🧭 Follow-Up Recommendations

Which team needs attention, in which area, and with whom — with the evidence behind each finding

🔍 KPI Analysis
🏠 Overview ›👤 Hamad Said Hamad Al Mamari
RUNS ANALYSED
19
1,064 Units
ACTUAL REJECTION
7.6%
their own output
EXPECTED REJECTION
6.6%
for their model mix
GAP VS EXPECTED
+1.0
percentage points
🧭
Assessment
Compared like-for-like against the models they were assigned
⚪ Within the expected range. Hamad Said Hamad Al Mamari performs in line with the rejection expected for the models they were assigned. No follow-up needed on quality grounds.
⚖ Rejection here is measured against the models this person was actually assigned, not a plant-wide average. Someone given harder models should not appear worse for running them. Figures cover a single import period and reflect output only — they do not capture experience, shift conditions, or workload.
🧩
Models Run
Their result on each model against everyone else's result on the same model
ModelMachine Runs TOTAL PRODUCTION Their Rejection Model Baseline DifferenceOEE
Style 640-17 5H 8 435 7.8% 5.0% +2.8 67%
Style 640-16 5H 3 246 8.1% 6.3% +1.8 77%
Style 640-15 4H 2 197 9.1% 11.5% -2.4 77%
666-17 5H 4 172 4.7% 5.5% -0.8 56%
444-17 5H 1 9 11.1% 6.1% +5.0 21%
666-18 5H 1 5 0.0% 6.6% -6.6 31%
🏭
Machines Operated
Where they worked, and how each machine performed
M/C No.Machine Runs TOTAL PRODUCTIONRejection % Total DowntimeOEE
6 8 435 7.8% 290 min 67%
5 5 181 5.0% 365 min 49%
16 3 246 8.1% 80 min 77%
15 3 202 8.9% 50 min 61%
⏱
Downtime by Reason
Downtime recorded during their runs
ReasonMinutesShare of Downtime
Rework systemic 300 min 38.2
Metal Pouring & Dross Cleaning 260 min 33.1
Metal Delay 70 min 8.9
Elec 65 min 8.3
Startup Loss / Specific Gravity Issue (min) 60 min 7.6
Trouble Shooting 30 min 3.8