Garment Technical Development Project
Date: 14th December 2001
Preamble
With the offshore Capacity increasing through the development of factories, to become the greater proportion of the whole, it is essential that we re-assess the supply processes and their relevance to the manufacturing units in the future.
This report, looking at the Garment Technical functions, intends to identify the potential for change and to propose the most appropriate courses of action needed to move some processes and responsibilities to the offshore manufacturing units.
This objective is to be achieved maintaining ‘Total Customer Confidence’ and the excellent ‘Customer Relationships’ achieved. Relationships which in themselves are far more important than the processes used.
On behalf of the business teams, who’s hard work has helped achieve our growth and domination of the Ladies Tailoring market within the Customer, may I ask that we do not let this project become ‘Power or Control Driven’. Can we also remember that nothing was achieved without the hard work and dedication of the many individuals involved?
The complexity that we all manage will remain and is always likely to remain. It is only through these dedicated people, with the appropriate skills coupled with the absolute tenacity to succeed, despite the problems and frustrations, that we are achieving the current results.
The Process Steps in Reverse (Factory Backwards).
Factory Based – Offshore / UK - Central Based UK Factories
Bulk Production¦
¦
Style Change¦
¦
Cut Bulk Contract
¦
¦-------------------- Bulk Markers
¦ ¦
¦-------------------- Pattern Sign Off
¦
Factory Test Lot / Pilot
The proposal affecting the factories as, say Phase One is to provide Technical Skills and Procedures, which would allow factory based ‘Pattern Sign Off’ (Final tweaks) and Bulk Cutting Marker Making (Lay Tops) for all potential customers.
These mechanisms would provide the ability to adjust products for ‘Local Conditions’ within the Fit, Construction and Aesthetic Constraints of the Contract Seal in the full sense of the words (Necessary to produce a ‘No Surprises’ environment).
Pre Production with Factory Team
¦
Jig & Die Making
¦
¦-------------------- Jig Patterns
¦ ¦
¦-------------------- Pattern Grading
¦
Contract Sealing
¦
Development Test Lot
¦
¦-------------------- Development Pattern
¦
First Test Garment
¦
Receive Design Pack
These processes take place in close proximity to the UK Factories and with easy access to the Customers Head Office in London.
They were designed to ensure on behalf of the business that products were debugged of inconsistencies coming from the design processes and achieved a conforming and timely Contract Seal to allow Feed on Targets to be met.
The process steps begin with proving the capability of the Design Pattern to achieve the Customers construction and fit standards.
They culminate with the hand over of a production ready product through the Pre-production process.
The Garment Technical Department began its creation some four years ago to protect the Product (and therefore the business’s reputation), from the conflicts created by inconsistent Product Design and the continual ‘Fire Fighting and Corner Cutting’ Manufacturing Practices which were prevalent in the business at that time.
By doing what we do, we have raised our Technical Profile within the Customer's ranking to No.1 (We were bottom of the pack then).
Through this consistent objective, our process takes a designed product of any technical standard and takes it to a consistently 'manufacturable' standard of Fit, Construction, Durability and Sew-ability.
We initially developed these technical processes to better supply the factories who both lived in a world of technical chaos once they moved from just Four styles a year into a multiple style change environment and complex product mix.
Deficiencies in the factory capabilities included:
The inability of the technical teams to focus on Product Development.
Incomplete and inconsistent machinery standards from team to team.
Operator skills and / or method deficiencies.
A management pressure to perform which inadvertently drove all support resources onto a fire fighting mode rather than to focus on a consistent technical approach and development methods.
Garment Patterns had always been the whipping boy of day to day technical issues in manufacturing. To have a different versions of the same style's pattern in use in different factories or production teams did not seem to concern anyone at the time. In many cases these pattern variations would not have been recognised as the source of other manufacturing problems either.
The Strategy, which created the Garment Technical Department, has now bridged much of this gap, but does not pretend to have solved local custom and practice issues. Critical factory people did not bother to attend pre planned Pre-production meetings.
The customer-facing element of the Garment Technical Department’s role has however, given the business a positive edge over our competitors, in the eyes of the Customers Departmental Teams, that we supply.
To contemplate fundamental changes to this new way of working MUST be accompanied by some fundamental changes in attitude and standards by those in the factory teams charged with future responsibility. If this attitude and practises change is not managed then a return to the chaos of the past is more than likely.
It needs to be said that during the gradual evolution of the Centralised Processes, much cynicism and doubt has been levelled at the Garment Technical Team. This fortunately, did not deflect the team from its focused objectives. However, the successes achieved have not and still do not come easily.
To avoid any ‘slipping back’ into product chaos will require Consistent Individuals with Practitioner Skills, the Vision and Determination to deliver consistency and efficiency to the Business, and not to the Factory Manager. Products, whose consistency and quality is in excess of that which we produce today.
It was the Group Chairman who asked the question, on my first day in the business ‘What do we need to do in Ladieswear to achieve the same aesthetic standards of our Menswear Jackets’. We need to keep looking at Higher Standard products from outside of our business to set and achieve product standards, which are better even than that Menswear standard!
The work we do with our Trimmings Suppliers in establishing the best, fit for purpose, interlinings is now led by our Garment Technical team, even though Design set the 'Handle' standards required. This process needs separate consideration, as bulk fabric samples need to be sent for compatibility tests to be carried out in the supplier’s labs.
Garments, which are manufactured to conform to their construction specifications.
Garments, which are consistent in fit developed from their Fit Standards Block Patterns.
Garments, which are durable in performance and excellent in their presentation.
Garments, which are consistent from garment to garment and style to style.
The business strives to meet these standards but often falls short. Some luck and some timely ‘blag’ has carried us through until recently, with the introduction of a new technologist and new procedures.
We are being challenged more frequently on the detail and some of the processes are stalling due to incomplete procedures. (Wearer Trials, Product Codes, Customer Production Samples etc).
Fabric and its Associated Processes
Despite all of the technical skill and effort applied to the product from the initial Design through to Delivery of Stock, many of the inconsistencies which hamper logical and consistent procedures, are related to fabric, always have been and probably always will be.
Unlike the Menswear industry however, in Ladieswear the tendency is to ‘dive in’ for a pattern change, rather than develop consistent manufacturing processes and skills, which eliminate most of the ‘Fabric Effect’.
The alternative trial & error methods used in the Ladieswear industry tends to eat precious Development Time, and often involve insufficient repeatability to move forward fast and with confidence, time after time.
In the following strategies, the underlying principle is to remove the fabric issues from the system ‘early on’ and continue the garment development process despite the non-availability of so called ‘correct fabric’.
The Strategies I refer to were those formulated before the subject underlying this development document was tabled.
First Fit with the Customers Team
¦
Transfer Design Pack to Garment Technical Team
¦
Receive Contracts
¦
Show Final Garments to Customer
¦
Cost Final Garments
¦
Make Sample Garment
¦
Cut Sample Garment
¦
¦------------------------Make First Production Pattern Set
¦
Set Up Design in Web PDM
To introduce a ‘Right First Time Design Processes’ puts the objective into one simple phrase.
To invoke this strategy requires determination on the part of the Design Team and the Design Room Management.
Determination to use the full set of manufacturing methods when making all Sample Garments.
Consistent use of the Block Patterns and the standard (proven) construction elements such as Collar Fit, Sleeve Head and Pad constructions, Trouser and Skirt Zips, Lining Pattern Constructions, Fabric Allowances etc.
Taking Short cuts by not using the correct methods will remove a possible opportunity to Garment Contract Seal at the First Fit Stage (2 weeks after Final Garments are Shown and Ordered).
Having the full set of Special Machines available in the Sample Making Area is essential if Design is to set and use the correct machines to create the Manufactured Finish.
Any new styles, which are Right First Time and which have been Garment Contract Sealed at this early stage, would be contenders for early factory development ahead of the current procedures.
Based on the principle of a Right First Time Design Pack, proven to be transferable to manufacturing without alteration, the Garment Technical Strategy could be:
The current role of the Gerber Silhouette Expert, used to Correct Design Patterns, would change to one of Supervising / Instructing the Design Pattern Cutters.
The Test Run Team, who make the Contract Seals would continue to make the Seals required for the Factory and Warehouse (Three Seals) and New Samples for any that were not Right First Time sealable at ‘First Fit’.
A Prime objective of this team should move from Re-building Design Products, to perfecting the Design Pack for earlier hand over to the factories for their pre-production work.
Pattern Grading must also be completed earlier in the development cycle, if only to allow other sizes to be cut during the development stages. While we have not been held to it yet by the Customer, we are expected to Contract Seal in both sizes 12 medium and 18 medium. Additionally, Size 10 medium garments are often required for Press Photo Shoot purposes.
The Pattern Grading function also includes the creation of Fusible Patterns and the Patterns used to create the Autojigs and Cutting Dies for use by the Factory Production Teams.
Once all Design Pattern Cutters are using their Silhouette System for creation of new styles, a proportion of the individual styling grading work should be eliminated when the standard grade is carried forward from the block pattern.
Fusible Patterns could be made by the original Pattern Makers; however, this has been avoided to maintain their capacity for creating New Designs. The Designers always complain that their Pattern Cutters have too much to do?
The building of the Product Packs in our Web Product Data Management System and for the Customers control system has recently become a critical requirement now that both are replacing the old Style File system. Their accurate and complete maintenance is both critical and essential.
Where the Customers Buying Departments are concerned, three or four buying phases of different magnitude are planned each season. Once the program is delivered, It is the future intention that we Contract Seal all styles in a Bought Group of Styles at the same single meeting , say one session each month with any required Re-fit meetings by exception in between.
The Customers Technologist has indicated that they will want to attend all Manufacturing Pre-production meetings. The only feasible way to achieve this, while avoiding their living in each of the factories, is to conduct Group Pre- Productions for the Offshore Factories in the UK?
These Pre Productions would need to be held in the same groups as were Contract Sealed and completed before sending Product Packs to any other factory. This process may take a couple of days a month to achieve but could avoid constant travelling.
Pre Production packs would then contain the Customers Construction Requirement when sent to the manufacturing factory.
The Local Factory Technical Team would then carry out factory based Pre-Productions without the need for a visit from the UK Garment Technical Team, other than by exception. The Web PDM System and the Individual Product Pack will carry all of the UK Pre Production Detail.
The local Factory Technical Team would use the extended time available to manufacture their own Test Garments, made under guidance by the Factory Technical Manager (or Technician). These Test Garments would then be used to plan in detail the production line requirements in terms of machinery, skills, and training needs, line balance and the eventual feed on plan.
The improved quality of this preparation process will allow the first production to become the replacement for the current ill practised ‘pilot’ batch.
If the Technical Team (Technician, Work Study, Head Mechanic and Trainer) have prepared well then the ‘First Production’ will be good enough to entertain a Customer Team visit to see ‘The Factory Pilot’.
The new Strategy for Fabric, that element essential to the Product Development process, involves some key steps:
Testing the majority of new fabrics before Final Garments to eliminate the unworthy.
Wearer Trialing trousers for 2 days before or about when the fabric is ordered. A high confidence level will come from a ‘Pass’ on this trial.
Chasing in the ‘Pilot Roll’ of Bulk Standard fabric to allow Garment Contract Seals and the Full 50 hour wearer trial for the ‘Fabric Contract Seal’ (Bulk Submission) to be completed earlier than is the current norm.
If the location for the Manufacture of Contract Seals and / or Wearer Trials were to shift as part of this system appraisal, then that would be the required location for this Test Roll of fabric.
The manufacture of Wearer Trials for the 50-hour and the full 200-hour trials, is still a subject of contention. Three people within the current Design Team were employed to cover the making of Wearer Trials and Special Customer Orders. Recently their capacity appears to have been absorbed into the Design Sewing Team compliment.
Wearer Trials occasionally influence Pattern Development / Last Minute Changes (Effect of Wash Allowances / Construction) therefore feedback needs to go through the last entity to have ‘Change Responsibility’ for the Production Pattern.
Customer's Department Technologist Service Expectation.
The Customers Department Garment technologist has yet to declare all of his intentions, however, he has indicated that he wishes to attend all pre production meetings and to assess some pilots in the factories.
His practice to date would indicate that he also wants everything to fit his diary and agenda, rather than our Critical Development Path.. This stance is not possible currently with all Pre-Production Meetings scheduled to suit factory needs above all else.
Therefore, the principle of using a UK Based Central Pre-Production Process, with infrequent factory visits to see production, is as good as it will probably get, if we can get him to work this / our way.
The questions to be resolved by this project is, How much of the Product Development process can be logically moved to the Manufacturing unit, UK and Offshore, while maintaining the timeliness of activities leading to the Timely Feed On of All New Styles?
Where do we do the work most appropriately for the best result?
The move to UK Lay Planning and Marker-Making for all Production Facilities becomes relatively simple for factories who have the Developed Skill and Equipment to receive and use downloads. Factories without these resources would need to receive printed Cutting Lays and Cut Planning Instructions with their contracts.
Bulk Production¦
¦
Style Change¦
¦
Cut Bulk Contract
¦
¦-------------------- Bulk Markers
¦ ¦
¦-------------------- Pattern Sign Off
¦
Factory Test Lot / Pilot
¦
Jig & Die Making
¦
¦-------------------- Jig Patterns
¦
Contract Sealing
¦
Development Test Lot
¦
Central Pre-Production
¦
¦-------------------- Pattern Grading
¦ ¦
¦-------------------- Development Pattern
¦
First Test Garment
¦
Receive Design Pack
The next stage of local development would logically take control of the last pattern modifications needed to cope with local conditions.
With a central Development Team holding the Master Pattern, the local copy could be modified without risk other than introducing local errors.
This would allow small adjustments perceived by the factory Technical Team as essential to their manufacturing methods. If say Jigs are to be fully manufactured in the location for the location then to make the patterns using the local Gerber System would be logical.
Factory Based – Central Based – Choice Based – Either
Bulk Production¦
¦
Style Change¦
¦
Cut Bulk Contract
¦
¦-------------------- Bulk Markers
¦ ¦
¦-------------------- Pattern Sign Off
¦
Factory Test Lot / Pilot¦
¦
Jig & Die Making¦
¦
¦-------------------- Jig Pattern¦
¦
Contract Sealing
¦
Development Test Lot
¦
Central Pre-Production
¦
¦-------------------- Pattern Grading
¦ ¦
¦-------------------- Development Pattern
¦
First Test Garment
¦
Receive Design Pack
The stage of local development below takes control of the Full Pattern Development and Contract Sealing to the Manufacturing Unit.
With a Central Development Team now not holding a Developed Master Pattern, the local copy would have to be sent to any second user factory along with its localised features.
This second user factory could be disadvantaged by the pattern and need to have it modified for them elsewhere.
Factory Based – Central Based – Choice Based – Either
Bulk Production¦
¦
Style Change¦
¦
Cut Bulk Contract
¦
¦-------------------- Bulk Markers
¦ ¦
¦-------------------- Pattern Sign Off
¦
Factory Test Lot / Pilot¦
¦
Jig & Die Making¦
¦
¦-------------------- Jig Pattern¦
¦
Contract Sealing
¦
Development Test Lot¦
¦
¦--------------------Pattern Grading
¦ ¦
¦-------------------- Development Pattern
¦
Central Pre-Production
¦
Receive Design Pack
Taking more stages of Product and Pattern Development to the Manufacturing Factories considerable additional Pattern Development Skills will be required.
These Skills will ideally need to have been gained through a formal Garment Technology Course which includes Pattern Cutting and Gerber Accumark PDS Pattern Manipulation.
The Local Technical Management Skills should also include some level of Formal Tailoring Skills to ensure that haphazard or illogical alterations are made.
A benefit of the Web PDM history trail and the ability to e-mail Patterns or pattern pieces back to base provides the ability to help from afar if and when doubt persists.
Priorities and Further Considerations.
From the scenarios discussed, and the potential to source garments from Contractor Companies world-wide with provision of only a Sketch or a Model Garment, the real issue to be determined, is how far to go and how quickly.
To develop Local Marker making with full fabric utilisation targeting and reconciliation is the simplest first step as the skills for most if not all processes already exist.
A dispassionate Skills Analysis would indicate the training or recruitment needs for a Pattern Developer.
Moving to making Contract Seals in Factories carries additional problems of Timing and Materials.
The contract seal rules demand the correct fabric in any colour and the correct trimmings are used.
This implies that the first Bulk Fabric needs to be where the seals and the 50-hour wearer trials are to be made.
The timely manufacture of Contract Seals in their Bought Groups implies that the resource and the materials need to be available as soon as the fabric arrives from the mill. Would a dedicated sample team be created to make these Samples and Seals?
The Development Test Lot is made to assess the repeatability of the Design Pattern. This has proven to be an essential process as Sample Machinists will invariably compensate for deficiencies in the Sample Pattern and not necessarily inform the original Pattern Cutter. Or if they do pass the information, the Pattern Cutter may choose to ignore the comments.
The process therefore is:
Test the original and assess for suitability.
Compare Pattern to Block and note variances.
Bring Pattern back to Block for Fit.
Incorporate all necessary Technical Features (Standard Pockets)
Correct / Remake Lining to Standard Construction
Grade for Size 18’s
Make Contract Seals & Seal
Modify after Sealing based on comments
Add Jig Allowances at appropriate time before ordering.
Fully Grade for Production
Anything is possible with realistic planning and implementation.
It is the business need that should drive the plan.
Once decided, a timed action plan will define the local effect and the central effect.
This would need to include cover for the factories where the resources will not exist such as any Future Contractor.
We have yet to look at the LSD Systems, Processes and Responsibilities.
Once we have conducted these steps a more formalised, date driven plan can be established.
Frank Lomax