

Testimonials“I am very happy with the layout that you put together for us. We are filling up the western side of the building's office space with a design company, a music company and a large format output device. We are going to be rebranding as the COT Media Group later this month. We now need to refine a few Standard Operating procedures to maximize the work flow. Things however are dramatically improved with the new layout. I will keep you posted and please feel free to have anyone contact me for a reference.”
Nigel Worme
Managing Director
COT Caribbean Graphics

By Hal Ettinger
Now, as economic growth resumes, is the time to think about how effective plant layout and design can make the difference between a ho-hum ROI and substantially larger profits. Changing the layout of your existing operations or designing an effective plant expansion will reduce production costs and help you meet the demands of future markets. To address this, I'm going to tell you the sad tale of Mulder Graphics and contrast it with the story of Trent Litho.
Bill W. Mulder had, in the words of his son Todd, a vision. Unfortunately, the elder Mulder's view of the future came with a set of blinders. The owner's hard work, long hours, determination and focus had built the largest commercial printing company in his mid-sized Indiana city. At $16.8 million in annual sales, the Mulder Graphic's dominance in its market was unchallenged... until seven years ago.
Then, Trent Litho, considerably smaller at $8.7 million a year, brought its own vision to bear on the competition with Mulder. The vision, foresight really, belonged to Jack Trent and what he called his posse. There were some in the printing community who had other names for Trent's collection of up-start managers and supervisors. Trent would never be accused of being middle of the road anything. His company was no exception.
Seven years ago, he hired an industry consultant to review the company's layout and operations in light of current and anticipated production requirements. When Trent soon thereafter found a building across town on 8th and Wells, he compared the site's potential to what the review had concluded. Then, he put it all on the line, buying the site, making plans to renovate the building and move his entire printing operation to the new location. Set on a 7-acre site, the plant was built in 1981 and since then had been home to Drake Industries, a manufacturer of acrylic display cases.
Mulder Graphics should have done the relocating. The company was big and getting bigger, choking on operating inefficiencies in a building that left little if any options for accommodating continued growth. Instead of reviewing relocation alternatives, Bill Mulder made a quick decision to purchase a building adjoining his existing plant. Given the building's odd configuration and the city's building set-back requirements, as well as its utility easements, the acquisition had little to recommend itself. But Bill told his son Jerry, “When I started this company, you could have fit the entire operation on that lot and had enough room left over to play football on a real field, son! I don't need anyone to tell me how to expand or layout our plant. This'll be plenty for expansion, plenty.”
So, seven years ago both companies embarked on expansion plans that were to take them into the next millennium. Three years after both had made their moves,Trent's sales had increased by over 30% and profits by 133%. Mulder's sales had increased too, by 11%, and it profits by 14%. It was clear that within a few years Trent would become the dominant commercial operation in its Indiana market.
Here's why.
Eight Common and Costly Mistakes
Result: Lost opportunities. Without a critical review, the limitations of existing plant layout and of less than optimal production methods are likely to be repeated, and the chance to achieve higher levels of efficiency and, thus, greater profitability are likely to be lost. A little bit of evaluation and planning up-front goes a long way, both in the construction process and, later, in the plant's operating efficiency. Money not invested in planning and layout design is often lost later, many times over, by plant inefficiencies and excessive energy and maintenance costs.
Result: The company will not obtain best value for dollars spent on construction, selection of contractor(s) or building schedules.
Result: The company is likely to incur additional cost during construction and expensive delays in completion.
Result: Alternatives that often lead to better plant efficiencies are often overlooked, and opportunities are missed for buy-in from employees and management.
Result: A negative impression for employees and customs alike; a considerable marketing disadvantage.
Result: Construction costs are increased and schedules lengthened. Plant maintenance costs are greater than need be—a recurring cost.
Result: Early obsolescence, material handling nightmares and less than optimal output by production equipment purchased in the future
Result:: Takes you away from the job you're most effective at, gives you a job you do less well and ties you up for longer than anticipated, causing your primary job responsibilities to suffer.
The Moral of the Story
The plot of the Trent/Mulder story is repeated countless times per year all across the country. Its lessons are self-evident.