Professional Documents
Culture Documents
S I G M A
MODERN DAIRY
farm is a complex
and highly integrated collection of systems (see Figure 1).
The systems tend to
share system analysis challenges
regarding capital, labor, management and sometimes equipment
making. Dairy farms can be
described as five manufacturing
systems [cropping, feeding,
replacements, milking and
manure/nutrient management
(see Dairy Terms and Definitions, p. 40)] that
transfer products and costs internally. Products sold
externally include milk (88.2% of receipts), cattle
(6.1%), crops (2.5%) and miscellaneous (3.2%).1
According to a 1999 dairy farm business summary for large herds in New York, the average large
herd had 594 cows and assets totaling $3,487,968.2
As Figure 2 (p. 36) illustrates, these dairy farms (an
average of 70 farms with more than 300 cows) are
capital and labor intensive with low returns. One of
the largest expenses on dairy farms is purchased
feed, which costs an average of 25% of gross
income. Lactating cow diets typically contain 45 to
60% purchased ingredients, with the remaining proportion home raised by the cropping system.
34
F E B R U A R Y
2 0 0 2
W W W . A S Q . O R G
On-farm
Wasted/spoiled feed
F E B R U A R Y
2 0 0 2
35
M O O O OV I N G T O WA R D S I X S I G M A
and improve safety factors while maintaining consistent production. This idea, along with the fact that all
animal and crop information flows through the
feeding system (see Figure 1, p. 35), has led to
the feeding systems being identified as a critical
control point in quality management on dairy farms.
The feeding system has become the quality management development area for farms.
FIGURE 3
Adjust
amounts
offered
Which
mix
Forage
Commodity
FIGURE 2
Number of cows
594
$5,872
Equity percentage
Lower and
upper deciles
320 to 1,432
$3,549 to $8,088
53%
25 to 81%
10.4%
2.4 to 21%
$2,834
$986 to $4,529
25%
13.18
45
$31,081
Years of education
(primary operator)
20 to 32%
33 to 61
$18,503 to $39,853
14
* Jason Karszes, W.A. Knoblauch and L.D. Putnam, New York Large Herd Farms,
300 Cows or Larger, 1999 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, Department of
Agricultural, Resource and Managerial Economics, 2000).
36
F E B R U A R Y
2 0 0 2
W W W . A S Q . O R G
Which
forage
How
much
Which
commodity
Bags
Inspection
Add and
weigh
Which
bags
Hand add
Deliver to
group
Mix
Unload
Return to
feed area
FIGURE 4
New corn
silage
Old corn
silage
Grass bag
Grass bunk
front
Alfalfa
bunk
back
Alfalfa
bunk
front
Forage
Grass
bunk
back
Which
forage
F E B R U A R Y
2 0 0 2
37
M O O O OV I N G T O WA R D S I X S I G M A
FIGURE 5
38
F E B R U A R Y
2 0 0 2
W W W . A S Q . O R G
Future work
FIGURE 6
Mean DM
DM CV percentage
Mean NDF
(DM percentage)
Alfalfa
silage
Corn
silage
Grass
silage
Alfalfa
silage
27.72
31.02
30.75
35.10
34.1
37.3
41.4
6.4
9.1
28.4
23.2
19.9
30
26.1
50.46
44.76
59.75
46.67
46
59.4
46
NDF CV percentage
8.7
9.8
11.9
12.5
13.5
13.3
13.5
As the project progresses,
the Six Sigma staff delinDM dry matter content, a percentage
eations (Champions, Black
CV coefficient of variation
NDF neutral detergent fiber, a laboratory analysis that measures cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin
Belts and Green Belts)
are slowly taking form.
* A.F. Kertz, Variability in Delivery of Nutrients to Lactating Dairy Cows, Journal of Dairy Science, 1998, Vol. 81.
Currently, members of
upper management are
Champions. Additional
FIGURE 7
Feeding System Control Chart for Percentage of Corn Silage Dry Matter
training in statistics will
slowly result in middle
35%
management (head feeder)
rising to a Green Belt level
and off-farm consultants
30%
rising to Black Belts. This
loose adoption of Six Sigma
25%
vocabulary will take approximately 18 to 24 months to
20%
fully implement on the case
study farm. Were currently
developing a quality manu15%
al containing SOPs and
good quality practices for
10%
all staff, continuing to train
management and staff in
5%
statistics and human
resource management, and
0%
incorporating new technol10/2
10/12
10/22
11/11
11/21
12/1
12/11
12/21
12/31
1/10
11/1
ogy into daily workflows.
Sample date
Daily dry matter deterPercentage of corn silage dry matter
Moving range
mination of stored feeds is
a controllable source of
variation; however, we need a rapid and accurate onbecoming more complex, most producers are unaware
farm method. The coefficients of variation for dry
of the technologys level of accuracy and stability.
Information regarding accuracy and testing is being
matter determination of four methods ranged from 2.4
collected from the manufacturers, and their input is
to 3.4% for corn silage, and the method commonly
being used to develop gage reliability and reproused on-farm averaged three to four units higher than
ducibility (R&R) studies. Accomplishing this requires
the one used in the laboratory.11 One new method,
portable near infrared spectrophotometry, would
better record keeping for equipment service, activity
allow a farm to determine dry matter once a day or
based costing analysis and R&R results.
more frequently and require only two to five minutes
Reinforcing the farms commitment to continuous
per sample vs. the 45 to 60 minutes the current
improvement is the foundation of all future work. As
method requires.
in manufacturing and service sectors, the issue of the
Although farms are using more technology and it is
day often overrides long-term goals and strategy set
QU A L I T Y P R O G R E S S
F E B R U A R Y
2 0 0 2
39
M O O O OV I N G T O WA R D S I X S I G M A
40
F E B R U A R Y
2 0 0 2
W W W . A S Q . O R G
forth by the strategic leadership team. Regular meetings are being held with the strategic leadership team
and various staff members to discuss problems and to
reinforce long-term continuous improvement goals.
REFERENCES
QU A L I T Y P R O G R E S S
F E B R U A R Y
2 0 0 2
41