MANUFACTURING EXECUTION SYSTEM (MES) FOR SHIPYARD MATURITY
A crucial part in the success of any shipyard lies in their operational processes and how these are managed and directed. Being able to translate the knowledge and skills of available craftsmen, engineers and managers into robust, predictable and efficient processes is one of the key attributes of high-performance shipyards. Whatever the production strategy or relevant ship type involved we at Floorganise guarantee these processes to be enabled. To secure the continuous improvement of both production performance and project predictability.
SHIPYARD PROCESS MATURITY: WHAT AND WHY?
A crucial part in the success of any shipyard lies in their operational processes and how these are managed and directed. Being able to translate the knowledge and skills of available craftsmen, engineers and managers into robust, predictable and efficient processes is one of the key attributes of high-performance shipyards. Whatever the production strategy or relevant ship type involved we at Floorganise guarantee these processes to be enabled. To secure the continuous improvement of both production performance and project predictability.
A competitive international context
The diminishing competitive advantage of European SME-shipyards for instance lies not only in the increased technological capability of their competitors but also in their own lesser performance. The annual statements from multiple European shipyards are showing losses incurred. Even though these losses have yard specific causes, which can be quite diverse in nature, more often than not these losses are the result of poorly executedprojects. A major factor herein is poor project planning and process control causing excess work, increased cost and lead times, and failing quality.
Current approaches
As work progresses the interaction with the supply chain becomes more intense and the impact on cost, lead time and quality increases. SME-shipyards and also large shipyards have used Gantt charts and Critical Path Methods (CPM) to schedule shipbuilding projects.
A CPM plan compiles a list of project activities and milestones, determine the length of individual activities and link these together in a network of dependencies setting scheduling dates, critical route and general project length. This is primarily a logical top- down approach for creating a high-level tactical view of the main milestones and sequence of the project, but not very useful when it comes to monitor the project progress, identify set-backs and solve problems at the operational level. Likewise, Gantt charts provide a top- down view of the project but is a poor tool when it comes to deal with practical challenges such as seamless integration of the supply chain in the project. The undesirable result is that, projects that were carrying more uncertainty than anticipated had too optimistic forecasting, unforeseen delays or failure costs. So not only the efficiency of these shipyards is low, so is their internal control and the predictability of their performance.
Fig.1.HH, depicting a generic view on how management structures are linked with the planning process, is used to pinpoint the main cause for poorly executed projects.
The relevant definitions for planning levels are:
Project tactical plan define the overall goals i.e. scope, schedule, and budget for the project, in alignment with the high-level objectives of the organization.
Tactical plans are concerned with the responsibility and functionality of lower-level departments to fulfil their parts in the project execution.
The operational project plan maps out the day-to-day tasks covering the what, the who,the when, and the how much.The arrows in Fig.1. indicate the imperative link between the tactical and the operational planning levels. The GAP pinpoints the current problem of shipyards: a gap between how the production project is perceived (tactical level) and the shop floor day-to-dayoperational realities. ’ Increasing the shipyards competitiveness requires to increasethe level of control and predictability on the level of the project, the execution and the shipyard’’.

Process maturity in shipbuilding operations
The ability to respond to the shipbuilding environment (shipyard, supply chain etc.) being aware of the correct time and location to act, according to the circumstances and the corporate culture is called “maturity”. When directed at “processes” it is the extent to which processes are explicitly defined, managed, measured, controlled and effective. It is an indication of how close a developing process is to being complete and capable of continual improvement through qualitative measures and feedback. Thus, for a process to be mature, it has to be complete in its usefulness, automated, reliable in information and continuously improving.
Fig.2. depicts the various stadia of process maturity and the position of the majority of SME-shipyards between “Initial” and “Managed” levels.
Process and performance maturity is clearly an important prerequisite for both the predictability and the efficiency of the shipyard. The level of maturity directly relates to the extent to which processes and performance are organized explicitly. Rather than solely depending on individuals and their subjective experiences, which is often the case.
Towards fact based decision making If for instance the hours spent on jobs and the progress made is updated roughly once a month through a manual paper approach we tend to call this process of project control rather immature. Because the interval of a month just doesn’t allow for proper early signaling of risks, early recognition of learning effects or failure costs and the paper approach doesn’t allow for accuracy or timeliness.

“Increasing the shipyards competitiveness requires to increase the level of control and predictability on the level of the project, the execution and the shipyard”
Craftsmanship versus maturity
This is not to say that these shipyards and shipbuilders do not know their business on how to build ships, but that the immaturity of processes not only inhibits efficiency but also the level of control and predictability leading to waste of resources and negative contract results. Also because the data involved isn’t capable of planning or controlling the activities of the yard in the level of detail (granularity) of the operation itself. To achieve a higher degree of predictability and performance there is a requirement for both soft controls (leadership, culture, trust) as well as hard controls (processes, supporting IT systems and KPI’s).

Success factors for improvement; current limitations in shipyard practices
A critical success factor in achieving a higher degree of process maturity is addressing the informational needs from the staff involved in the execution of the project. A key characteristic of this informational need revolves around the detail or granularity level of the data shared. If the data is capable of relating sufficiently to what we call human size, one job for one person for one day, the accuracy of progress, dependability, timeliness and predictability increases significantly. The contents of this operational data involves practical insights on which ctivities should take place, the budget of the tasks, how a particular drawing looks like, which materials are involved, in which sequence should the activities take place, when and with which resources and preconditions. Following concepts like Lean Manufacturing, providing and applying this operational data results in better operational decision making and thus more efficiency. When this operational data is set in place more insights can be derived from it. For instance the financial impact of the current progress for the results of the project allowing for increased predictability and control too. It is widely recognized that the shipbuilding industry has insufficient capabilities to address these operational data requirements (Lee, Shin ’19).1
1. Development of an IHOP Execution System Based on Analyses of Shipyard Production Planning Process. Lee, Shin. Journal of Ship Production and Design 2019
Common practice, finance in the lead
Since many yards struggle with the maturity of their operational processes, financial insights are available rather late. This significantly limits their level of control and predictability but it also poses great risk for the continuity of the shipyard. Which is why the financial departments within yards extend the use of their centralized and oftentimes generic IT system designed for the tactical level all the way to the level of the operations. This top down approach of both systems (how it is used) and logic (what data is exchanged) creates a false sense of safety since the input on progress from the operational units is oftentimes incorrect, late, or incomplete but also subjective. I.e. submitting 62% progress on an activity has the impression of accuracy but is actually the result of a subjective assessment with a direct financial impact on earned value.

Conclusion: bridge the gap between tactical and operational control (Fig.3.)
Maturity development is key for shipyards to become both more efficient and predictable. Shipyard processes should be supported with specific IT-systems, carrying data consisting of a granularity level, capable of relating to the human size. So as to address the informational needs from the shop floor with operational data therewith adding objectivity and accuracy to the process and the project. Subsequently this data is used to deliver insights to facilitate better decision making and as a result achieving a higher degree of efficiency. In parallel this operational data can be used to address the financial perspective of the project allowing for a higher degree of predictability and control of both project and shipyard. In summary of all of these needs are potentially addressed with delivering on the promise of a truly integrated planning.
Delivering on integrated planning
Delivering on integrated planning
Best practices we see that are aimed at developing process maturity are manifold but can be summarized as an integrated and automated planning approach to bridge the gap between the tactical and operational level. In this paragraph first the informational needs from the operations, planning and control perspectives are discussed, then the requirements for how the data is modelled, transferred and used and subsequently how this can all be achieved and which activities will need to be undertaken.

3 data streams are curial from a mature planning & control perspective. Which are:

Planning information
- Top-down goal setting: Channeled via objectives, goals and norms
Control information
- Bottom-up reporting: Channeled via performance and deviations
Physical production flow
- Horizontal flow of data
- To support the primary process
- Centered on the product level of the relevantdept (blocks vs sections vs panels)
- Provide accountability and fact-based decisions insights and information from the various participants in the project from both outside the yard (the supply chain) as well as inside the yard is crucial to develop the before mentioned physical production flow.
Availability of insights to develop physical production flow
Due to the nature of shipbuilding and its engineering-to-order character a lot of the information which is required to make proper planning decisions is available only shortly before it’s usage. This oftentimes puts crucial information on the critical path. For instance, which systems and therefore foundations will be placed in which rooms and which sections or blocks will these rooms consists of? Having this information in time allows for the installation of this foundation in the pre-outfitting stage when this job can be executed far more efficiently than the later outfitting stages. Being able to bring together all these
Increasing predictability with insights on task readiness.

The planning and control cycle to direct the shipyard as a whole resides within the financial discipline of the shipyard. Whilst the cycle that supports the operational planning and control cycle reside within operational teams. Such as planners, work preparators or within operational departments. Even though the information needs from both roles differ there is a huge benefit to be gained when these two roles apply integrated planning and control efforts. Through the application of more refined granularity both the predictability as well as the efficiency of performance increases significantly.

Each of these planning levels have various users, responsible roles and requirements. Which is why they are addressed in different systems whilst simultaneously keeping them in sync to support the integrated planning and control cycle. Following the planning pyramid logic, it can be stated that management is more dependent on the vertical data streams to support their fact-based decision making whilst the operations is more dependent on the horizontal data streams. The latter are addressed within Floor2Plan making use of the various steps from the PDCA-cycle.
PDCA-cycle
All activities taking place in and around the shop floor follow a repetitive cycle of steps. These can be summarized as Plan, Do, Check and Act. Having these steps properly aligned, integrated and instantly available for all participants of the project is a crucial cornerstone in increasing production performance.

SHIPYARD PROCESS MATURITY: REQUIREMENTS FROM BEST PRACTICES
Applying plan, do, check and acts steps to bridge the gap to operational control (the why
In each specific phase of shipbuilding all distinctive roles have a specific informational need. Assuring the predictability of processes and projects requires a structured approach to these needs. The four key steps that together form the backbone of the proposed improvement and which in essence are capable of delivering on an increased maturity are depicted in Fig.5 Important topics like planning and scheduling, reporting time andprogress made, analyzing performance and adjusting norms, process improvements and revised priorities are all addressed within these four steps. The enhancement of operational performance and predictability requires development of several cultural aspects, technical capabilities and process requirements.

Complexity and uncertainty | summarizing the requirements from data perspective (the what)
The basics of these four steps and the concept of operational planning for the yard and the project is in essence quite straightforward. But the nature of shipbuilding adds difficulty when addressing these aspects all in a manual approach. Not only is there an infinite amount of activities with all kinds of relations to other items of the project, there are also many people and prerequisites involved that make it difficult to properly plan and schedule for all of these separate tasks. Exactly because of this complexity (many relations) and uncertainty (unforeseen changes) it is preferred to automate as much as possible to be able to bridge the gap to operations. Doing so properly requires delivering on these requirements from a data perspective.
Developing a truly integrated an mature process requires the simultaneous development of both process, culture and a degree of physical production flow. Obviously the IT-systems in place can provide an important backbone but ultimately the individual people within the shipyard hold the key to operational success. The various levels of maturity therefore require the recognition of these other needs too. In the below stated overview the various properties and characteristics are recognized per maturity level so as to provide a base line of for assessment purposes and subsequently the gradual development of the drivers that allow for the next leveL.



Unlock the potential of your shipyard with Floor2Plan. Discover how our innovative software can streamline operations and boost productivity.
How to improve predictability in your shipyard
Schedule a meeting
Come to a joint approach with us
Evaluate our prototype in your shipyard
Go-live and improve