Int. j. adv. multidisc. res. stud.

2024; 4(1):1095-1104

Received: 24-12-2023
Accepted: 04-02-2024

Minimization of Root Causes of Declining Productivity in a Manufacturing

Company: A Case Study of Jocalis Company
1 KB
Duru, 2 R Uche, 3 OO Obiukwu, 4 DA Ekpechi, 5 KC Chukwuemeka
1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Federal University of Technology, Owerri, Nigeria
DOI: https://doi.org/10.62225/2583049X.2024.4.1.2346 Corresponding Author: KB Duru

Abstract
This presents a comprehensive methodology employed to data analysis and root cause identification. From the result
identify and address declining productivity issues within the obtained, the average availability of critical machine like the
JOCALIS Aluminium Roofing Sheet Manufacturing roller machine after root cause analysis is increased by
Company Limited, situated in Onitsha, Nigeria. The study 10.62%. Also, the average MTBF (mean time between
encompasses various manufacturing divisions, with a failure) of the critical machine after root cause analysis is
primary focus on aluminium roofing sheet production of increased by 13.66% and MTTR (mean time to repair) is
three lines involve in production of red, black, and milk decreased to 46.42% respectively. The applications and
colour coated roofing sheet. The research aims to uncover general impact of this study includes enhancing machine
the root causes of defects in the manufacturing process and availability, reducing downtime, increasing efficiency,
develop effective strategies for improvement. Key methods optimizing maintenance practices, implementing preventive
include data collection through interviews, company maintenance schedules, improving equipment diagnostics,
records, library research, and internet sources, followed by and prioritizing root cause analysis to reduce breakdowns.

Keywords: Roofing Sheet, MTBF, MTTR, Productivity Improvement, Root Cause Analysis, Preventive Maintenance,
Manufacturing Efficiency

1. Introduction
The manufacturing industry plays a pivotal role in the economic growth and development of nations, contributing significantly
to employment, revenue generation, and overall industrialization, Mishra and Rao [1]. In Nigeria, the aluminium roofing sheet
manufacturing sector has experienced substantial growth, providing roofing solutions to a burgeoning construction industry
and meeting the demands of a rapidly urbanizing population, Oluwole [2]. One of the prominent players in this sector is Jocalis
Aluminium Roofing Sheet Manufacturing Company Limited, situated in Anambra.
Over the years, Jocalis Aluminium has demonstrated its commitment to producing high-quality roofing sheets, contributing to
the development of the construction industry in Nigeria. However, like many manufacturing enterprises, Jocalis Aluminium
faces the ever-present challenge of ensuring sustained productivity and efficiency in its operations. Declining productivity can
have adverse effects on the company's competitiveness, profitability, and ability to meet the growing demands of the market,
Dinovitzer [3].
While Jocalis Aluminium has been successful in producing aluminium roofing sheets that meet industry standards, it has in
recent times experienced a noticeable decline in productivity. This decline has manifested in various aspects of the company's
operations, including output per hour, defect rates, downtime, and overall employee feedback. Productivity is a multifaceted
concept, and its decline can be attributed to a combination of factors that may be interrelated, Chien et al [4].
One of the primary issues faced by Jocalis Aluminium is the increase in defect rates, resulting in rework and higher production
costs. The defects not only lead to resource wastage but also impact customer satisfaction negatively and the company's
reputation, Sousa et al [5]. Furthermore, increased downtime due to machine breakdowns and maintenance issues has led to
production interruptions and decreased output per hour, Gosavi [6]. These challenges have financial implications for the
company, as labour costs and operational inefficiencies rise, Ali and Ali [7].
The impact of declining productivity is not limited to operational aspects alone; it extends to the workforce. Employee
feedback has indicated dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs, citing concerns about working conditions, machinery
1095
International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Studies www.multiresearchjournal.com

reliability, and overall morale,Appelbaum et al [8]; Hu et al Factors Affecting Productivity in Manufacturing

[9]
. Addressing these issues is crucial for maintaining a 1. Defects and Quality Control: Defects in
motivated and engaged workforce. manufacturing processes can lead to increased rework,
This research holds significance on several fronts. Firstly, it resource wastage, and customer dissatisfaction, Chien et
is of practical importance to Jocalis Aluminium as it seeks al [14]. A study by Sousa et al [5]. emphasizes the
to enhance its productivity and competitiveness. Secondly, importance of robust quality control practices in
the study contributes to the broader manufacturing sector in minimizing defects and improving productivity.
Nigeria by shedding light on common challenges faced by 2. Machine Reliability and Downtime: Frequent
manufacturers and offering potential solutions, Olajide and machine breakdowns and maintenance issues contribute
Kekong [10]. Lastly, it adds to the body of knowledge on to unplanned downtime, leading to decreased output per
productivity improvement strategies in manufacturing, with hour, Ali and Ali [7]. Gosavi [6] highlights the
implications for industries beyond roofing sheet significance of preventive maintenance programs in
manufacturing (Li et al., 2020). minimizing disruptions.
Jocalis Aluminium Roofing Sheet Manufacturing Company 3. Employee Satisfaction and Engagement: Employee
Limited's commitment to addressing the root causes of morale and job satisfaction significantly influence
declining productivity is a critical step towards sustaining its productivity in manufacturing, Appelbaum et al [8].
growth, maintaining its reputation, and meeting the dynamic Dissatisfied employees may exhibit reduced motivation
demands of the market. By understanding the underlying and contribute to operational inefficiencies. Hu et al [16].
factors contributing to these issues, the company can adopt Stressed the importance of engaging employees in
targeted strategies and interventions that will drive positive problem-solving and continuous improvement efforts.
change and propel it toward a future of increased efficiency
and competitiveness. Machine Failure
Productivity is a critical determinant of an organization's According to Nadler [15], when a piece of machinery fails it
competitiveness, profitability, and long-term sustainability, inevitably cost a company resources, time and money.
Bhadury et al [11]. In the context of the manufacturing
industry, where efficiency and quality are paramount, Main causes of Industrial Machine failure
declining productivity can pose significant challenges, The main causes of industrial machine failure include
Gosavi [12]. This literature review explores the factors inadequate maintenance, corrosion, and misalignment
affecting productivity in the aluminium roofing sheet (bearing failure, metal fatigue, accidents).
manufacturing sector, with a focus on the identification and
minimization of root causes. While significant research has Steps to Prevent Equipment Failure
addressed productivity improvement in manufacturing, there 1. Establish a Maintenance Schedule
is a need to contextualize these findings within the specific 2. Eliminate potential defects
challenges faced by Aluminium Roofing Sheet 3. Utilize equipment monitoring
Manufacturing Company Limited.
The Jocalis Aluminium Roofing Sheet Manufacturing Although, a good number of research have been done using
Company Limited, located in Anambra, Nigeria, has been a root cause analysis on machine reliability and availability,
significant contributor to the roofing sheet manufacturing for different industries including aluminium sheet
sector. Manufacturing companies when run in smooth and companies, to optimize the productivity of the company and
effective processes plays a vital role in the construction suggested various maintenance strategies, but no research
industry and urbanization, Oluwole [13]. However, most work yet on the application root cause analysis of JOCALIS
manufacturing companies have recently encountered a Aluminium Roofing Sheet Manufacturing Company
pronounced decline in productivity across various Limited, situated in Onitsha, southern part of Nigeria, to
operational facets, including output per hour, defect rates, detect the machine failure in three different production lines
downtime, and employee satisfaction, Chien et al [14]. This (red, black, and milk colour coated roofing sheets) of the
decline threatens the company's competitiveness, company and suggest remedy to increase the machine
profitability, and capacity to meet market demands. efficiency.
Increasing defect rates in some producing companies is a
rising trend, leading to rework and elevated production 2. Materials and Methods
costs. Defects not only result in resource wastage but also In this section, we provide a comprehensive overview of the
affect customer satisfaction and the company's reputation, methodology employed in the pursuit of identifying and
Sousa et al [5]. mitigating the root causes of declining productivity within
Frequent machine breakdowns and maintenance issues JOCALIS Aluminium Roofing Sheet Manufacturing
(Downtime and Machine Breakdowns) have caused Company Limited, located in Onitsha, Nigeria. A robust and
substantial production interruptions and decreased output well-structured methodology is fundamental to the success
per hour, Gosavi [6]. These challenges contribute to of this research endeavour, as it underpins the systematic
operational inefficiencies and financial implications for the investigation and strategic interventions aimed at restoring
company, Ali and Ali [7]. productivity in the aluminium roofing sheet manufacturing
Employee dissatisfaction which implies the Employee sector. This section serves as a roadmap, guiding readers
feedback, indicates a growing dissatisfaction with working through the systematic journey of inquiry that characterizes
conditions, machinery reliability, and overall morale, this study. Fig 1 presents the process flow chart of the study.
Appelbaum et al [8]. This discontent poses a risk to
workforce motivation and engagement.

1096
International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Studies www.multiresearchjournal.com

due to some unplanned events that will result in the course

of the maintenance session but ideally, the shift in which a
maintenance session was carried out is meant to start up and
stabilize the line for the incoming shift to start up full
production. Triggers for maintenance include original
equipment manufacturer (OEM) recommendations,
breakdown Parreto chart, and regular 8hourly weekly plan,
machine cycle hour (also known as preventive or scheduled
maintenance). Table 2 presents the data collected from the
maintenance questionaries.

Table 2: The Maintenance Team Composition (Asset care)

Job designation Number
Casual workers 17
Operators 50
Fig 1: The Process Flow Chart of the Methodology Artisans 20
Forklift drivers 6
Methods of Data Collection Machine specialists 14
The materials used for this research include the following: Team leaders 8
1. Oral interview/interaction with some selected staff of Maintenance planners 2
JOCALIS Aluminuim Industry. Maintenance controllers 3
2. Use of the company’s journals/magazines/bulletins and Logistic controller 1
data storage systems. Unit managers 1
Packaging Engineer 1
3. Use of the libraries.
Packaging manager 1
4. Research on internet. Others (clerks, administrative officer) 3
5. Maintenance log sheets. Total 130

Data Analysis In addition, we collected data on maintenance costs over a

From the questionnaires retrieved and oral interrogation, the one-year period within the scope of our research on
following data were collected on the production department 'Identification and Minimization of the Root Cause of
and tabulated. Declining Productivity in JOCALIS Aluminium Roofing
Sheet Manufacturing Company Limited, Onitsha.' Notably,
Data Analysis on the Labour these maintenance costs primarily encompass expenditures
As of the time of this research, the company is made up of on machine parts and aluminium sheet product, with a
130 workers, functioning at the production line department, specific focus on achieving a target cost of N1,350.75 ($1.5)
which are grouped in skilled and unskilled. Table 1 presents per square meter of product. The comprehensive breakdown
the number and classification of the workers. of these maintenance costs over the course of a year is
presented in the Table 3, while further analysed on a chart in
Table 1: Labour (Production Department)
Fig 3.3.
Job designation Number
Casual workers 17 Table 3: Maintenance Cost (From August 2021 to July 2022)
Operators 50
Month Maintenance Cost in Naira (#)
Artisans 20
August 10,863,792.93
Forklift drivers 6
September 10,072,550.51
Machine specialists 14
October 13,360,266.22
Team leaders 8
November 15,388,173.04
Maintenance planners 2
December 12,825,811.26
Maintenance controllers 3
January 19,735,682.48
Logistic controller 1
February 21,975,705.88
Unit managers 1
March 19,607,159.38
Packaging Engineer 1
April 12,023,906.46
Packaging manager 1
May 13,485,335.19
Others (clerks, administrative officer) 3
June 18,929,708.97
Total 130
July 14,836,231.43
The percentage of unskilled workforce from the above data
is 17.7% which includes all the casual workers, while the
remaining 82.3% are taken by skilled staffs.

Data Analysis on the System Maintenance

In as much as all (including the casual workers) participate
during a maintenance session, it is the sole responsibility of
some key people in the department known as the “asset
care” to drive it. A planned maintenance session lasts an
average of 8hours weekly although sometimes exceeds that Fig 2: The Maintenance Cost Chart over a Period of 12 Months
1097
International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Studies www.multiresearchjournal.com

Machines used and its Performance 2022 (12 months). Table 4 - 6 presents the machines used in
This section presents three lines production used by the the product manufacturing, packaging, its break down
company, each line possesses the same production process pattern, and monthly down time frequency information at
and machine, the data collected runs from August - July the three lines.

Table 4: The Production Break Down Pattern and Down Time Record Over a Year Period in Line 1 (Red Coated Line)
Machine/ Downtime incurred (mins) Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Rolling Mills 249 181 262 193 106 128 170 143 127 148 233 167
Shearing Machines 212 190 175 168 159 173 148 157 123 106 154 1183
Coating Machines 40 17 54 16 70 55 69 56 102 33 159 17
Annealing Furnaces 37 34 46 122 18 37 154 109 123 44 69 106
Slitting Machines 255 313 196 249 332 149 271 178 136 114 228 143
Laminators 146 209 241 268 270 183 174 162 198 187 175 162
Cutting Machines 447 359 182 355 277 319 452 313 285 177 184 464
Extrusion Machines 179 183 113 172 209 216 177 185 162 152 138 173
Stamping Presses 258 309 352 388 371 358 260 359 318 264 208 354
Welding Machines 2372 1300 1269 1311 1362 1481 1533 1540 1451 1316 438 1515
Casting Equipment 147 146 150 175 108 131 239 176 138 144 105 152
Quality Control Equipment 102 110 97 148 116 129 133 154 162 184 175 116
Material Handling Equipment 48 20 59 162 83 179 156 108 137 44 66 40
Forklifts 56 140 136 104 16 29 437 153 116 145 179 188
Conveyors 129 136 187 152 329 326 148 176 179 168 174 47
Cranes 871 583 742 651 718 577 950 500 471 586 612 347

Table 5: The Production Break Down Pattern and Down Time Record Over a Year Period in Line 2 (Black Colour Coating)
Machine/ Downtime incurred (mins) Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Rolling Mills 288 362 183 199 332 401 258 179 186 177 181 149
Shearing Machines 178 264 192 338 491 414 258 439 662 173 189 155
Coating Machines 76 88 162 179 183 189 131 168 213 175 136 111
Annealing Furnaces 108 113 169 183 316 200 188 169 254 183 179 158
Slitting Machines 137 399 448 1200 1662 983 179 567 540 622 181 162
Laminators 192 189 266 362 165 249 133 142 185 194 188 199
Cutting Machines 207 319 347 1320 545 300 520 680 159 180 135 375
Extrusion Machines 48 117 250 310 281 158 179 188 291 542 163 540
Stamping Presses 922 1822 2610 1458 933 820 1336 1740 670 515 1860 1774
Welding Machines 3106 4000 2860 3008 1924 2664 1843 1680 1720 1740 3312 2740
Casting Equipment 206 331 147 326 558 729 184 1677 156 170 228 476
Quality Control Equipment 18 142 196 181 37 48 69 77 52 161 183 151
Material Handling Equipment 27 184 166 175 189 105 260 149 182 171 233 168
Forklifts 49 66 39 45 69 54 168 25 90 77 86 50
Conveyors 126 121 201 316 289 143 116 185 178 109 74 132
Cranes 330 1640 1380 1744 2960 183 1055 329 1770 2080 1489 1622

Fig 3: Average Machine Down-Time Frequency in Production Line 1 And 2

1098
International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Studies www.multiresearchjournal.com

Table 6: The Production Break Down Pattern and Down Time Record Over a Year Period in Line 3 (Milk Colour Coating)
Machine/ Downtime incurred (mins) Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Rolling Mills 116 123 146 310 187 139 105 122 138 84 164 114
Shearing Machines 185 148 137 1558 1670 189 1532 800 175 182 176 338
Coating Machines 14 0 152 136 144 37 162 173 15 100 33 9
Annealing Furnaces 170 199 164 138 133 115 244 283 154 166 150 33
Slitting Machines 29 118 262 138 175 132 152 109 154 148 166 130
Laminators 2662 149 344 633 312 209 423 313 123 144 14 178
Cutting Machines 146 520 844 167 132 53 343 518 545 332 155 196
Extrusion Machines 116 240 174 134 544 298 651 371 359 243 257 173
Stamping Presses 181 374 218 196 266 149 200 159 186 247 446 224
Welding Machines 337 527 332 1186 1006 499 176 1526 1340 1265 1255 1118
Casting Equipment 0 9 0 0 11 315 38 152 166 174 122 06
Quality Control Equipment 420 365 172 199 155 318 568 196 186 742 195 187
Material Handling Equipment 250 337 215 378 179 210 111 371 459 236 380 494
Forklifts 314 387 143 379 118 273 429 208 353 409 437 513
Conveyors 800 193 222 148 160 187 415 387 208 177 162 349
Cranes 12 140 169 133 141 283 164 140 139 122 1440 386

This downtime occurs in bits but after the day’s job, an This implies that the company loses on the milk colour
average of 5hours is lost daily and this has some coated metal roofing sheet is #2,843,100 in an hour’s
consequences, for instance output target not met, therefore downtime for line 3.
the company losses money, machine, and other factory In the course of this work, machine has been identified as
efficiencies are equally not achieved. the common source of loss time in JOCALIS Aluminuim
Roofing Sheet LTD Onitsha, which at times runs into hours.
Analysis of the Cost Implication of an Hour Down Time In fact, on an average 15-20 minutes production time is lost
Incurred from the System every hour. This has posed a great concern as the factory is
Using the data provided above for the various line running below its efficiencies.
capacities, an analysis was carried out to ascertain the level
of lost money wise incurred in an hour down time and the Model Equation Formulation/Implementation
result is as follows: The expression to define the reliability is given as:
For Aluminium Roofing Sheet Production line 1:
Line capacity = 28,000 sheets per hour (1)
Numbers of sheets per company complete product package
in a bundle = 12 Hence R(t) is the reliability also called the survivor function.
Quantity produced/hour = 28000 ÷12 = 1708 sheets per hour This is defined as the probability of operation without
(approximately) failure to time. F(t) is the cumulative failure distribution
12 sheets make a bundle therefore quantity of bundles function (CDF). In reliability F(t) is the probability that
produced per hour randomly chosen part will fail by time (t).
A sheet of red colouraluminium roofing sheet is sold at the A life time distribution model F(t) is the probability density
rate of #1370 by the company which implies that in an hour function (PDF) over the time range 0 to ∞ (infinity). The
the company makes or loses 1708 X #1370 = #2,339,960 on relationship between CDF and PDF is illustrated below:
downtime for line1
F(t) = (2)
For Aluminium Roofing Sheet Production line 2:
Line capacity = 40,000 sheets/hour
Numbers of sheets per bundle = 12 f (t) = (3)
Quantity produced per hour (in bundle) = 40,000 ÷ 12 =
3333 bundles per hour (approximately) Hazard Rate H(t)
Cost per sheet = #1370 This also known as the instantaneous failure rate, is the
Therefore, the cost in an hour downtime = N1370 × 3333 probability that a failure will occur in the next time interval
bundles = N4,566,210 divided by the reliability R(t). It is mainly for non-repairable
This implies that the company loses on black coated metal material.
roofing sheet is #4,566,210 in an hour’s downtime for line 2. The probability of normal operation up to a given time is
called reliability;
For Aluminium Roofing Sheet Production line 3:
Line capacity = 35,000 sheets/hour
Numbers of sheets per bundle = 24
Quantity produced/hour (bundle) = 35,000 ÷ 24 = 1458 h(t) = (4)
bundles per hour (approximately)
Cost per bundle = #1950 It can also be written as
Therefore, the cost in an hour downtime = N1950 × 1458
bundles = #2,843,100
h(t) = (5)

1099
International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Studies www.multiresearchjournal.com

Which is equivalent to F(t) = 1- (11)

h(t) = (lnR.t) (6) f(t) = λ (12)

The integral of the hazard rate is the cumulative failure rate The mean time to failure of the exponential function is
(cumulative hazard rate). simply the inverse of the failure rate

H(t) = MTTF = (13)

The Weibull Distribution for Calculation of Failure Rate

(7) and Reliability
The Weibull distribution is used to fit various shapes of
Reliability Distribution reliability curves. The Weibull function can be expressed in
The hazard rate h(t) or instantaneous failure rate multiple ways. The Weibull expression below is the
Since R(0) = 1 (perfect reliability) probability of survival R (t) between time zero and time.
No failure at time of zero
The reliability rate over a time period t is
R(t) = (14)

R(t) = (8) There are three Weibull reliability curve pit parameters in
even the basic form of the Weibull function. They are:
This also termed mean time to failure (MTTF) more 1. B = the shape parameter
specifically, the mean time to failure 2. Y = the location parameter also known as the detect
initial on time parameter
3. α = the characteristic life scale parameter.
MTTF = 1 = (9)
This Weibull can have variants, the two-parameter
The Bathtub Curve distribution. The difference between the two variants is
The distribution of failures over the life time of a product whether or not failures start at time zero. If failure does start
population is initially important to the detection of reliability at a time zero, the defeat initiation time parameter (also
physics. Using these concepts hazard rate that changes over known as location parameter) is zero and Weibull
the life time of the product starting high, reducing and exponential expression is reduced to.
increasing towards the end of the product life is termed the
bathtub curve.
The population will have defective items that will fail within R(t) = (15)
the first few weeks to months of the product life time (infant
mortality) is termed the bathtub curve because of the shape When = 1 equation 3.15 becomes the exponential model
of the curve itself. An ideal life time distribution failure
behaviour is to eliminate the failures due to defects in the 3.10 with β =
infant mortality portion of the curve through born-in and /or
defect reduction programs and do not operate the product The two-parameter fit model is commonly used in reliability
into the wear out phase. The operational life is within the life predictions. The PDF off the two parameter Weibull
typical constant hazard rate section of the curve for proper model
life time distribution modelling, individual failure
mechanisms must be modelled independently and there must f(t) = (16)
be only one population. If there are multiple populations (or
subpopulation) within the data must be individually
extracted and statically analysed as single populations. F(t) = 1 - (17)
There is various time to failure distributions to express
population life time behaviour statically, three popular The cumulative failure rate of the two parameters Weibull
statically reliability distributions are to be expended, they model (cumulative hazard rate) is expressed as:
are exponential distribution. Weibull distribution and the
lognormal distribution.
H(t) = (18)
The Exponential Distribution for Calculation of Failure
Rate and Reliability The lognormal Distribution for Calculating Failure Rate
The exponential distribution is the least complex of all life and Reliability
time distributions models. The failure rate or hazard rate h(t) The other popular statistical distribution is the lognormal
= λ. The failure rate is a constant in this model which is time to failure distribution is as it is named. The lognormal
suitable for the stable for failure rate regime. distribution is also called the Gausian distribution PDF.

R(t) = (10)
f(t) = (19)
1100
International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Studies www.multiresearchjournal.com

important to the company’s success. The KPI’s that usually

F(t) = (20) calls for concern in the production unit are: Factory
Efficiency, Adjustable Factory Efficiency, Machine
3. Results Efficiency, Compliancy to Plan, Line Efficiency, Operating
The company sets out some key performance indicators Efficiency, and Availability. The outcome of others. The
(KPI) which they use to measure factors that are crucial to above mentioned are measured in percentage (%). The
their business success in their effort to achieve and sustain incessant machine unavailability has made these KPI’s seem
their vision/mission statements, for production department, unrealistic as the company month after month cannot meet
these KPI’ are hardly achieved as a result of the frequent up with its target and KPI’s.
machine failures. The KPI’ are chosen based on what is

Table 7: Downtime Sources, Frequency, and its Degree of Occurrence

Downtime source Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Machine 17318 18216 17571 21811 20811 15516 18061 18691 16236 15852 17666 18584
Operational (man) 10 0 0 5 13 0 0 4 0 0 0 27
Materials 175 277 180 21 115 228 217 101 156 108 138 115
Accident 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
Utilities supply 215 305 117 205 414 59 65 72 137 149 162 138
Program/software error 12 34 15 0 33 68 49 12 0 4 10 41
Others (jam, trip, dirt carryover etc) 50 44 13 51 62 38 66 75 49 22 61 17

Fig 4: Graphical Representation of Average Downtime Sources

Table 8: KPI’S Over the Last Twelve Months

Type of Efficiency
Target (%) AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MRCH APR MAY JUNE JULY AVER
Line 1 (Red Coated)
Machine Efficiency 99 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 84.23
Factory Efficiency 88 67 75 70 68 72 66 70 59 71 73 59 51 66.75
Operating Efficiency 95 74 68 75 72 66 70 61 66 61 62 68 66 67.42
Line Efficiency 92 70 74 71 74 75 71 72 67 69 7369 69 64 70.75
Compliancy to Plan 98 69 71 68 69 70 68 66 59 62 70 67 61 66.67
Line 2 (Black Coated)
Type of Efficiency Target (%) AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MRCH APR MAY JUNE JULY AVER
Machine Efficiency 99 77 79 82 75 81 77 80 69 76 78 80 82 79.62
Factory Efficiency 88 65 67 71 45 71 69 65 66 73 68 71 69 66.75
Operating Efficiency 95 76 71 69 71 83 77 71 74 61 70 72 68 71.92
Line Efficiency 92 69 70 70 66 79 70 70 68 72 73 70 66 72.15
Compliancy to Plan 98 67 74 77 62 68 64 68 65 71 73 79 72 70.00
Line 3 (Milk Coated)
Type of Efficiency Target (%) AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MRCH APR MAY JUNE JULY AVER
Machine Efficiency 99 78 77 72 78 76 73 79 70 75 68 75 69 76.08
Factory Efficiency 88 80 81 86 82 79 73 64 72 85 83 77 71 77.75
Operating Efficiency 95 87 81 89 72 83 77 75 72 55 82 79 88 78.33
Line Efficiency 92 77 84 83 89 83 75 71 68 65 80 73 71 76.58
Compliancy to Plan 98 73 83 85 88 85 71 70 71 69 79 75 73 76.83

1101
International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Studies www.multiresearchjournal.com

Fig 5: Various KPI Efficiencies for line 1

Fig 6: Various KPI Efficiencies for line 2

Fig 7: Various KPI Efficiencies for Line 3

Table 9: Quantity of Aluminium Roofing Sheet Produced in a Year (Aug 2021 and July 2021)
Month Plan Actual
Line 1= 128,000 Line 1= 12,960
Line 2 =1,817,000 Line 2 =1,669,028
August
Line 3 =4,000 Line 3 =3,260
Total =1,949,000 Total = 1,685,256
Line 1=78,000 Line 1=167,359
Line 2 =1,674,000 Line 2 =1,580,815
September
Line 3 = 106,000 Line 3 = 49,918
Total =1,858,000 Total = 1,748,174
Line 1=279,000 Line 1=196,705
Line 2 =1,724,062 Line 2 =1,330,320
October
Line 3 =39,000 Line 3 = 41,985
Total = 2,042,062 Total = 1,610,995
Line 1=232,000 Line 1= 308,743
November Line 2 =1,676,000 Line 2 =1,815,698
Line 3 =19,000 Line 3 =18,000
1102
International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Studies www.multiresearchjournal.com

Total =1,927,000 Total =1,891,148

Line 1=592,000 Line 1= 759,884
Line 2 =1,706,000 Line 2 =1,815,698
December
Line 3 =17,700 Line 3 =78,857
Total =2,315,700 Total =2,654,439
Line 1=439,900 Line 1=559,283
Line 2 =1,430,000 Line 2 =1,390,217
January
Line 3 = 20,000 Line 3 = 21,801
Total = 1,889,900 Total = 1,971,301
Line 1= 655,800 Line 1= 648,117
Line 2 =1,321,000 Line 2 =1,193,476
February
Line 3 = 52,450 Line 3 = 53,600
Total = 2,029,250 Total = 1,895,193
Line 1= 782,345 Line 1= 719,594
Line 2 =1,821,960 Line 2 =1,586,680
March
Line 3 =85,000 Line 3 = 62,725
Total =2,689,305 Total =2,368,999
Line 1=651,636 Line 1= 527,544
Line 2 =1,751,459 Line 2 =1,180,642
April
Line 3 =75,000 Line 3 =72,511
Total = 2,478,095 Total = 1,780,697
Line 1= 808,094 Line 1= 726,239
Line 2 =1,791,833 Line 2 =1,584,528
May
Line 3 = 55,000 Line 3 = 38,988
Total = 2,654,927 Total = 2,349,755
Line 1= 976,153 Line 1= 875,496
Line 2 = 1,869,084 Line 2 = 1,626,021
June
Line 3 = 93,220 Line 3 = 91,304
Total =2,938,457 Total =2,592,821
Line 1=790,007 Line 1=612,085
Line 2 =1,164,500 Line 2 =1,036,604
July
Line 3 =55,450 Line 3 = 48,644
Total =2,009,957 Total = 1,697,333

Table 10: Summary of the Profit and Loss Incurred on the Companies Output
Cases Lost or Gained Loss /Profit Incurred
Month Plan Actual
(Plan ― Actual) [(Plan ― Actual) X #1400 ― Unit Cost of a Case]
August 2,209,000 1,979,093 229,907 = Lost 321,869,800
September 2,131,000 2,132,645 1,645 = Gained 203,000 (profit)
October 2,276,237 1,831,194 445,053 = Lost 623,060,200
November 1,975.000 1,928,350 46,650 = Lost 65,310,000
December 2,748,700 3,091,630 342,930 = Gained 480,102,000 (profit)
January 2,334,900 2,269,089 65,811 = Lost 92,135,400
February 2,358,250 2,160,961 197,289 = Lost 276,204,600
March 3,056,201 2,726,382 329,819 = Lost 461,746,600
April 2,849,095 2,000,481 848,614 = Lost 1,188,059,600
May 2,992,438 2,570,401 422,037 = Lost 590,851,800
June 3,525,174 3,034,833 490,341 = Lost 686,477,400
July 2,260,507 1,921,202 339,305 = Lost 475,027,000

Fig 8: JOCALIS Company Production Plan/ Actual within a Year

1103
International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Studies www.multiresearchjournal.com

4. Conclusion Manufacturing Firms. Journal of Cleaner Production.

This project was carried out on the machines in the 2017; 140(Part 3):711-719.
production line of JOCALIS Aluminium Roofing Sheet 5. Sousa R, Farias T, Marinho A, Magalhães S. A
Company LTD, Onitsha, Anamabra State, Nigeria. On this Comparative Study of Quality Management Practices in
study, all repeated breakdowns were analysed along with the Manufacturing Companies in Portugal and Brazil.
critical parts, which has been under breakdown condition is Procedia Manufacturing. 2019; 39:302-309.
also identified and analysed. Also, the reason for the 6. Gosavi A. Maintenance, Reliability, and Condition
breakdown has been analysed and some of the tools of root Monitoring for Manufacturing Firms. Operations
cause analysis like 5-why analysis, fish bone diagram was Research Perspectives. 2019; 6:100145.
integrated to identify the actual cause of the breakdown. By 7. Ali A, Ali S. An Assessment of the Impact of
this analysis and methods, the root causes of the machine Downtime on Manufacturing Performance in the Food
breakdowns were identified. This in turn helped to develop Industry. Journal of Manufacturing Technology
and improve a new preventive maintenance checklist for the Management. 2017; 28(1):30-50.
machine. This method is used to prevent the failure of 8. Appelbaum E, Bailey T, Berg P, Kalleberg AL.
equipment before it actually occurs. The average availability Manufacturing Advantage: Why High-Performance
of critical machine like the roller machine after root cause Work Systems Pay Off. Cornell University Press, 2017.
analysis is increased by 10.62%. Also, the average MTBF of 9. Hu Y, Chen H, Wang J, Deng S. Impact of Employee
the critical machine after root cause analysis is increased by Satisfaction on Quality and Productivity in High-
13.66% and MTTR is decreased to 46.42% respectively. Technology Manufacturing Firms. International Journal
After root cause analysis there is an improvement in the of Quality & Reliability Management. 2018;
maximization of planned productivity, this is because of 35(7):1545-1560.
proper diagnosis of the existing system and by employing 10. Olajide OA, Kekong CK. The Impact of Quality
proper preventive maintenance schedule. Therefore, Management Practices on Manufacturing Performance
whenever a breakdown occurs, the root cause of the in the Nigerian Cement Industry. Journal of
breakdown has to be identified. Then some efforts should be Manufacturing Technology Management. 2019;
made to improve this system using root cause analysis and 30(8):1251-1272.
counter measures, such that similar type of breakdown can
be reduced.
Therefore, in summary, this work resulted in reduced
machine downtime during production, increased machine
availability, increase in machine/factory efficiency by an
increased MTBF (Mean Time Between Repair) and
decreased MTTR (Mean Time to Repair), increased overall
equipment effectiveness (OEE), improved safety and quality
conditions, improved factory efficiency, improved
adjustable factory efficiency, improved machine efficiency,
improved compliancy to plan, improved line efficiency and
improved operating efficiency. Furthermore, the general
impact of this study impact includes: reduced overtime costs
and more economical use of maintenance workers due to
working on a scheduled basis instead of a crash basis to
repair breakdowns, timely, routine repairs circumvent fewer
large-scale repairs, reduced cost of repairs by reducing
secondary failures, identification of equipment with
excessive maintenance costs, indicating the need for
corrective maintenance, operator training, or replacement of
obsolete equipment and parts stocking levels can be
optimized.

5. References
1. Mishra S, Rao T. Manufacturing Sector Growth and
Economic Development in India. Journal of
Contemporary Issues in Business and Government.
2020; 26(2):654-666.
2. Oluwole OO. The Role of Manufacturing Sector in
Economic Growth: An Empirical Study of Nigeria.
Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development.
2018; 9(4):11-20.
3. Dinovitzer R. Production Imperatives: Work, Value,
and Industrial Organization in Japan. Sociological
Theory. 2015; 33(3):241-265.
4. Chien CF, Chen LH, Huang CY. The Impact of Quality
Management Practices on Green Innovation and
Organizational Performance: Empirical Study of
1104