Schematic signal. No live readings.
- Family
- Production
- Owner
- Line supervisor
- Response
- Shift review
GFT / Cameroon textile / Performance-management system
Every measure
needs an action.
A proposed operating spine joins six KPI families, line-level capture and management review. The same data prepares the ground for the digital strategy.
Prepared January 2024
Operating spine · Six KPI familiesSelect a family signal
Read the instrument
Select a family. See the decision behind it.
These gauges represent the six families in the programme design. Their arcs are schematic and display no invented performance score. Select a family to inspect the unit, owner and response it needs. Actual targets require an agreed product, operating boundary and baseline.
Production → line supervisor → shift review
Make good output visible by shift.
- Measure
- Good output against the agreed plan, by shift
- Owner
- Line supervisor
- Response
- Shift review
Compare the output of the defined line and product with its agreed plan. Record planned time, interruptions and actual output separately. The supervisor needs an actionable reason for the gap, while the plant review needs a reconciliation that can be traced back to events.
Quality → quality lead → containment
Separate the first pass from the repair.
- Measure
- Accepted units over inspected units, with rework kept apart
- Owner
- Quality lead
- Response
- Containment
Record inspected units, accepted units, defect types and rework. Keep the inspection method and counting rule consistent. A lower defect count means little if the inspection coverage changed. Quality measures should direct containment and corrective action, not encourage a team to stop recording problems.
Delivery → planning owner → order review
Preserve the original promise.
- Measure
- Order completion against the quantity and date agreed
- Owner
- Planning owner
- Response
- Order review
Measure order completion against the quantity and date actually agreed with the buyer. Retain changes to that promise and distinguish internal readiness from customer delivery. The response may involve production planning, materials or transport, so an exception needs a cross-functional owner.
Cost → operations and finance → reconciliation
Give cost per garment a good-output denominator.
- Measure
- Cost per accepted garment, within a stated period
- Owner
- Operations and finance
- Response
- Reconciliation
Relate labour and other costs to accepted output within a stated period. Keep overtime, rework and idle time visible. Product-mix changes can alter the meaning of a comparison; explain them before treating an apparent cost movement as a gain or loss in productivity.
People → supervisors and training → coverage
Measure capability alongside attendance.
- Measure
- Skills coverage and attendance, with access limited by role
- Owner
- Supervisors and training
- Response
- Coverage plan
The team needs attendance, skills coverage and practical learning records that support the operating plan. A missing skill can interrupt a line even when every position is filled. Use the record to plan coaching and safe deployment, with access to individual data limited by role.
Sustainability → process owner → resource review
Keep the resource boundary with the reading.
- Measure
- Energy, water and waste against the process and its output
- Owner
- Process owner
- Response
- Resource review
Record energy, water and waste against the relevant process and output. Preserve meter status and missing readings. A per-garment ratio can change because the product or boundary changed; it should not be advertised as an improvement without an appropriate comparison.
Arcs are schematic. They are not performance scores and show no reading from a line.
Define the operating boundary
A measurement contract precedes a dashboard.
Record Line A · Shift 2 · Style X · Batch 0147
- 01EventEnters, leaves, reject, stoppage
- 02OwnerRecords, validates, acts
- 03RevisionCorrected, original kept
Event timestamps · illustrative times
Worked example 14:20:07 · Unit leaves · accepted first pass
Define the operating boundary
The programme’s system covers the operation from cutting through sewing to finishing and dispatch. It is designed to run the factory and to generate the data later applications will consume. Begin with a small set of measures the team can record and act on.
Field 01 of 03
Define the event.
Specify when a unit enters and leaves the process, how a reject is counted and when a stoppage begins. Keep rework distinct from first-pass output. Write these rules close to the capture point so different shifts do not create different versions of the same measure.
Field 02 of 03
Define the owner.
Name the role responsible for recording, validating and acting on each exception. Those responsibilities may belong to different people. A useful measure connects the person who sees a problem to someone with the authority and resources to resolve it.
Field 03 of 03
Define the revision.
Allow errors to be corrected without losing the original record. Retain the reason and timing of an amendment. Missing data should remain visible as missing until reconciled; silently replacing it with a plausible value makes later analysis less trustworthy.
Follow the sequence
The review rhythm changes the scale of the question.
Three cadences, one record
The design uses daily, weekly and monthly reviews. Each cadence has a different purpose. Follow the sequence to see how the same event moves from an immediate response to a planning decision. Select a cadence to inspect its place in the chain.
Daily review, the line
Daily: contain the exception.
The line review checks output, quality, attendance and interruptions against the current plan. It assigns an immediate response and escalation. Keep the conversation close to the event while the people involved can explain what happened.
Weekly review, the plant
Weekly: remove recurring causes.
The cross-functional review looks for repeated constraints in the reconciled record. Select an improvement experiment, assign responsibility and agree the evidence expected afterwards. Do not confuse a repeated symptom with a proven cause.
Monthly review, the plan
Monthly: change the plan.
Management reviews capacity, demand, cost and resource performance together. Decisions may alter training, maintenance priorities or commercial commitments. Keep the changed assumption in the record so the next period is assessed against the correct plan.
- Scale of the question
- The line
- The question
- What happened, and who responds now?
- Owner
- Line supervisor with the line team
- Output
- An immediate response and an escalation
- Scale of the question
- The plant
- The question
- What keeps coming back, and what do we test?
- Owner
- The cross-functional review
- Output
- One experiment, an owner and the expected evidence
- Scale of the question
- The plan
- The question
- Which assumption changes next period?
- Owner
- Management
- Output
- A changed assumption kept in the record
Keep provenance attached
Capacity utilisation must stay separate from OEE.
Provenance and boundary
Historical CICAM figures in the programme annex describe capacity utilisation. OEE instead combines availability, performance and quality inside a defined process and time boundary. Use the OEE instrument to inspect that distinction with illustrative shift inputs. The historical numbers below are contextual observations from a July 2023 report.
Boundary comparison · Step 01
Reported utilisation is a capacity ratio.
Three sites, three percentages, one July 2023 report. They describe how much capacity was used, on that report’s own boundary.
Boundary comparison · Step 02
OEE needs three factors in one boundary.
Availability, performance and quality, measured on the same line, product and time window. None of the three is stated for these sites.
Boundary comparison · Step 03
The gap cannot be computed from these figures.
No OEE value can be read off a utilisation percentage. The honest entry is blank until the event record exists.
Reported Garoua utilisation
Garoua: 33.7%
Historical third-party capacity utilisation. Not a GFT KPI reading.
Reported CICAM 1 utilisation
CICAM 1: 48.9%
A different material and time boundary from a shift OEE calculation.
Reported CICAM 2 utilisation
CICAM 2: 10.83%
No OEE value can be inferred from this percentage alone.
- Annex figure (July 2023)
- Garoua: 33.7% capacity utilisation
- OEE factor boundary
- Availability × Performance × Quality
- Boundary status
- Historical third-party capacity utilisation. Not a GFT KPI reading.
- Annex figure (July 2023)
- CICAM 1: 48.9% capacity utilisation
- OEE factor boundary
- Availability × Performance × Quality
- Boundary status
- A different material and time boundary from a shift OEE calculation.
- Annex figure (July 2023)
- CICAM 2: 10.83% capacity utilisation
- OEE factor boundary
- Availability × Performance × Quality
- Boundary status
- No OEE value can be inferred from this percentage alone.
Warp and Signal
A dashboard cannot repair an undefined denominator.
Output, defects and hours can be perfectly legible and still describe incompatible boundaries. The management system earns trust by preserving the relationship between the event and the decision. Its first achievement is a reconciled record that the operating team can explain, rather than a favourable-looking trend.
Every hour on the roster, including time no event explains. Largest denominator, lowest ratio. The spine is pulled out of true.
The operating time the plan allowed, with stoppages inside it. Middle denominator, middle ratio. The spine is part way back.
Only the time the event record can account for. Smallest denominator, highest ratio. The spine is seated. Ask what was left out.
Schematic bar lengths, not data. One output, three denominators: the ratio is only as honest as the boundary chosen first. The orbiting instruments are a KPI architecture. They do not show readings from an installed line or imply that the proposed management routine is in use.
Make the design operational
The data spine connects capture, validation and response.
Captured at the process
- Line · shift · product · batch
- Event time and counting basis
- Status: timely, or late manual entry
Reconciled before analysis
- Good output, rejects and rework against material flow
- Event coverage against planned time
- Duplicates and gaps resolved, reason kept
Returned to an owner
- Exception with its definition and context
- Owner may challenge before acting
- Action closed, then change checked
The proposed system keeps a common record for the factory and the digital layer. Start with capture methods that operators can sustain under real shift conditions. Add automation where it improves completeness or timeliness. The ability to explain a record matters more than the sophistication of the device that collected it.
Capture at the process.
Use a stable line, shift, product and batch identity. Record the event time and counting basis. Provide a practical fallback when a device is unavailable. A late manual entry needs its own status so it is not mistaken for a timely machine observation.
Reconcile before analysis.
Check whether good output, rejects and rework explain the material flow. Compare event coverage with planned operating time. Investigate duplicate or missing observations. Keep the resolution record, because a later model can otherwise learn a recording habit instead of a production pattern.
Return the result to an owner.
Present an exception with its definition, context and recommended review. The responsible role should be able to challenge it. Track whether an action was completed and whether the expected change followed; closing an action is different from proving a benefit.
Test before extending
Maturity is demonstrated through routine use.
Progression rule Each stage depends on verified routine use of the stage before it.
Stage 01 gate Trace dashboard figures back to ordinary and interrupted shift source events.
Stage 02 gate Verify unresolved exceptions remain open with an owner and follow-up date.
Stage 03 gate Hold product mix and operating boundary constant before extending an intervention.
Data-driven decisions
CaptureSource events traced
ReviewAction log checked
ImproveComparison held
Design stages. Not an assessment of a current GFT factory.
Test before extending
Routine adoption precedes expansion.
The programme proposes a progression from basic capture through consistent review to improvement and data-driven decisions. These are design stages, not an assessment of a current GFT factory. The next stage should depend on the reliability of the previous one. A completed installation or training session cannot establish sustained adoption on its own.
Stage one: capture
A record the team can reconcile.
Evidence needed
Sample ordinary shifts, including interrupted ones, and trace the dashboard back to source events. Ask operators and supervisors to explain the counting rules. Investigate missing periods before using the record as a baseline for an improvement claim.
Stage two: review
A review that changes action.
Evidence needed
Inspect the action log for an owner, expected result and follow-up. Confirm that unresolved exceptions remain visible. A meeting that merely displays indicators does not demonstrate that the management routine has become useful.
Stage three: improve
An improvement that survives comparison.
Evidence needed
Evaluate an intervention under a comparable product mix and operating boundary. Retain contrary results and alternative explanations. Use the evidence to decide whether to repeat, revise or stop the intervention before extending it across more lines.
- Family
- Production
- Owner
- Line supervisor
- Response
- Shift review
- Family
- Quality
- Owner
- Quality lead
- Response
- Containment
- Family
- Delivery
- Owner
- Planning owner
- Response
- Order review
- Family
- Cost
- Owner
- Operations and finance
- Response
- Reconciliation
- Family
- People
- Owner
- Supervisors and training
- Response
- Coverage plan
- Family
- Sustainability
- Owner
- Process owner
- Response
- Resource review
Continue through the programme
Carry a measure into its next decision.
Use the programme links to reconnect the KPI architecture to feasibility and digital design. The OEE model is available for an illustrative shift calculation. Further instruments and papers are shown with their availability status. This is a proposed management design, with no claim of deployment, certification or realised savings.
Production → line supervisor → shift review
Next decision
Take the shift gap to its events
Quality → quality lead → containment
Next decision
Hold the counting rule steady
Delivery → planning owner → order review
Next decision
Keep the promise in the record
Cost → operations and finance → reconciliation
Next decision
Reconcile cost to accepted output
People → supervisors and training → coverage
Next decision
Plan coaching from the record
Sustainability → process owner → resource review
Next decision
State the boundary before the ratio
The same record feeds The connected programmeFeasibility studyDigital strategy
A proposed management design. No claim of deployment, certification or realised savings.