Operations Management
Using the case of a restaurant operating in the service industry, this report seeks to present an analysis of internal processes using value stream mapping. Firstly, the report presents a process chart to provide an overview of internal processes and operations. Secondly, the report provides a short discussion on each stage of the process. Finally, the report presents the layout of the facility with emphasis on the objectives of the layout and how these objectives were realized.
The Service Process in the Restaurant
The service process in the restaurant tends to very simple: the customer comes, eats, and leaves. However, an analysis of the process reveals that the process is not as simple as formerly conceived, as a series of tasks and small activities, about twenty four activities, need to be performed, and most especially, several individuals (i.e., front stage, backstage, and support actors) are involved in providing the service. For the illustration of the flow of activities and people involved in providing services to restaurant customers, see Figure 1.
As seen in the process chart, the process begins when a customer arrives at the restaurant. The restaurant representative (i.e., receptionist or the waiter) then welcomes the guests, enters the name of the guests on the waiting list, and assigns a table for the guests. Afterwards, the restaurant personnel or the waiter escort the customers to the table and subsequently take the order. After taking the customers’ orders, the waiter then posts the orders to the kitchen staff, who are then responsible for cooking and preparing the food. Upon preparing the food, the kitchen staff signals the waiter who subsequently serves the food to the guest. After eating the food, the guest then asks for the check, settle the bill, and finally leaves.
Analysis of the Process Using Value Stream Mapping
Various symbols have been used in the process map to denote specific activities. For example, the yellow squares denote core activities; the green circles signal the start and end of the process; the orange diamonds signal inspection activities; the red triangles indicate waiting time; and the arrows indicate movements and transitions within the process. Consequently, these are the points of scrutiny during value stream mapping. As discussed in Lovelle (2001) value stream mapping is a powerful and simple tool in outlining and distinguishing the true value of activities in the service process. The goal of value stream mapping is to determine each value-adding action required to create the desired value (Womack 2006). In the case of the restaurant service process flow, the yellow squares denote significant actions or activities in the process, which are instrumental in creating the desired value.
Using value stream mapping in process analysis, the organization takes the standpoint of the various players (i.e., customers and front stage, back stage, and support actors) in the process (Womack 2006). Taking the standpoint of the customers in the restaurant for example, the process involves idle or waiting times, which may be considered as non-value adding activities in the process flow. Consequently, Collier and Evans (2007) noted that waiting times could be very annoying on the part of the customers. In restaurants for instance, long waiting time could be annoying to customers, especially when they are hungry or are experiencing time constraints. Either way, the goal of value stream mapping is to minimize non-value adding activities and in the process improve process flow and hence service levels (Manos 2006). Given the negative impacts of non-value adding activities to customers’ perception of the service, managers should therefore take steps to eliminate or at the least minimize non-value adding activities in the process.
Value stream mapping approach to process analysis also involves assigning estimated process time on each activity to determine cycle times, waiting time, and setup time among others (Monroe 2006). In the case of the restaurant process chart, rough estimates of the time consumed in each activity have been included in order to measure the time taken to provide the service and at the same time identify time wastages within the process. It should be noted that in most instances customers relate long process time to inefficiency. Taking a closer look at the process time, it takes the customers about 12 minutes at the minimum, before getting a table seat. For guests who are experiencing time constraints, twelve minutes of waiting time may be too long, hence trigger customer frustration and eventually dissatisfaction. In view of the negative implications of long process time to customer satisfaction, managers should exert efforts to improve process time.
Type of Layout and Objectives
As discussed in Krishnan and Krishnamurthy (2009), the fundamental strategy for creating a process layout is to combine resource units based on processing type and subsequently relocating them relatively to each other based on the flow existing between them. Furthermore, Krishnan and Krishnamurthy (2009) also claimed that one key assumption or objectives in the design of process layouts is infinite capacity and maximum efficiency. In relation to layout patterns, Collier and Evans (2007) identified four major layout patterns, which may be identified as follows: the product layout, the process layout, the fixed position layout, and the group layout. For service-oriented operations, the most appropriate layout pattern is the fixed position layout (Collier and Evans 2007). In the fixed position layout, resources, including manpower and equipments required to create a product or provide a service are located in a common location. Consequently, this applies to restaurant operations whereby receptionists are located in the reception area, the waiters in the dining area, and kitchen staff in the food preparation area.
Conclusion
An understanding of internal process could help in developing or designing more effective and efficient process flows. Process charts and value stream mapping are effective approaches in understanding and analyzing the effectiveness of the process. As seen in the case of the restaurant service process, certain activities may be considered as non-value adding. Consequently, these non-value adding activities are the primary sources of customer frustration and eventually dissatisfaction. In view of the negative effects of non-value adding activities to customer satisfaction, managers should take steps to eliminate if not minimize these non-value adding activities. Similarly, managers should exert effort to identify the most suitable process layout, as the layout determines overall efficiency and productivity.
References
Collier, D & Evans, J 2007, Operations Management, Goods, Services, Value Chains. Cengage, New York.
Krishnan, K & Krishnamurthy, V 2009, ‘Performance analysis of distributed and process layouts under manufacturing disruptions’, IIE Annual Conference, Proceedings, pp. 591-597.
Lovelle, J 2001, ‘Mapping the value stream’, IIE Solutions, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 26-33.
Manos, T 2006, ‘Value stream mapping: an introduction’, Quality Progaress, vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 64-70.
Monroe, D 2006, ‘Analyzing the value streams’, Quality, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 50-56.
Womack, J 2006, ‘Value stream mapping’, Manufacturing Engineering, vol. 136, no. 5, pp. 145-155.