applied
sciences
Article
Practical Application of Plan–Do–Check–Act Cycle
for Quality Improvement of Sustainable Packaging:
A Case Study
Vi Nguyen 1 , Nam Nguyen 1 , Bastian Schumacher 2
1
2
*
and Thanh Tran 1, *
Faculty of Engineering, Vietnamese-German University, Le Lai Street, Hoa Phu Ward,
Thu Dau Mot City 75000, Binh Duong Province, Vietnam; vi.nh@vgu.edu.vn (V.N.);
gpem2016_nam.nh@student.vgu.edu.vn (N.N.)
Chair of Sustainable Corporate Development, Technische Universität Berlin, Straße des 17. Juni 135,
10623 Berlin, Germany; bastian.schumacher@tu-berlin.de
Correspondence: thanh.tt@vgu.edu.vn
Received: 8 August 2020; Accepted: 9 September 2020; Published: 11 September 2020
Featured Application: This research underscores the benefits of Plan–Do–Check–Act (PDCA)
methodology in quality improvement. Practitioners can use it as the simplified guidance to practice
PDCA combined with other support tools. Through the packaging case study, all stages of PDCA
are clearly instructed step by step to effectively implement. The new packaging method which
concentrates on effective designs and using recycled, bio-degradable, friendly environmental materials
balances quality and profit for the company. It can be used as a benchmark example for PDCA in
continuous quality improvement for packaging.
Abstract: The research aims to give practical instructions for applying Plan–Do–Check–Act (PDCA)
cycle in a packaging process. Eco-friendly, recycled material and a new packaging method for quality
improvement and cost efficiency of heavily fragile product packaging are studied in this paper.
A case study was conducted at GPEM laboratory, Vietnamese German University, Vietnam. In this
case study, the current packaging style with Styrofoam material was analyzed and replaced by new
packaging material and methods after applying the PDCA cycle for continuous quality improvement.
Targets of the research were to find the new packaging method using friendly environment materials,
to improve the quality, and to reduce the defect ratio due to packaging for fine-stone round surface
fountains. Moreover, the extra cost should not be higher than 20% compared with the current
packaging cost. The article proposes a simplified way that focuses on the combination of quality
tools in the PDCA multiple phases to solve these problems. The quality tools are applied effectively
through the PDCA cycle from collecting data, defining, analysis, testing, evaluation, and making
decisions. New packaging design was been produced and tested successfully. One hundred percent
of new packaging boxes for the mid-weight fountains (under 15 kg) passed the dropping test
condition. Nearly 10% of the heavier weight products (above 15 kg) still had some small cracks on
their top and bottom due to drop tests. Another PDCA cycle is recommended to continue applying
for achieving a thorough solution. The conducted results show that PDCA is an effective method to
tackle the damage product issue due to inappropriate packaging material and technique. It also
brings good solutions for balancing sustainable packaging improvement and reducing the cost
to ensure profit for companies. Besides contributing a guide reference for PDCA deployment,
the authors intend to inspire practitioners and researchers to broaden exploration of the PDCA
applications for sustainable packaging methodology. The research analysis shows that the PDCA
methodology should be applied for defect reduction and quality enhancement in the packaging field.
The field currently lacks systematic guidance for continuous improvement.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6332; doi:10.3390/app10186332
www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6332
2 of 15
Keywords: lean manufacturing; PDCA; sustainable packaging; quality management
1. Introduction
Packaging has an important role not only in increasing the customer’s satisfaction with the
product but also in improving the economic profits of a company. More than the function of containing
products inside, good packaging protects products from damages in transport, storage, and logistics;
from the end of a production line delivered over retailers, till the end customers. Also, the packaging is
an effective mean of conveying information to customers and partners through design labels shown by
product color, manufacturing date, ingredients, characteristics, weight, user guide, etc. These results
in reducing warranty and compensation costs, increasing the customer’s satisfaction and company’
reputation. In recent years, developing and using sustainable packaging is a global concern to protect
the environment and to reduce the burden of waste treatment for the future generation. Trends in
packaging industry development concentrate in a lower cost: Saving energy on packaging processing;
reducing raw materials; using recycled, bio-degradable material; making a package with prolonging
the durability and flexible for reuse; developing smart and interactive packaging to consumers [1].
This trend also poses challenges for companies in finding new materials and packaging methods which
are able to enhance their responsibility in protecting the living environment and community but still
ensure their economic returns.
There are many types of packaging material which are usually used for fragile products such as
styrofoam, peanut foam, PE foam, bubble wrap, kraft paper, honeycomb, and biodegradable packing
made of natural, non-toxic sources such as wheat, mushroom, and cornstarch. The common of these
materials provide suitable cushioning that prevent damages in inside areas and outside areas due
to hazards and collisions during transit from the manufacturer to customers or the retailer, or even
incidents while the products are in the manufacturer warehouse or on retail shelves. Traditional packing
with styrofoam, peanut foam, PE foam, or bubble wrap has many advantages such as low costs,
lightweight, water insulation, easy to handle characteristics, and flexibility to return to the original
shape after absorbing shock. However, they are types of plastic which create burdens in solving
problems of long-term waste treatment, and are harmful for the environment and human health.
While different types of kraft paper, honeycomb, and biodegradable materials can be the right solutions
for these issues, they do have their disadvantages, i.e., higher weight and higher costs than traditional
packing. Therefore, most companies are not ready to 100% replace their current package material
to biodegradable materials. Instead of using full plastics-based protectors for packaging, they try to
reduce the number of plastics and combine them with friendly environment material.
In Vietnam, current packaging methods for heavily fragile products are commonly styrofoam
and carton box. The packaging method is simple with styrofoam protectors for the product corners,
tops, and bottoms to prevent them from being shocked or vibrations during transportation and
handling processes. However, during the storage and transferring products styrofoam protectors
can be broken down into small pieces due to the pressure and collision between pallets. These are
annoying for the customer when opening the box and have a lower rating for professional packing.
Increasing quality and professionalism in product packaging is a current trend in management strategy,
especially, when Vietnamese companies expand in exporting products to Europe and developed
countries. However, the extra cost for packaging can result in significantly reduced profits of the
company. The target of the study is to give a guideline on how to apply PDCA methodology to tackle
problems in manufacturing. The objectives of the research focus on two main points. The first one is to
develop a simplified combination of PDCA cycle and quality tools for quality packaging improvement.
The second one is to deploy this PDCA cycle to solve multi-objective problems for packaging designs.
The designs should guarantee protection quality, be friendly to the environment, and contribute to
manufacturing cost reduction. Through the case study of finding the new packaging method which
Appl. Sci. 2020,
2020, 10, 6332
x FOR PEER REVIEW
Appl.
of 15
16
33 of
ratio due to packaging, the authors prove that PDCA is an effective method for teamwork in order to
uses
solveeco-friendly
problems. materials to improve the quality, and reduce the defect ratio due to packaging,
the authors prove that PDCA is an effective method for teamwork in order to solve problems.
2. Literature Review
2. Literature Review
Plan–Do–Check–Act (PDCA) methodology was first created and defined in the 1930s by the
Plan–Do–Check–Act
(PDCA)
was first
defined
the 1930s by
American
statistical expert
Waltermethodology
A. Shewart [2,3].
Then,created
in the and
1950s,
it wasindeveloped
by the
W.
American
statistical
expert
Walter
A.
Shewart
[2,3].
Then,
in
the
1950s,
it
was
developed
by
W.
Edwards
Edwards Deming and became one of the most well-known methods in the world to guide
Deming
and became
oneCheck
of the step
mostiswell-known
methods
in the
world
to guide
improvement
[3,4].
improvement
[3,4]. The
sometimes called
Study,
and
the cycle
becomes
the Plan–Do–
The
Check
step
is
sometimes
called
Study,
and
the
cycle
becomes
the
Plan–Do–Study–Act,
PDSA,
Study–Act, PDSA, cycle [5,6]. The “Plan” step includes analyzing and evaluating the existing
cycle
[5,6].After
The “Plan”
step includes
analyzing
and
evaluating
the existing
situation.
After identifying
situation.
identifying
all possible
and root
causes,
the area,
opportunities
for improvement
are
all
possible
and
root
causes,
the
area,
opportunities
for
improvement
are
recognized
recognized and prioritized. Then, changes in the system and setting targets and
thatprioritized.
relate to
Then,
changes are
in the
system and
targets
relate
to the
improvement
arecarried
proposed
planned.
improvement
proposed
and setting
planned.
In thethat
“Do”
step,
changes are
out,and
usually
on a
In
the
“Do”
step,
the
changes
are
carried
out,
usually
on
a
small
or
pilot
scale
to
obtain
the
results
small or pilot scale to obtain the results for studying and analyzing. For each change, the idea is tested
for
analyzing.
For each
the idea
is tested before
and data
is gathered
to support The
the
andstudying
data is and
gathered
to support
thechange,
next phase
to compare
and
after effectiveness.
next
phase
to
compare
before
and
after
effectiveness.
The
“Check/Study”
step
consists
of
analyzing
“Check/Study” step consists of analyzing the results of the changes, determining learning lessons
the
results
of out
the changes,
changes, comparing
determining
learning
outsolutions
changes,brought
comparing
with
from
carried
with
settinglessons
targetsfrom
to seecarried
whether
adequate
setting
targets
to
see
whether
solutions
brought
adequate
results.
In
the
“Act”
step,
if
changes
lead
results. In the “Act” step, if changes lead to improvements, they are adopted and applied on a larger
to
improvements,
theyare
areabandoned.
adopted and
a larger
scale.and
Otherwise,
theyseveral
are abandoned.
scale.
Otherwise, they
Theapplied
processon
can
be iterative
may require
cycles for
The
process
can
be
iterative
and
may
require
several
cycles
for
solving
complex
problems.
In general,
solving complex problems. In general, the PDCA cycle is a continuous process shown in Figure
1, i.e.,
the
is a continuous
process
1, i.e.,
it is and
not an
process.
it is PDCA
not an cycle
end-to-end
process. When
youshown
reach in
theFigure
last stage
of Act
the end-to-end
outcomes meet
the
When
you
reach
the
last
stage
of
Act
and
the
outcomes
meet
the
planned
targets,
you
should
start
all
planned targets, you should start all over again and constantly look for better and continuous
over
again
and
constantly
look
for
better
and
continuous
improvements.
improvements.
Figure 1.
1. Plan–Do–Check–Act (PDCA)
(PDCA) cycle.
cycle.
Figure
Various
forfor
anan
effective
PDCA
cycle
[7].[7].
They
areare
5 Whys,
5S,
Variousquality
qualitytools
toolscan
canbebeused
usedasassupport
support
effective
PDCA
cycle
They
5 Whys,
5W1H,
or
5W2H,
brainstorming,
Ishikawa
diagrams,
Pareto
chart,
the
flow
chart,
Poka
Yoke,
Six
Sigma,
5S, 5W1H, or 5W2H, brainstorming, Ishikawa diagrams, Pareto chart, the flow chart, Poka Yoke, Six
Failure
and Effects,
TreeFault
Analysis,
More than
a simple
is a
Sigma, Mode
FailureAnalysis
Mode Analysis
andFault
Effects,
Tree etc.
Analysis,
etc. More
thanapproach,
a simple PDCA
approach,
philosophy
should be applied
in the be
organizational
for continuousculture
improvement.
For each
PDCA is athat
philosophy
that should
applied in culture
the organizational
for continuous
case
study, PDCA
a new
intersection
between
the scientific
method
andthe
specific
problem-solving
improvement.
Foriseach
case
study, PDCA
is a new
intersection
between
scientific
method and
actions.
scientific methods,
quality scientific
tools are used
for different
of PDCA
to reach
the
specific Various
problem-solving
actions. Various
methods,
quality phases
tools are
used for
different
best
possible
improvement.
of utilizing
tools in the
is atools
scientific
practical
phases
of PDCA
to reach theThe
bestart
possible
improvement.
ThePDCA
art of cycle
utilizing
in theand
PDCA
cycle
combination
attracts numerous
industryattracts
professionals
as well
as scientists.
In this
is a scientific that
and currently
practical combination
that currently
numerous
industry
professionals
as
paper,
5 Whys,In
Ishikawa
diagrams,
5W2H,Ishikawa
Computer
Aided Design
and prototypes
are
well asthe
scientists.
this paper,
the 5 Whys,
diagrams,
5W2H,(CAD)
Computer
Aided Design
used
during
performing
cycle. performing
By mastering
thesecycle.
tools,
article proposes
a simplified
(CAD)
and prototypes
arePDCA
used during
PDCA
Bythe
mastering
these tools,
the article
proposes a simplified way that emphasizes the combination of root-cause analysis, active and
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6332
4 of 15
way that emphasizes the combination of root-cause analysis, active and creative ways to generate
ideas in the planning phase, design for sustainability in the doing phase, and testing methods and
implementing evaluations during PDCA cycle. The case study of this research can contribute as a
successful application of PDCA in the packaging problems which normally lacks guidance for using
systematic methodologies for quality management.
In recent years, the effectiveness of the PDCA methodology for quality improvement has been
underscored in manufacturing [8], services, the health care system [9–11], and other environments.
Matsuo and Nakahara examined and proved the positive effects of PDCA and on-job-training on
significant improvements in workplace learning [12]. Wahiduzzaman, et al. used PDCA and 5S
to minimize the sewing defects for the knit T-Shirts product in an “Interstoff Apparels Limited”,
Bangladesh. They concluded that PDCA cycle is an excellent tool in continuous improvement planning
which resulted in increasing profit and quality for the company [13]. Realyvásquez, et al. used the
PDCA cycle with support tools like the Pareto charts and the flowchart in finding a solution for
at least 20% defect reduction. The successful implementation results in decreasing by 65%, 79%,
and 77% defects in three product models [14]. Sunadi Sunadi, et al. implemented statistical process
control through the PDCA cycle followed with Ishikawa diagram, 5W1H method, and nominal group
technique to improve beer cans packaging. They analyzed and found out the solutions for the process
capability index meeting the specification. The results showed that PDCA is a useful and effective
method for improving packaging quality [15]. The benefits of practicing PDCA in planning, testing,
and developing changes for target purposes make it become a well-known technique in the quality
management field [16–19]. In general, literature shows that the PDCA cycle is highlighted as not only
an effective tool for the quality control of products and process development but also as a logic program
for continuous improvements [20–23]. In addition, PDCA can be used as a base approach to integrating
with other methods in Lean and six sigma methodologies [24–26]. Garza-Reyes et al., proposes an
approach, based on the PDCA cycle, to systematically conduct Environmental-Value Stream Mapping
(E-VSM) studies. They successfully implemented the PDCA-based approach to improve the green
sustainability performance of operations [27]. Jones et al., utilized the PDCA cycle to implement Six
Sigma. They introduce a framework which operationalizes Six Sigma implementation with quality
management and the PDCA cycle to effectively achieve executive commitment [28]. However, learning
and using PDCA cycles can be challenging and time-consuming if the practitioners do not fully
understand the methodology. Unsuccessful PDCA applications are the result of many reasons such as:
Poor studies on a current problem and its obstacle, erroneous data collection, wrong or improper use
of quality tools, fail in defining root causes, insufficient analysis, process non-standardization, or no
sharing learning experience before and after the PDCA implementation [29,30]. This paper explores all
phases of the PDCA cycle for a full understanding. Through a case study in improving packaging
quality, the paper provides a benchmark example on how to apply PDCA in planning, reducing defects,
checking, and monitoring further implementation steps. These help practitioners to avoid mistakes or
main barriers, and to find the right implementing way as well as success factors for the PDCA cycle.
In the next part, quantitative and qualitative methods of the research are explained in detail.
Table 1 is a summary of the methods and techniques used in phases of the proposed PDCA cycle.
The applications of these methods and techniques in packaging quality improvement will be further
discussed in the next session.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6332
5 of 15
Table 1. Research methodologies.
PDCA
Plan
FlowStep
Stage
Methods and Techniques
Goal
1
Problem definition
and clarification
Interviews
Questionnaires
Analyze quality report
Clearly defining problems of
current packaging methods
Define customers’ requirements
2
Data collection
Check sheet
Observation record
Investigating the current situation,
obstacles, specific characteristics
of the problem
3
Analysis
Brainstorming
5 Whys technique
Ishikawa diagram
Discovering all possible causes,
the n figuring out root causes
Action plan
Brainstorming
5W2H technique
Gantt chart
Generating and evaluating
potential countermeasures to
eliminate root causes
Conceiving detail plan with
clearly time bounds to block
root causes
Material testing
Market research
Cost comparison
Implementing tests to
check/compare durable ability,
resist bursting, the strength
of materials
Finding eco-friendly materials for
packaging which meet the
technical requirements and at the
acceptable price
6
Design
Brainstorming and
affinity diagram
Evaluation and
selection techniques
Computer aided design
Prototype
New packaging design to
eliminate/block root causes
Apply solutions to real products
7
Check
Brainstorming
Drop tests
Doing experiments
Checking if the countermeasures
were effective? if not, return to the
Do phase
8
Record
Comparison and evaluation
techniques
Data collection
Analyzes and compares
experiment results with the
target goals
9
Standardization
and conclusion
Flow chart
Standard operating procedure
Standardize the improvements
Sharing learnings and
achievements
Plan for further steps
4
5
Do
Check
Act
3. Applying PDCA Cycle in Packaging for Quality Continuous Improvement
The research applies a PDCA methodology to improve the packaging quality for sample fountain
products of a GPEM’s industrial partner. The company produces and exports composite planters,
fountains, and other gardening things. Based on its monthly reports, the primary defects caused by
inadequate packaging methods are cracks on the bottom, rim, and body of round shape fountain
products. These products have fine-stone surfaces and weight from 11 to 20 kg. In addition,
the current packaging method also is complained about using non-environmentally friendly materials.
Cushions are easily broken or displaced from the original position during transportation. Using PDCA
methodology which is a simple and powerful tool in tackling the problems and improving the team
problem-solving sessions, will help systematic organizing team members’ thoughts and implementing
actions. Although PDCA descriptions are fairly easy to understand, to effectively apply it, it requires
the involvement of all team member’s responsibility. In addition, it involves multiple layers from
analysis to testing. Therefore, the members have to cooperate well in informative commutation
and implementations. Through the case study, this paper will cover each step of PDCA as well as
recommend you with tools for accelerations and increasing effectiveness.
3.1. Plan
The first step in the PDCA cycle is Plan. This step includes defining problems and collecting
all relevant data. Then the team has to find out the problems’ root causes to develop an actionable
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6332
6 of 15
tested plan. However, identifying the key stakeholders and understanding customers’ expectations
are mainly focused first of all. Since the PDCA requires many steps from defining, planning, testing,
analyzing, etc., a multidisciplinary or cross-functional team should be established. This team includes
members who have different main functions, who can communicate and interact with each other
frequently toward the main goal. The Plan phase normally consumes more time than others due
to it should be done very carefully in clarifying the problem, finding and analyzing the root causes,
developing solutions or countermeasures in an action plan.
Problem clarification–root cause analysis: The crack report of a GPEM industry partner shows
the increasing percentage of the cracked packages from the pre-shipment stage to customers’ storage
checking. Cracks appear on the rim, body, and also the bottom of products. These problems happen
to different types of products. In general, the higher percent of failure ratio, the more cost penalty
the manufacturer has to pay. Because of the damaged product, the company has to be responsible to
customer for warranty or change the new product. Especially, from the first three months—the highest
market demand duration this year, the cracks at the body, bottom, and top of the products is 1.64%,
which is extremely high compared to previous periods. There may be a consequence of bad packaging
methods or wrong manipulation that leads to ongoing problems. In addition, current consumers
and industry trends which prefer using sustainable materials for packaging also put the company in
the need of improving the packaging sustainability. Therefore, finding the materials and packaging
methods which are friendly to the environment and still ensure bringing profit for the company are
in urgent need. Table 2 is an example of how the team recorded and analyzed the actual situation to
identify current problems in packaging.
In Plan step, the re are several useful tools to improve the efficiency in team communication
and problem-solving.
5 Whys technique: The simplest tool for solving problems, developed by Sakichi Toyoda,
a Japanese inventor and industrialist. The basis of this effective approach is to ask why five times
for a specific problem. Taiichi Ohno, a famous quality guru, believes that “by repeating why five
times, the nature of the problem as well as its solution becomes clear”. However, in general, you may
need to ask the question fewer or more times than five before the root cause of a problem is found.
The meaning to strive for 5 whys is to not give up easily until finding a root cause instead of ending
up with a “symptom”. Beside be used individually, the 5 Why technique is usually as a part of the
Ishikawa diagram to identify the causes.
A cause and effect diagram: This is also called a fishbone diagram or an Ishikawa diagram.
Using this diagram for a given problem, all its possible failure causes can be identified, categorized,
and displayed. In the diagram, the right or its head shows the problem or effect which is identified.
There is a spine, drawn by straight lines and big bones or Ribs. These bones show the relationship
between major causes and the effect. Team members will need brainstorming (or use the first Why)
to define the major causes of the problem. Medium size bones show secondary causes, small bones
represent root causes. Ishikawa diagram is used to evaluate the root causes and to brainstorm solutions
to them.
5W2H, five W’s two H’s is a method for asking questions about a process or problem.
5W2H represents: Who, what, when , where, why, how, and how much (or many). It usually
is used when defining or analyzing a process or a problem for improvement opportunities as
well as planning. When applying 5W2H method, the problem or situation has to be reviewed.
Then appropriate questions about the problem are developed. The order of 5 W’s and 2 H’s is not
important. A question and answers can lead to additional questions to form the improvement plan or
to generate possible changes.
Appl. Sci. 2020,
2020, 10, xx FOR
FOR PEER REVIEW
REVIEW
Appl.
Appl. Sci.
Sci. 2020, 10,
10, x FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
of 16
666 of
of 16
16
company in the
the need of
of improving the
the packaging sustainability.
sustainability. Therefore, finding
finding the materials
materials and
company
company in
in the need
need of improving
improving the packaging
packaging sustainability. Therefore,
Therefore, finding the
the materials and
and
packaging methods
methods which
which are
are friendly
friendly to
to the
the environment
environment and
and still
still ensure
ensure bringing
bringing profit
profit for the
the
packaging
packaging methods which are friendly to the environment and still ensure bringing profit for
for the
company
are
in
urgent
need.
Table
2
is
an
example
of
how
the
team
recorded
and
analyzed
the
actual
Appl. Sci. 2020,
10,
6332
company
company are
are in
in urgent
urgent need.
need. Table
Table 22 is
is an
an example
example of
of how
how the
the team
team recorded
recorded and
and analyzed
analyzed the
the actual
actual
situation to identify
identify current problems
problems in packaging.
packaging.
situation
situation to
to identify current
current problems in
in packaging.
7 of 15
Table 2. An analysis example of grasping the actual situation, identify current problems in packaging.
Table
2.
example
of
situation,
identify
current
packaging.
Table 2. An
analysis
example
of grasping
theactual
actual
situation,
currentin
Table
2. An
An analysis
analysis
example
of grasping
grasping the
the
actual
situation,
identifyidentify
current problems
problems
in problems
packaging. in packaging.
For spherical
shape product,
are four
boards
For spherical
shapethere
product,
thefoam
re are
fourwhich
foamcover
boards which
For
For spherical
spherical shape
shape product,
product, there
there are
are four
four foam
foam boards
boards which
which cover
cover
all sides
and are
tape.are
Thestuck
boards
easilyThe
broken
down.
cover
allstuck
sidesbyand
byare
tape.
boards
are easily
all
all sides
sides and
and are
are stuck
stuck by
by tape.
tape. The
The boards
boards are
are easily
easily broken
broken down.
down.
Problem:
Styrofoam
is damaged
damaged during
during storage
storage or
or delivery;
delivery; The
The flat
flat
broken
down.
Problem:
Styrofoam
is
Problem: Styrofoam is damaged during storage or delivery; The flat
protectors
are easily
easily
be shoved
shoved away
away
from their
theirduring
initial positions;
positions;
Using
Problem:
Styrofoam
is
damaged
storage
or
delivery;
protectors
are
be
from
initial
Using
protectors are easily be shoved away from their initial positions; Using
unfriendly
environmental
material
The environmental
flat protectors
are easily be shoved away from their initial
unfriendly
material
unfriendly
environmental
material
positions; Using unfriendly environmental material
For rectangular
cuboid type,
four L
L shape
Styrofoam
are
on the top
top
For
cuboid
four
Styrofoam
on
For rectangular
cuboid
four
L shapeare
Styrofoam
For rectangular
rectangular
cuboid type,
type,
fourtype,
L shape
shape
Styrofoam
are
on the
the topare on the
and bottom of
of the product,
product, the
the other
other four foams
foams are
are placed
placed in
in the
and
top and
bottom
of the
other
foams
and bottom
bottom
of the
the
product,
the product,
other four
fourthe
foams
are four
placed
in the
theare placed
middle.
middle.
in the middle.
middle.
Problem: Styrofoam
Styrofoam often
often is broken
broken down
down in
in pieces. This
This does not
not only
Problem:
Problem:
Styrofoam
often
is broken
in pieces.
Problem:
Styrofoam
often is
is broken
down
in pieces.
pieces.down
This does
does
not only
only This does
annoy customers
customers but
but also
also reduce
reduce protection.
protection.
annoy
only annoy
but also reduce protection.
annoy not
customers
but alsocustomers
reduce protection.
Open one box
box for
for checking: Dirty
Dirty inside nylon
nylon covered
covered product
product
Open
Open
box for checking:
covered product
Open one
one
boxone
for checking:
checking:
Dirty inside
insideDirty
nylon inside
coverednylon
product
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Outside:
Boxes areBoxes
bent by
overloading
on the top
top
Outside:
are
bent by overloading
on the top
Outside:
Outside: Boxes
Boxes are
are bent
bent by
by overloading
overloading on
on the
the top
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
7 of 16
7 of 16
Outside: The carton box is burst/torn or scratched by collisions.
Outside: The carton box is burst/torn or scratched by collisions.
Outside: The carton box is burst/torn or scratched by collisions.
In Plan step, there are several useful tools to improve the efficiency in team communication and
problem-solving.
In2Plan
there areIshikawa
several useful
tools to
the efficiency
in team
communication
Figure
is astep,
developed
diagram
forimprove
the issue:
Cracks on
the products.
The and
team
5 Whys technique: The simplest tool for solving problems, developed by Sakichi Toyoda, a
problem-solving.
uses the
first Why question to define the major causes, i.e., transportation, storage, and packaging.
Japanese inventor and industrialist. The basis of this effective approach is to ask why five times for a
5 Whys
technique:
The simplestquestions
tool for solving
problems,
developed
Sakichi
a
With eachspecific
major
category,
additional
are
used
until
finding
outwhy
theby
root
cause.Toyoda,
Normally,
problem.
Taiichi
Ohno, a whys
famous quality guru,
believes
that “by
repeating
five
times,
Japanese
inventor
and
industrialist.
The
basis
of
this
effective
approach
is
to
ask
why
five
times
for
a
thegoods
nature ofafter
the problem
as well
as its solution
becomes clear”.the
However,
general,in
you
may need then finally
the finish
checking
quality
and packaging,
y are instored
inventory
specific
problem.
Taiichi
Ohno,
a
famous
quality
guru,
believes
that
“by
repeating
why
five
times,
askcustomers.
the question fewer
or more
than five
the root cause
of a problem
is found.
The
deliveredtoto
Cracks
cantimes
happen
duebefore
to incidents
related
to human
or machine
factors
themeaning
nature to
of strive
the problem
asiswell
asgive
its solution
becomes
clear”.
inof
general,
you may need
for 5 whys
to not
up easily until
finding
a rootHowever,
cause instead
ending up
duringtothe
storing
time
or
on
the
delivery
way.
Or
the
effects
caused
by
poor
packaging
method.
with the
a “symptom”.
Beside or
be more
used individually,
Why technique
usuallyofasaaproblem
part of the
ask
question fewer
times than the
five5 before
the rootis cause
is found. The
The real
arrangement
the
is not
regulation.
one
pallet,
the re
different
Ishikawa
to
identify
meaning
todiagram
striveinfor
5 warehouse
whystheiscauses.
to not
givefollowed
up easilyby
until
finding a In
root
cause
instead
ofare
ending
up
A
cause
and
effect
diagram:
This
is
also
called
a
fishbone
diagram
or
an
Ishikawa
diagram.
kinds of
products.
They are
not arranged
with the samethe
quantities
and sizes.isThe
overloaded
container
with
a “symptom”.
Beside
be used individually,
5 Why technique
usually
as a part
of the
this diagram for a given problem, all its possible failure causes can be identified, categorized,
is one Ishikawa
of Using
the reasons
totocause
carton
box failure. These arrangements are the result of insufficient
diagram
identify
the causes.
and displayed. In the diagram, the right or its head shows the problem or effect which is identified.
training. There
Careless
handlings
in
the
warehouse
when
loading
unloading
pallets
are caused
A cause
anddrawn
effectbydiagram:
This
isbig
also
called
a fishbone
diagram
or relationship
an
Ishikawa
diagram.by
is a spine,
straight lines
and
bones
or Ribs.
Theseor
bones
show the
Using
this major
diagram
forand
a given
problem,
all its possible
causes(or
canuse
bethe
identified,
between
causes
the effect.
Team members
will needfailure
brainstorming
first Why) categorized,
define the major
causes
of the problem.
size bones
show
small
bonesis identified.
andtodisplayed.
In the
diagram,
the rightMedium
or its head
shows
thesecondary
problemcauses,
or effect
which
represent
root
causes.
Ishikawa
diagram
is
used
to
evaluate
the
root
causes
and
to
brainstorm
There is a spine, drawn by straight lines and big bones or Ribs. These bones show the relationship
solutions to them.
between major causes and the effect. Team members will need brainstorming (or use the first Why)
5W2H, five W’s two H’s is a method for asking questions about a process or problem. 5W2H
to define
theWho,
major
causes
ofwhere,
the problem.
Medium
showIt secondary
causes,
represents:
what,
when,
why, how,
and howsize
muchbones
(or many).
usually is used
when small bones
Because the company uses one type of cushion for all different types of products. Cracks can
happen on parts where the cushion is not provided enough or not thick enough, or the shape of
cushions is not fit with the product.
4th W: Why use only one type for all products?
Because cushions are not designed and tested for each type of products. There is no instruction for
using
extra
numbers of cushions for different sizes of shapes of products.
Appl. Sci.
2020,
10, 6332
8 of 15
5th W: Why not design and test cushion for each type of product?
The design team did simulation testing to saving cost and concluded the current cushions can
untrained
employees.
therange
second
major
group cause which relates to transportation, the bad road
be used
for a wide For
weight
of the
products.
After
current
problems,
rootcauses, reasons.
realizing inputs,
andmajor
desiredgroup
outputs,
conditions
andevaluating
truck driver
steering
habitfinding
are also
possible
The third
related
the
team
has
to
set
the
target
goal
to
lead
the
plan
in
the
right
direction.
to the packaging method brings many possible causes of cracks on products. They are inadequate
is the target
in box,
this case
study.
cushions, Below
low-quality
carton
a poor
fixing level between product edges and box, and ineffective
Target:
Improving
packaging
or
finding
a new solutiondug
with deeper
environmentally
material
to tackle
the by
separations. These potential factors are continuously
to findfriendly
the root
or initial
causes
problem of damaged products while providing cost-effective packaging.
using 5 Why technique.
Figure 2. Ishikawa diagram for possible causes creating crack.
Figure 2. Ishikawa diagram for possible causes creating crack.
For example,
cracksabove,
on the
product:
As the analysis
with
some types of products, the cushions inside the packing box are not
1st
W: Why
are
they
happening?
suitable
or not
good
enough.
The design team might not use appropriate or essential methods to test
Possible
be bad method
transportation,
storage
or packaging
cushions causes
and thecan
packaging
such as the
drop tests
for impact points. This can lead to two
problems:
Nothave
beingbad
ablepackaging?
to conclude exactly the cushion efficiency for different types of products.
2nd
W: Why
The cushion
design
(thickness,inmaterial,
shape, etc.)
maygood
protect
good for one type of product
One
reason can
be itself
that cushions
the packages
are not
enough.
but
not
for
others.
When
finding
out
these
root
causes,
the
team
has
to
generate a solution to solve
3rd W: Why using not suitable quality cushions?
Because the company uses one type of cushion for all different types of products. Cracks can
happen on parts where the cushion is not provided enough or not thick enough, or the shape of
cushions is not fit with the product.
4th W: Why use only one type for all products?
Because cushions are not designed and tested for each type of products. There is no instruction
for using extra numbers of cushions for different sizes of shapes of products.
5th W: Why not design and test cushion for each type of product?
The design team did simulation testing to saving cost and concluded the current cushions can be
used for a wide weight range of the products.
After evaluating current problems, finding root- causes, realizing inputs, and desired outputs,
the team has to set the target goal to lead the plan in the right direction.
Below is the target in this case study.
Target: Improving packaging or finding a new solution with environmentally friendly material to tackle
the problem of damaged products while providing cost-effective packaging.
As the analysis above, with some types of products, the cushions inside the packing box are not
suitable or not good enough. The design team might not use appropriate or essential methods to test
cushions and the packaging method such as the drop tests for impact points. This can lead to two
problems: Not being able to conclude exactly the cushion efficiency for different types of products.
The cushion design itself (thickness, material, shape, etc.) may protect good for one type of product but
not for others. When finding out these root causes, the team has to generate a solution to solve them.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6332
9 of 15
However, the team also needs to consider the cost of producing and testing a current or a new design.
5W2H can be used to clarify all aspects of the problems and concerns and take them into account when
developing solutions.
Table 3 can be an example of how to make questions by using 5W2H in creating new cushion
design, developing the real- testing method, and implementing it.
Table 3. 5W2H (five W’s two H’s) example.
5W2H
Question
Who?
Who design and test the packaging cushions?
Who should be involved and responsible for it?
Who are involved but should not be?
What?
What are the essential requirements with a new cushion design?
What are the mandatory tests before using new designs?
What are the effective methods for real-testing?
Why?
Why we have to redesign cushions and do multi real-test for new cushions and packaging?
When?
When the activities (redesign and practical testing) are started?
Where?
Where are these activities done?
How?
How are these done?
How (much, long)?
How much do they cost?
How long do they take?
When generating and evaluating the possible solutions, with the 5W2H tool, the team can consider
their feasibility, practicality as well as economically. 5W2H is not only useful for planning, but it also
brings benefits for other phases in the PDCA cycle. Table 4 is a PDCA timeline with detailed tasks for
the case study. 5W2H can be used for finding viable solutions, planning necessary resources, designing
experiments with expected outcomes as well as defining methods for measure performance
Table 4. PDCA timeline and action plan for the case study in packaging quality improvement.
PDCA
Plan: 2 Sept–13 Sept
Do: 16 Sept–20 Sept
Check: 23 Sept–27 Sept
Act: Oct
Detailed Tasks
-Figure out customer
requirements for packaging
-Grasp the actual situation,
identify current problems
in packaging
-Perform root causes analysis
-Set and clarify target goals
-Propose
solution/countermeasures
-Output: An action plan for quality improvement and to use sustainable material in packaging
which includes:
-Plan to test the current packaging material and compare it with other types (one or more than one)
which have a competitive price
-Propose a new packaging material: Minimum use of environmentally unfriendly
packaging material.
-Timeline to create new designs for packaging
-Plan for doing real tests for materials and completed packaging of products
Implement
actions
Carry out proposed improvement actions or countermeasures which include:
-Finding new materials for packaging
-Using CAD/CAM software to design protectors for planters and fountains
-Implement solutions to real products
Check the
-Drop test to check the performance of new packaging
achievements
-Verify the results
-Standardize the improvements
-Document benefits
-Define future Plans
Make decision:
which include:
Adopt or reject
+ Propose company to apply
changes?
solutions into real
packaging line
+ Plan for continuous
improvements
3.2. Do
In the Do phase, the action plan in the previous stage is carried out. The team firstly finds new
material or better quality material for packaging which is biodegradable and recyclable. Cardboard
and honeycomb are viable materials to replace styrofoam. However, they may create more costs,
especially with honeycomb material. After doing the market research for new viable material, price,
and available suppliers, the design team decides to use corrugated cardboard which has three to five
layers. The more layers a cardboard has, the more expensive it is. The five-layer corrugated fiberboard
is used in packaging heavy fragile products.
Appl.Sci.
Sci.2020,
2020,
Appl.
10,
xFOR
FOR
2020,
PEER
xREVIEW
FOR
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW
Appl.
Sci.
2020,
10,10,
x REVIEW
FOR
PEER
Appl.
10,
xSci.
PEER
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
1010ofof1616 10
10 of
of 16
16
10 of 16
10 of 16
3.2.Do
Do 3.2.
3.2.
DoDo
3.2.
3.2. Do
3.2. Do
In
the
Do
phase,
Inthe
theDo
Do
the
phase,
actionthe
the
plan
action
in the
the
plan
previous
inthe
theprevious
stage
previous
is
stage is
out.
is
carried
The
team
out. The
firstly
The
team
finds
firstly
new
finds
phase,
action
plan
in
stage
carried
out.
team
firstly
finds new
new 10 of 15
In the
the
action
plan
in
previous
stage
is carried
carried
out.
The
team
firstly
finds
new
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10,
6332
In Do
theInphase,
Do
phase,
the action
plan
in
the
previous
stage
is
carried
out.
The
team
firstly
finds
new
material
or
material
better
quality
orbetter
better
material
qualityfor
for
material
packaging
forprevious
packaging
which
is
biodegradable
which
is biodegradable
biodegradable
and
recyclable.
andfirstly
recyclable.
Cardboard
Inor
the
Do phase,
the
action
plan
in the
stage
is carried
out.
The
team
finds Cardboard
new
material
or
quality
material
for
packaging
which
is
and
recyclable.
Cardboard
material
better
quality
material
packaging
which
is
biodegradable
and
recyclable.
Cardboard
material or better quality material for packaging which is biodegradable and recyclable. Cardboard
and
honeycomb
and
honeycomb
arequality
viable
are
materials
viablematerials
to
materials
replace
styrofoam.
replace
styrofoam.
However,
they
may
they
create
may
more
create
costs,
more
material
orhoneycomb
better
material
for
packaging
whichstyrofoam.
isHowever,
biodegradable
and
recyclable.
Cardboard
and
are
viable
toto
replace
However,
they
may
create
more costs,
costs,
and
honeycomb
are
viable
materials
to
replace
styrofoam.
However,
they
may
create
more
costs,
and
honeycomb
are
viable
materials
to replace
styrofoam.
However,
they
may
create
more
costs,
especially
especially
with
honeycomb
with
honeycomb
material.
After
material.
doing
After
the
doing
market
the
research
market
for
research
new
viable
for
new
material,
viable
price,
material,
price,
and
honeycomb
are
viable
materials
to
replace
styrofoam.
However,
they
may
create
more
costs,
especially
with
honeycomb
material.
After
theresearch
market
research
forviable
new
viable material,
price,
especially
withwith
honeycomb
material.
After
doing
thedoing
market
for
new
viable
material,
price,
especially
honeycomb
material.
After
doing
the
market
research
for
new
material,
price,
Table
5especially
is
an
example
of
the
team
compares
and
carton
from
and
available
and
suppliers,
available
suppliers,
thehow
design
the
team
design
decides
team
to
decides
use
corrugated
tocorrugated
useresearch
corrugated
cardboard
cardboard
which
has
which
three
to
has
three
toboxes
five
with
honeycomb
After
doing
the
market
forcardboard
new
viable
material,
price,
and
available
suppliers,
the
design
team
to
use
corrugated
cardboard
has
three
and
available
suppliers,
the
design
team
decides
todecides
use
corrugated
cardboard
which
haswhich
three
tofive
five
and
available
suppliers,
thematerial.
design
team
decides
to
use
corrugated
cardboard
which
has
three
to
five to five
layers.
The
layers.
more
The
layers
more
a
cardboard
layers
a
cardboard
has,
the
more
has,
the
expensive
more
expensive
it
is.
The
it
five-layer
is.
The
five-layer
corrugated
corrugated
different layers.
suppliers.
There
are
several
tests
to
check
the
durable
ability,
resist
bursting,
the
strength
and
available
suppliers,
the
design
team
decides
to
use
corrugated
cardboard
which
has
three
to
five
layers.
The
more
a cardboard
has,
the
more
expensive
it five-layer
is.five-layer
The five-layer
corrugated
The
more
layers
a layers
cardboard
has,has,
the the
more
expensive
it is.
The
corrugated
layers.
The
more
layers
a cardboard
more
expensive
it is.
The
corrugated
fiberboard
fiberboard
used
inispackaging
packaging
is
usedinin
packaging
heavy fragile
fragile
heavy
products.
fragile
products.
layers.
The
more
layers
apackaging
cardboard
has,
the
more
expensive it is. and
The five-layer
fiberboard
used
heavy
fragile
products.
isisused
in
heavy
products.
of cartonfiberboard
boxes
and
cardboards.
The
results
from
the
compression
burstingcorrugated
tests (Table 5) show
fiberboard
is
used
in packaging
heavy
fragile
products.
Table55isis
Table
an
example
5isispackaging
ofexample
how heavy
the
team
how
compares
theteam
teamcompares
compares
corrugated
corrugated
cardboard
cardboard
and carton
and
boxes
carton
from
boxes
fiberboard
is5an
used
fragile
products.
5 in
ananexample
ofofthe
how
the
corrugated
cardboard
and
carton
boxes from
from
Table
example
of
how
the
team
compares
corrugated
cardboard
carton
boxes
from
TableTable
isthe
an
example
of how
team
compares
corrugated
cardboard
and
carton
boxes
from
that although
having
same
price,
the
of
carton
boxes
isand
different
from
many
suppliers.
different
suppliers.
different
suppliers.
There
are several
There
are
tests
several
to quality
check
tests
the
to durable
check
the
ability,
durable
resist
ability,
bursting,
resist
the
bursting,
strength
theoffrom
strength
of
Table
5
is
an
example
of
how
the
team
compares
corrugated
cardboard
and
carton
boxes
different
suppliers.
There
are
several
tests
to
check
the
durable
ability,
resist
bursting,
the
strength
of
different
suppliers.
There
are
several
tests
to
check
the
durable
ability,
resist
bursting,
the
strength
of
different suppliers. There are several tests to check the durable ability, resist bursting, the strength
of
carton
boxes
carton
and
boxes
cardboards.
and
cardboards.
The
results
The
from
results
the
compression
from
the
compression
and
bursting
and
tests
bursting
(Table
tests
5)
show
(Table
that
5)
show
that
Ojitex carton
box
and
cardboard
are
much
better,
more
durable
than
the
current
ones.
Therefore,
different
suppliers.
There
are
tests
tothe
check
the
durable
ability,
resist
bursting,
the
strength
of that
carton
and
cardboards.
The
results
from
the
compression
and
bursting
tests
(Table
5)that
show
carton
boxes
andboxes
cardboards.
Theseveral
results
from
compression
and
bursting
tests
(Table
5)
show
that
carton
boxes
and
cardboards.
The
results
from
the
compression
and
bursting
tests
(Table
5)
show
although
having
although
thecardboards.
having
same price,
the same
the results
quality
price, the
of quality
carton
boxes
of carton
is different
boxes
is
from
different
many
from
suppliers.
many
Ojitex
carton
boxes
and
The
from
compression
andis
bursting
tests
(Table
5)suppliers.
show
thatOjitex
although
having
the
same
the
of
carton
boxes
different
from
many
suppliers.
Ojitex
having
the
same
price,
theprice,
quality
ofquality
carton
boxes
is different
from
many
suppliers.
Ojitex
although
having
the same
price,
the
quality
ofthe
carton
boxes
is different
from
many
suppliers.
Ojitex
the teamalthough
decides
to
use
Ojitex
carton
boxes
and
cardboards.
carton
boxcarton
and
cardboard
box
and cardboard
are muchthe
better,
arequality
much
more
better,
more
than
durable
the
current
than the
ones.
current
Therefore,
ones.
Therefore,
the team
the team
although
having
the
of durable
carton
boxes
is different
many
suppliers.
Ojitex
carton
boxcardboard
andsame
cardboard
are
much
better,
more
durable
than
thefrom
current
ones.
Therefore,
the team
carton
box
and
cardboard
areprice,
much
better,
more
durable
than
the
current
ones.
Therefore,
thethe
team
carton
box
and
are
much
better,
more
durable
than
the
current
ones.
Therefore,
team
decides
to
decides
useand
Ojitex
to use
carton
Ojitex
boxes
carton
andboxes
cardboards.
and cardboards.
carton
box
are
much
better,
durable than the current ones. Therefore, the team
use
Ojitex
carton
andmore
cardboards.
decides
todecides
use
carton
boxes
andboxes
cardboards.
decides
to Ojitex
usetocardboard
Ojitex
carton
boxes
and
cardboards.
Table 5. Carton box testing.
decides to use Ojitex carton boxes and cardboards.
Table 5. Carton
Tablebox
5. Carton
testing.box testing.
Table
5. Carton
box
testing.
Table
5. Carton
box testing.
Table
5. Carton
box
testing.
Ojitex Carton Box
5.Box
Carton
box
testing.
Current Table
Carton
Current
Carton
Box
Ojitex Carton
Ojitex
BoxCarton Box
Current
Carton
Box Box
Ojitex
Carton
Box
Current
Carton
Ojitex
Carton
Box
Current
Carton
Box
Ojitex
Carton
Box
Current Carton Box
Ojitex Carton Box
Current Carton Box
SampleSample
Sample
Sample
Sample
Sample
Sample
Compression
Compression
test
test
Compression
test
Compression
test
Compression
test
Compression
test
Compression test
Compression
Compression
test-results test-results
Compression test-results
Compression
Compression
Compression
test-resultstest-results
test-results
Compression test-results
Deform force
Deform
(kg·f): force
321.91(kg·f): 321.91
Deform force (kg·f): 321.91
Deform
(kg·f): 321.91
Deform force
(kg·f):force
321.91
Deform force (kg·f): 321.91
Deform force (kg·f): 321.91
Deform force
Deform
(kg·f): force
753.98(kg·f): 753.98
Deform force (kg·f): 753.98
Deform
(kg·f): 753.98
Deform force
(kg·f):force
753.98
Deform force (kg·f): 753.98
Deform force (kg·f): 753.98
Bursting testBursting test
Bursting test
Bursting test
Bursting test
test
Bursting Bursting
test
Appl. Sci. 2020,
10,Sci.
x FOR
Appl.
2020,PEER
10, x REVIEW
FOR PEER REVIEW
11 of 16
11 of 16
Bursting test-results
Bursting test-results
2)
2)
2)
Time
Bursting
(kg·f/cm
Time
Bursting force
(kg·f/cm
Time force
Bursting
force
(kg·f/cm
Time
Bursting
force
(kg·f/cm2)
Time
Time
Bursting force (kg·f/cm2 )
Bursting force (kg·f/cm2 )
1
8.0285
1
12.6824 12.6824
1
8.0285
1
12
8.0285
12
12.6824
7.6124
2
14.2746 14.2746
2
7.6124
3
7.6741
3
13.6171
3
7.6741
3
13.6171
2
7.6124
2
14.2746
4
8.2956
4
14.2695 14.2695
4
8.2956
4
35
7.6741
3
13.6171
7.4789
5
13.1754 13.1754
5
7.4789
5
4
8.2956
4
14.2695
Average
13.6038 13.6038
Average 7.8179
7.8179 Average Average
Bursting
test-results
5
7.4789
5
13.1754
Another important
action in action
the Doin
phase
of this
case
is to
change
design. The
Another important
the Do
phase
of study
this case
study
is topackaging
change packaging
design. The
Average
7.8179
Average
13.6038
new design
to maximize
the advantages
of new of
material
and helpand
in help
cost reduction.
new has
design
has to maximize
the advantages
new material
in cost reduction.
Brainstorming
and affinity
are two techniques
recommended
for teamwork
to generate
Brainstorming
anddiagram
affinity diagram
are two techniques
recommended
for teamwork
to generate
creative solutions.
While brainstorming
encourages
team members
to come up
with ideas
in aideas
free in a free
creative solutions.
While brainstorming
encourages
team members
to come
up with
and openand
environment,
the affinity
to organize
these datathese
into data
groupings
consolidated
open environment,
thediagram
affinity helps
diagram
helps to organize
into groupings
consolidated
information.
Using theUsing
advantage
of scienceofand
technology
in this stage
helps
shorten
in times in
information.
the advantage
science
and technology
in this
stage
helps times
shorten
designingdesigning
or implementing.
In this case
study,
carton
designeddesigned
to provide
or implementing.
In this
casemesh
study,
meshstructure
carton structure
to both
provide both
cushion and
linkage
This protection
prevents prevents
damages damages
from forces
acting
notacting
only from
cushion
andprotection.
linkage protection.
This protection
from
forces
not only from
sides but sides
also from
the top
and
the carton
box.
When
people
load
boxes
to pallets
and
storeand store
but also
from
thebottom
top andofbottom
of the
carton
box.
When
people
load
boxes to
pallets
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6332
1
2
3
4
5
Average
8.0285
7.6124
7.6741
8.2956
7.4789
7.8179
1
2
3
4
5
Average
12.6824
14.2746
13.6171
14.2695
13.1754
13.6038
11 of 15
Another
phase
of of
this
case
study
is toischange
packaging
design.
The new
Another important
importantaction
actionininthe
theDo
Do
phase
this
case
study
to change
packaging
design.
The
design
has to has
maximize
the advantages
of new material
andmaterial
help in cost
Brainstorming
new design
to maximize
the advantages
of new
and reduction.
help in cost
reduction.
and
affinity diagram
are twodiagram
techniques
forrecommended
teamwork to generate
creative
Brainstorming
and affinity
are recommended
two techniques
for teamwork
tosolutions.
generate
While
brainstorming
encourages
team members
to come
up members
with ideasto
income
a free up
andwith
openideas
environment,
creative
solutions. While
brainstorming
encourages
team
in a free
the
affinity
diagram
helps
to
organize
these
data
into
groupings
consolidated
information.
Using
the
and open environment, the affinity diagram helps to organize these data into groupings consolidated
advantage
of Using
sciencethe
andadvantage
technologyofinscience
this stage
shortenin
times
designing
implementing.
information.
andhelps
technology
thisinstage
helps or
shorten
times in
In
this caseorstudy,
mesh carton
to provide
cushion
and linkage
protection.
designing
implementing.
In structure
this casedesigned
study, mesh
carton both
structure
designed
to provide
both
This
protection
prevents
damages
forces prevents
acting not
only from
but
also not
from
thefrom
top
cushion
and linkage
protection.
Thisfrom
protection
damages
fromsides
forces
acting
only
and
the the
carton
When of
people
loadbox.
boxes
to pallets
them
in a long
time,
sidesbottom
but alsooffrom
top box.
and bottom
the carton
When
peopleand
loadstore
boxes
to pallets
and store
this
style this
helppackaging
to balancestyle
pressure
the contact
area to
of area
bottom
or points
top side.
thempackaging
in a long time,
help on
to balance
pressure
onall
thepoints
contact
to all
of
Figure
a 3DFigure
packaging
design
computer-aided
design
software. Figure
is a real
bottom 3orshows
top side.
3 shows
a 3Dusing
packaging
design using
computer-aided
design4software.
prototype
a new
packaging
Figure 4 isof
a real
prototype
of adesign.
new packaging design.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
12 of 16
Figure
3D Computer
Computer Aided
Aided Design
Design (CAD)
(CAD) packaging
packaging design.
Figure 3.
3. 3D
design.
Figure 4. Real packaging.
Figure 4. Real packaging.
3.3. Check
3.3. Check
At the Check stage, the team analyzes and compares experiment results with the target goals
At
the team
and compares
experiment
results making
with theand
target
goals
stated inthe
theCheck
plan stage,
step. The
checkanalyzes
step is essentially
important
in decision
defining
stated in the plan step. The check step is essentially important in decision making and defining
further steps. For the case study, the package must resist drag, stretch, torn, and drop conditions by
manufacturer’s standard. Then, when it is delivered from the production site to the customer’s hand,
the product inside still remains its function and appearance.
In packaging protection aspect, these factors are mandatory and considered as main requirements
Figure 4. Real packaging.
3.3. Check
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6332
12 of 15
At the Check stage, the team analyzes and compares experiment results with the target goals
stated in the plan step. The check step is essentially important in decision making and defining
further
furthersteps.
steps.For
Forthe
thecase
casestudy,
study,the
the package
package must
must resist
resist drag,
drag, stretch,
stretch, torn,
torn, and
and drop
dropconditions
conditionsby
by
manufacturer’s
manufacturer’sstandard.
standard.Then,
Then,when
whenititisisdelivered
deliveredfrom
fromthe
theproduction
productionsite
sitetotothe
thecustomer’s
customer’shand,
hand,
the
theproduct
productinside
insidestill
stillremains
remains its
its function
function and
and appearance.
appearance.
In
Inpackaging
packagingprotection
protectionaspect,
aspect,these
the sefactors
factorsare
aremandatory
mandatoryand
andconsidered
consideredas
asmain
mainrequirements
requirements
to
toan
anindividual
individualpackage:
package:
••
••
••
••
Size
Sizeof
ofthe
thebox
boxor
orthe
thebottle
bottle where
where the
the object
object is
is packed
packed inside;
inside;
How
the
box
can
resist
forces
impacting
on
all
sides;
How the box can resist forces impacting on all sides;
How
Howititabsorbs
absorbsvibration
vibrationand
and shocking
shocking condition
condition during
during transporting;
transporting; and
and
What
is
the
maximum
protection
level
when
the
package
is
damaged,
and
What is the maximum protection level when the package is damaged, and whether
whetherititstill
stillretains
retains
the
original
product.
the original product.
Based
Based on
on these
these factors,
factors, the
the team
teamdeveloped
developeda adrop
dropmethod
methodtototest
testthe
theefficiency
efficiencyofofthe
the new
new
packaging
method,
thethe
packing
piece
(delivery
packaging
or master
carton)
is filled
and
packagingdesign.
design.InInthis
this
method,
packing
piece
(delivery
packaging
or master
carton)
is filled
sealed
for transport.
It is then
the to
designated
height height
and held
there
is dropped.
and sealed
for transport.
It islifted
then to
lifted
the designated
and
heldbefore
there it
before
it is dropped.
The
number
of
dropping
cycles
to
be
executed:
One
carton
box
passes
through
7
The number of dropping cycles to be executed: One carton box passes through 7cycles,
cycles,according
according
to
points
(Figure
5). Dropped
height
is theis
distance
between
the lowest
of point
the packing
tothe
the7-impact
7-impact
points
(Figure
5). Dropped
height
the distance
between
the point
lowest
of the
piece
and
the
impact
surface.
The
height
may
not
deviate
more
than
±2%
from
the
designated
dropped
packing piece and the impact surface. The height may not deviate more than ±2% from the designated
height
(Table
6). The
evaluation
takes placetakes
after place
the execution
all seven of
cycles.
dropped
height
(Table
6). The evaluation
after theofexecution
all seven cycles.
Figure5.5.Sequence
Sequenceofofthe
theimpact
impactpoints
pointsin
indropping
droppingtest.
test.
Figure
Table 6. Dropped height for a gross weight.
Table 6. Dropped height for a gross weight.
Dropped Height for A Gross Weight
Content
Content
Fountain
Fountain
Dropped Height for A Gross Weight
Up to Max 15 kg
>15 kg
Up to max 10 kg Up to max 15 kg >15 kg
500 mm
400 mm
250 mm
500 mm
400 mm
250 mm
Up to Max 10 kg
Evaluating the new packaging method: For mid-weight (under 15 kg) and round shape products:
100% of the packing boxes withstand the dropping test condition by absorbing shocking in both vertical
and horizontal axis. This new packaging method fills the box’s space, protects the inside product at
weak points, and separates weight concentration. It protects the inside product when vibrating and
shocking. However, with the product which weight more than 15 kg, there are still some small cracks
on the top and bottom parts.
The cost for each packaging involves a carton box, plastics foil covering the product, and sub-items
such as honeycomb board and adhesive tape. At present, the company spends 33,644 VND for each
unit packaging. The new method requires 35,684 VND. When comparing with the current packaging
method, the cost per unit of the new method increases by 6%. This number extremely satisfies the
customer’s requirement which states that the extra cost should not be higher than 20% compared with
the cost of current packaging.
3.4. Act
In the Act phase, the team documents the results and makes the decision on adopting or refusing
the changes. Be noted that PDCA is applied for continuous improvement, therefore, it is not a start-end
process. At the Act phase, another plan to look for an even better-improved way should be continued.
compared with the cost of current packaging.
3.4. Act
In the Act phase, the team documents the results and makes the decision on adopting or refusing
the changes.
Be6332
noted that PDCA is applied for continuous improvement, therefore, it is not a13startAppl.
Sci. 2020, 10,
of 15
end process. At the Act phase, another plan to look for an even better-improved way should be
continued.
In this
this case
case study,
study, the
new packaging
packaging design
design will
will be
be widely
widely implemented
implemented for
for mid-weight
mid-weight (under
(under
In
the new
15
kg)
and
round
shape
products.
A
packaging
standardization
process
is
developed
with
detail
task
15 kg) and round shape products. A packaging standardization process is developed with detail task
assignments (Figure
(Figure6).
6).For
Forthe
thelarge
largeweight
weight(above
(above
kg),
solution
totally
successful,
assignments
1515
kg),
thethe
solution
waswas
not not
totally
successful,
the
the
team
rejected
to
applied
it.
Another
PDCA
cycle
will
start
again
to
dive
further
into
tackling
team rejected to applied it. Another PDCA cycle will start again to dive further into tackling the
the problem.
problem.
Packaging standardization process
Workflow diagram
Description
Carried out by
Packing list check
Check whether products need
to be packed after receiving
from Production area
Packaging
team leader
Are these
product in
packing list
Control on-demand packing
products, if not, let them outside
Packaging
team leader
Check product quality
materials before packing
Packaging
worker
Eye check
before
packing
Bill of
Materials
(BOM) check
Arrange all prepack products
on packaging
line
Prepare subitem protectors
for individual
product
Prepare packaging process
Pack products
with all subitems in box
Labeling carton
box
Packaging
Seal box and
load on pallet
Finish packaging
and
Packaging
worker
Packaging
worker
Packaging
worker
An example
example of
of aa packaging
packaging standardization process.
Figure 6. An
4. Conclusions
This research highlights the benefits of PDCA methodology in quality improvement. It instructs
the simplified way to practice this method with support tools such as the 5 Whys, Ishikawa diagrams,
5W2H, and Computer-Aided Design (CAD). Through the packaging case study, PDCA combined
these tools and analyzed packaging defects, found root-causes, and facilitated development of more
sustainable ways to tackle problems. The new packaging method not only uses environmentally
friendly materials but also extremely reduces the defect ratio. With respect to the objectives of the case
study, the new design uses 100% recyclable, biodegradable materials. It can minimize surface crack
defects for mid-weight products or significantly reduce the defect ratio in large-weight products due to
incidents in delivering and storing. The extra cost for the new packaging method is slightly higher than
the old one, but the benefits of a higher competitiveness and customers’ satisfaction can be exploited.
For long-run evaluation, the new packaging design can help saving costs from decreasing the numbers
of rejected defects or reworked products, reducing the packaging time and labor forces. These result for
increasing customer satisfaction, the company’s profit, quality as well as reputation. The PDCA cycle
should be replicated for quality improvement, reducing defects and driving towards sustainability for
packaging methods. Recommendations to successfully apply PDCA methodology are mentioned in the
paper. In the Plan phase, keys for effective implementation are team establishment, teamwork spirit,
using proper quality tools for gathering data, clearly defining problems, and the analysis of the current
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6332
14 of 15
situation as well as of obstacles. The outcome of the Plan stage should include root-cause analysis,
potential solutions, and a detailed implementation schedule with time-bounds. In the Do phase,
implementing, refining, and finalizing countermeasures are essential actions. Using the right tools
and techniques for these tasks will result in shortening the testing times and saving costs. In the Check
stage, proper methods and plans for evaluations help to avoid erroneous data collection which can
lead to wrong decisions in the Act phase. Finally, the Act phase should include tasks in documenting
results, process standardization, sharing learnings, and planning of further steps.
In conclusion, this research contributes understandable guidance with a successful benchmark
application of PDCA for packaging problems. Through a packaging case study, it shows the
art of combining scientific and practical methodology by utilizing tools in the PDCA cycle to
achieve multipurpose objectives, i.e., responsibility in protecting the environment, increasing quality,
and economic profit. Due to the limited number of studies about continuous improvements in the
sustainable packaging field, the paper’s application is expected to be highly useful for practitioners
and researchers in similar quality projects. In addition, this simplified PDCA cycle with a combination
of quality and design tools can effectively be applied in creating new designs, reducing defects as well
as continuous quality improvement in any manufacturing field.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, methodology, funding acquisition, supervision, V.N.; investigation,
data curation, software, formal analysis V.N. and N.N.; project administration, visualization, writing—original
draft preparation, T.T.; writing—review and editing, B.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by The Vietnam Ministry of Education and Training, grant
number B2019-VGU-02
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Boz, Z.; Korhonen, V.; Sand, C.K. Consumer considerations for the implementation of sustainable packaging:
A Review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2192. [CrossRef]
Gidey, E.; Jilcha, K.; Birhanu, B.; Kitaw, D. The plan-do-check-act cycle of value addition. Ind. Eng. Manag.
2014, 3, 3. [CrossRef]
Silva, A.S.; Medeiros, C.F.; Vieira, R.K. Cleaner production and PDCA cycle: Practical application for reducing
the Cans Loss Index in a beverage company. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 150, 324–338. [CrossRef]
Sangpikul, A. Implementing academic service learning and the PDCA cycle in a marketing course:
Contributions to three beneficiaries. J. Hosp. Leis. Sport Tour. Educ. 2017, 21, 83–87. [CrossRef]
Strotmann, C.; Gobel, C.; Friedrich, S.; Kreyenschmidt, J.; Ritter, G.; Teitscheid, P. A participatory approach to
minimizing food waste in the food industry—A manual for managers. Sustainability 2017, 9, 66. [CrossRef]
Swamidass, P.M. Encyclopedia of Production and Manufacturing Management; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 2000.
[CrossRef]
Magar, V.M.; Shinde, D.V.B. Application of 7 Quality Control (7 QC) tools for continuous improvement of
manufacturing processes. Int. J. Eng. Res. Gen. Sci. 2014, 2, 364–371.
Chen, Y.; Li, H. Research on engineering quality management based on PDCA Cycle. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater.
Sci. Eng. 2019, 490, 062033. [CrossRef]
Taylor, M.J.; McNicholas, C.; Nicolay, C.; Darzi, A.; Bell, D.; Reed, J.E. Systematic review of the application of
the plan–do–study–act method to improve quality in healthcare. BMJ Qual. Saf. 2013, 23, 290–298. [CrossRef]
Reed, J.E.; Davey, N.; Woodcock, T. The foundations of quality improvement science. Future Hosp. J. 2016, 3,
199–202. [CrossRef]
Kurowski, E.M.; Schondelmeyer, A.C.; Brown, C.; Dandoy, C.; Hanke, S.P.; Cooley, H.L.T. Apractical guide to
conducting quality improvement in the health care setting. Curr. Treat. Options Pediatr. 2015, 1, 380–392.
[CrossRef]
Matsuo, M.; Nakahara, J. The effects of the PDCA cycle and OJT on workplace learning. Int. J. Hum.
Resour. Manag. 2013, 24, 195–207. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6332
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
15 of 15
Tahiduzzaman, M.; Rahman, M.; Dey, K.; Kapuria, T. Minimization of sewing defects of an apparel industry
in Bangladesh with 5S & PDCA. Am. J. Ind. Eng. 2018, 5, 17–24. [CrossRef]
Realyvásquez, A.; Arredondo-Soto, K.; Carrillo-Gutiérrez, T.; Ravelo, G. Applying the Plan-Do-Check-Act
(PDCA) cycle to reduce the defects in the manufacturing industry. A case study. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2181.
[CrossRef]
Sunadi, S.; Purba, H.H.; Hasibuan, S. Implementation of statistical process control through PDCA cycle to
improve potential capability index of drop impact resistance: A case study at aluminum beverage and beer
cans manufacturing industry in Indonesia. Qual. Innov. Prosper. 2020, 24, 104–127. [CrossRef]
Chakraborty, A. Technique Polytechnic Institute importance of PDCA cycle for SMEs. Int. J. Mech. Eng. 2016,
3, 30–34. [CrossRef]
Darmawan, H.; Hasibuan, S.; Purba, H.H. Application of Kaizen concept with 8 Steps PDCA to reduce in
line defect at pasting process: A case study in automotive battery. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Res. Eng. 2018, 4, 97–107.
[CrossRef]
Nabiilah, A.R.; Hamedon, Z.; Faiz, M.T. Improving quality of light commercial vehicle using PDCA approach.
J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2018, 12, 525–534.
Nugroho, R.E.; Marwanto, A.; Hasibuan, S. Reduce product defect in stainless steel production using yield
management method and PDCA. Int. J. New Technol. Res. 2017, 3, 39–46.
Jagusiak-Kocik, M. PDCA cycle as a part of continuous improvement in the production company—A case
study. Prod. Eng. Arch. 2017, 14, 19–22. [CrossRef]
Dudin, M.N.; Frolova, E.E.; Gryzunova, N.V.; Shuvalova, E.B. The deming cycle (PDCA) concept as an
efficient tool for continuous quality improvement in the agribusiness. Asian Soc. Sci. 2014, 11, 239–246.
[CrossRef]
Lodgaard, E.; Gamme, I.; Aasland, K.E. Success factors for PDCA as continuous improvement method
in product development. In IFIP International Conference on Advances in Production Management Systems;
Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; pp. 645–652.
Hussin, M.S.; Zailani, Z.A.; Hasnul Hadi, A.B.; Sanuddin, M.F.; Hamzas, M.A. Process improvement on
manufacturing floor through PDCA methodology. Int. Rev. Mech. Eng. IREME 2012, 6, 1441–1448.
Wei, L.; Gong-qian, L.; Jian-bo, H. Continuous improvement for lean maintenance of equipment based on
PDCA. Mod. Manuf. Eng. 2008, 2.
Clark, D.M.; Silvester, K.; Knowles, S. Lean management systems: Creating a culture of continuous quality
improvement. J. Clin. Pathol. 2013, 66, 638–643. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sokovic, M.; Pavletic, D.; Pipan, K.K. Quality improvement methodologies–PDCA cycle, RADAR matrix,
DMAIC and DFSS. J. Achiev. Mater. Manuf. Eng. 2010, 43, 476–483.
Garza-Reyes, J.A.; Romero, J.T.; Govindan, K.; Cherrafi, A.; Ramanathan, U. A PDCA-based approach to
Environmental Value Stream Mapping (E-VSM). J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 180, 335–348. [CrossRef]
Jones, E.C.; Parast, M.M.; Adams, S.G. A framework for effective Six Sigma implementation. Total. Qual.
Manag. Bus. Excel. 2010, 21, 415–424. [CrossRef]
Wani, Z.K.; Chin, J.F.; Muhammad, N.A. Common mistakes in running PDCA: A survey on university
student PDCA projects. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 530, 012042. [CrossRef]
Maruta, R. Maximizing knowledge work productivity: A time constrained and activity visualized PDCA
cycle. Knowl. Process. Manag. 2012, 19, 203–214.
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).