changeovers wait for tools and sign-off, about 40 minutes longer than at Site A

Strongest practice

Site A: 78% OEE

Changeover kits are prepared before the shift and handed over at a fixed time

Where to start

Changeovers at D, E and F

Three sites hold 53 of the 66 line hours a week at stake

OEE and value at stake by site

Gap to Site A in line hours a week, at 120 planned hours per site
SiteMain loss people describeOEEGap
Site A
Kits prepared before changeover, fixed shift handover
78%Best
Site B
Minor stops after material changes
74%4.8 h
Site C
Rework on first runs after a changeover
71%8.4 h
Site D
Maintenance windows moved at short notice
66%14.4 h
Site E
Changeover checklist skipped on the night shift
63%18.0 h
Site F
Operators wait for tools and sign-off
61%20.4 h

Supporting evidence: process maturity by site

ABCDEF Changeover preparation433221 Shift handover432312 Planned maintenance333122 First-run quality check432221

1 Ad hoc · 2 Defined · 3 Followed · 4 Followed and measured, scored on what interviews describe

Why Site F loses time

What operators and shift leads describe

Operator, Site F

Before every changeover we wait for the tools and the sign-off, so the line just stands

Weak process and workaround

No changeover kit is prepared. Operators borrow tools from the next line, which then stops too

What Site A does differently

A kit is ready before the shift, and the shift lead signs off the plan at handover rather than at the line

What to test

Pilot the Site A kit and handover at Site F for six weeks, then compare changeover time and availability

OREY