Kaufmann Consulting · K-Suite Diagnostic Analysis

Hartwell Precision Parts

Precision CNC Machining & Fabrication · 22 years · 47 employees
Prepared for: Tom Hartwell, Owner / President
Date: 2026-05-27
Revenue
$8,420,000
Margin
9.2%
Cash on hand
$142,000
LOC drawn
$480,000 of $750,000 (64%)
DSO
52 days (Net 30 terms)
Total inventory
$1,085,000
SAMPLE — HARTWELL PRECISION PARTS · ILLUSTRATION ONLY

Executive Summary

Owner-level read · designed for 90 seconds
Hartwell is an $8.42M precision machining shop running at a 9.2% margin — roughly $780,000 of operating profit — yet the cash that profit should produce isn't showing up in the bank, and the line of credit sits stuck at 64% with under two weeks of headroom. The reason is that cash is both trapped and leaking faster than the P&L suggests. The three biggest pieces: reactive maintenance costs roughly $563,000 a year once you count downtime at your two-shift production rate, not just the repair bills; slow collections (52 days against Net 30 terms) are holding $548,000 in receivables — almost exactly what's drawn on your line; and scheduling chaos burns about $408,000 a year in idle crew time during oversized changeovers. Behind those sit scrap and rework (~$230K/yr), inventory carrying cost (~$92K/yr plus $119K of dead stock), production turnover (~$83K/yr), and supplier unreliability (~$80K/yr). All in, the identified opportunity runs from about $657,000 to $1.64 million, blending one-time cash release with annual recovery. Start with collections: it's the fastest cash, costs nothing to begin, and the $329K–$411K it frees goes straight onto the line — turning the LOC back into a tool you choose to use, which is exactly the outcome you described. Then we fix the maintenance and scheduling that keep refilling the drain.
FindingSeverityCash Opportunity
Reactive maintenance costs far more in lost production than in repair bills HIGH $169K–$450K
Customers take 52 days to pay on Net 30 terms, trapping $548,000 in receivables HIGH $219K–$493K
Long changeovers and constant schedule changes burn $408,000 in idle crew time a year HIGH $108K–$282K
Scrap and rework consume an estimated $230,000 a year in material, labor, and machine time HIGH $46K–$161K
$1.08M in inventory carries $92,000 a year in cost — 42% stuck in WIP, 11% dead HIGH $60K–$119K
22% production turnover costs about $83,000 a year to replace and retrain people HIGH $17K–$41K
Supplier quality problems and late deliveries cost roughly $80,000 a year HIGH $20K–$52K
The line of credit is stuck at 64% and never pays down — leaving 1.9 weeks of cash headroom MEDIUM $19K–$41K
Total identified opportunity$657K–$1640K
Recommended starting point

Start with collections. It is the fastest cash in the building, it requires no capital to begin, and the $329,000–$411,000 it frees goes directly onto the line of credit — which solves the precise problem you named when we started: a line that won't pay down.

Analysis

How the findings connect — and where to start
late material forces reschedule downtime strands WIP changeovers strand WIP downtime drives overtime overtime burns out new hires rework steals capacity compound on shared capacity trapped AR draws the line trapped WIP draws the line 7 SupplierReliability 1 ReactiveMaintenance 4 Scrap &Rework 3 SchedulingChaos 6 Turnover 2 SlowCollections 5 Inventory/ WIP 8 LOCDependency
High severity Medium severity Low severity Causal relationship Compounding relationship
How the problems connect

The cash squeeze you're feeling traces back to two reservoirs where money sits trapped — receivables and inventory — and to the operational instability that keeps refilling them. The most direct is collections: customers paying in 52 days on Net 30 terms hold $548,000 in accounts receivable that should be cash in your account. That single gap is almost exactly the $480,000 drawn on your line of credit, which means you are borrowing at the bank, and paying interest, to cover money your own customers are sitting on.

The shop floor feeds the same problem from a different direction. Reactive maintenance produced 264 hours of unplanned downtime last year, and oversized changeovers added 600 hours of avoidable setup time. Both strand jobs mid-process — which is why work-in-process is 42% of your inventory, unusually high for a job shop. Half-finished work doesn't flow; it piles up between operations and becomes cash frozen on the balance sheet. The same instability forces 38 hours of overtime a week and the expediting that shows up in supplier freight, draining operating cash on top of the working capital it locks up.

Everything lands on the line of credit. Trapped receivables and bloated inventory tie up the working capital that should pay the line down, while overtime, expediting, scrap, and rework drain the operating cash that should service it. The LOC absorbs all of it and stays pinned at 64% utilization with 1.9 weeks of headroom. It isn't a separate problem — it's where every other problem comes to rest as a single number.

What's hiding what

The clearest example is maintenance. You spend $148,000 a year on it, and judged against that line item, reactive maintenance looks like a manageable cost. But the budget hides the real number: 264 hours of downtime at your two-shift production rate is roughly $534,000 of product you couldn't ship — more than seven times the premium you pay on the repairs themselves. Looking at the maintenance budget to decide whether reactive maintenance is hurting you means looking at the wrong number entirely.

The balance sheet hides a similar misdirection. Your inventory reads like a purchasing or buying problem, but the $520,000 of WIP wasn't over-bought — it was manufactured and then stranded by downtime and scheduling churn. The same is true of turnover: a 22% rate looks like an HR or hiring issue, but by your own account it's the newer hires who leave because they can't get traction on a floor running hot on overtime and firefighting. Several numbers that wear a department label — inventory, HR, freight — are actually one operational story showing up in different ledgers.

Where things multiply

Downtime and scheduling compound on the same machines and the same crews. Each consumes capacity; together they force the 38 hours of weekly overtime, whose premium alone runs about $33,600 a year, plus the expediting that follows late jobs. The lost capacity from downtime (~$534,000) and the idle changeover labor (~$408,000) aren't independent line items — they overlap on the same constraint and share the same overtime recovery, so the combined damage is larger and harder to see than either number alone.

Working capital multiplies the same way. Slow collections ($548,000 trapped) and stranded WIP both pull on the line of credit at once, and it's their combination that keeps it at 64% and generates roughly $40,800 a year in interest that neither would fully incur on its own. Scrap and rework make it worse still: a 5.1% rework rate steals machine hours that downtime and long changeovers have already made scarce, so a reworked part costs not just its share of the $230,000, but the queue capacity it denies — capacity you then buy back with overtime. Two problems sharing one constraint always cost more than their sum.

What to fix first and why

Start with collections. It is the fastest cash in the building, it requires no capital to begin, and the $329,000–$411,000 it frees goes directly onto the line of credit — which solves the precise problem you named when we started: a line that won't pay down. Within 30 to 60 days it improves your LOC position, cuts interest, and roughly doubles your weeks of headroom. It buys you runway.

That runway matters because the next moves — maintenance and scheduling — are the structural engine refilling the drain. They inflate WIP, drive the overtime, and steal the capacity that everything else competes for. They carry the biggest annual numbers, but they take 90 days or more to pay off and they don't release trapped cash; they stop new cash from being trapped. Slot dead-stock liquidation in early alongside collections as a second quick source of cash, then turn to the operational fixes for durable recovery.

The sequence is the whole point. If you start with maintenance because it's the largest figure, you'll be 90-plus days into a process change with no cash freed and under two weeks of headroom — and you can run out of runway before the fix lands. Right diagnosis, wrong order, same cash crisis. Collections first buys the time; operations second makes it stick.

Findings

Ranked by impact · highest first
FINDING 01
HIGH

Reactive maintenance costs far more in lost production than in repair bills

What the data shows

68% of your maintenance is reactive — machines get fixed after they break, not before — and that drove 22 hours of unplanned downtime a month, 264 hours for the year. Your maintenance budget is $148,000, but the budget isn't the real cost. The real cost is the production those 264 hours would have generated.

Root cause

With two shifts running hard and preventive maintenance skipped 'often' to keep machines up, small wear problems grow into breakdowns. Because spare parts aren't staged ahead, repairs stretch longer than they should. The shop is trading scheduled 30-minute PM stops for unscheduled multi-hour failures, and every failure pulls a machine off revenue work.

The non-obvious part

Your $148,000 maintenance line is a rounding error next to what the downtime actually costs. At a two-shift revenue rate of about $2,024 an hour, 264 lost hours is roughly $534,000 of production you didn't ship — more than seven times the reactive premium on the repairs themselves. If you judge reactive maintenance by the repair budget, you're watching the wrong number.

Cost of inaction

Approximately $46,924 per month unaddressed — about $563,090 per year if this continues.
264 downtime hrs/yr valued at the two-shift revenue rate ($2,024/hr = $534,336) plus the 40% premium on the reactive share of repairs ($28,754).

Cash opportunity

$169K – $450K  annual lost-production and repair-premium recovery

See the Options tab for the full calculation.

FINDING 02
HIGH

Customers take 52 days to pay on Net 30 terms, trapping $548,000 in receivables

What the data shows

You offer Net 30, but customers actually take 52 days to pay — a 22-day gap. At your revenue, that gap holds your AR balance at $1,240,000 when terms would put it near $692,000. The difference, about $548,000, is your cash sitting in someone else's bank account.

Root cause

In a 60%-repeat-business job shop, collections run on relationships, and follow-up is soft because no one wants to be the one who calls a good customer about money. With your controller stretched thin, AR aging gets reviewed when there's time, not on a cadence — so a 30-day account quietly becomes a 52-day account without anyone deciding to let it.

The non-obvious part

This $548,000 is almost exactly what's drawn on your line of credit ($480,000). You're borrowing at the bank — and paying interest — to cover cash your own customers are holding past terms. The line isn't financing growth; it's financing your customers' slow payment. That's the direct connection between your collections and the line you can't pay down.

Cost of inaction

Approximately $3,881 per month unaddressed — about $46,575 per year if this continues.
Interest carry on the $548K of excess AR at an estimated 8.5% LOC rate — the ongoing bleed, separate from the one-time cash the balance itself represents.

Cash opportunity

$219K – $493K  one-time cash released from excess receivables

See the Options tab for the full calculation.

FINDING 03
HIGH

Long changeovers and constant schedule changes burn $408,000 in idle crew time a year

What the data shows

Your changeovers run 54 minutes against a 30-minute target — 24 excess minutes, six times a day, 250 days a year, or 600 hours of avoidable changeover time. With 65% of your 31-person floor (20 people) idle during a typical setup, that excess costs about $408,000 a year in paid-but-not-producing labor — before the overtime it drives.

Root cause

Three schedule changes a week after release means jobs get reshuffled mid-stream, forcing unplanned extra changeovers. Setups aren't standardized — there's no discipline of staging everything before the machine stops — so each one takes nearly twice the target. The churn and the slow setups feed each other: every reshuffle creates another long changeover.

The non-obvious part

Those long changeovers quietly inflate your work-in-process. WIP is 42% of inventory — high for a job shop — because jobs sit half-finished waiting for the next setup. So scheduling chaos doesn't just cost idle labor; it helps trap cash on your balance sheet, and it feeds the 38 hours of weekly overtime you pay a 50% premium on to recover the time the changeovers ate.

Cost of inaction

Approximately $35,400 per month unaddressed — about $424,796 per year if this continues.
600 excess changeover hrs/yr × 20 idle crew × $34 loaded rate ($408,000), plus the scheduling-attributable 50% share of the $33,592 annual overtime premium ($16,796).

Cash opportunity

$108K – $282K  annual idle-labor and overtime recovery

See the Options tab for the full calculation.

FINDING 04
HIGH

Scrap and rework consume an estimated $230,000 a year in material, labor, and machine time

What the data shows

Your scrap rate is 3.4% and rework 5.1% — a combined 8.5% quality loss. Last quarter's scrap and rework totaled $38,400, which annualizes to $153,600. Applying your own 1.5× cost multiplier for the labor and machine time already invested in those parts brings the true cost to about $230,400 a year.

Root cause

Rework at 5.1% is high and points upstream: parts are made wrong, then fixed. With 18% of orders needing clarification before production and 6 wrong-parts incidents a month, a meaningful share of scrap and rework starts as bad information hitting the floor, not bad machining. The pressure of rushed changeovers and skipped PM pushes quality down further.

The non-obvious part

Rework hurts more than scrap here. Scrapped parts you stop spending on; reworked parts you pay for at least twice — once to make wrong, once to make right — and they eat scarce machine hours you're already short on because of downtime and long changeovers. Your 5.1% rework rate isn't just a quality cost; it's stealing the very capacity you're paying overtime to recover.

Cost of inaction

Approximately $19,200 per month unaddressed — about $230,400 per year if this continues.
Last quarter's $38,400 annualized (×4 = $153,600) and adjusted by your 1.5× rework cost multiplier for embedded labor and machine time.

Cash opportunity

$46K – $161K  annual scrap and rework reduction

See the Options tab for the full calculation.

FINDING 05
HIGH

$1.08M in inventory carries $92,000 a year in cost — 42% stuck in WIP, 11% dead

What the data shows

You hold $1,085,000 in inventory: $380K raw, $520K WIP, $185K finished. WIP at 42% is high for a job shop, and 11% of inventory — about $119,000 — hasn't moved in over a year. You're paying roughly $68,000 a year to carry the overstock and carrying $24,000 in annual obsolescence risk on top of it.

Root cause

The dead stock is largely leftover material and finished parts from programs that ended or changed. The high WIP is operational: jobs stall mid-process behind downtime and long changeovers, so half-finished work piles up between operations instead of flowing through. Inventory is where the shop-floor problems come to rest on the balance sheet.

The non-obvious part

Your inventory problem is mostly a downstream symptom, not a purchasing problem. The $520K of WIP wasn't over-bought — it was manufactured and then stranded by the same downtime and scheduling issues draining cash elsewhere. Fix the flow and a chunk of this WIP releases itself. The $119K of truly dead stock, though, is real trapped cash that no operational fix will free — that has to be actively cleared.

Cost of inaction

Approximately $7,667 per month unaddressed — about $92,000 per year if this continues.
$68,000 annual carrying cost on the overstock plus $24,000 in annual obsolescence risk; excludes the one-time cash represented by the $119K of dead stock.

Cash opportunity

$60K – $119K  one-time cash from dead stock plus annual carrying savings

See the Options tab for the full calculation.

FINDING 06
HIGH

22% production turnover costs about $83,000 a year to replace and retrain people

What the data shows

Your production turnover runs 22% on a 31-person floor — roughly 7 people a year who leave and must be replaced. Each replacement costs about $12,120 once you add recruiting ($3,200), training ($2,800), and the productivity gap while a new hire ramps over 10 weeks at 55% productivity ($6,120). That's about $83,000 a year.

Root cause

By your own account, it's the newer hires who leave — people who can't get traction in a fast-moving environment — while your ten-year veterans stay. That points to onboarding, not culture: new people are dropped onto a floor running hot on overtime, long changeovers, and firefighting, with little structured ramp-up, so they struggle and leave before they ever become productive.

The non-obvious part

Turnover and your other problems form a loop. The chaos — overtime, downtime, scheduling churn — makes the floor a hard place to learn, which drives new hires out; their departure leaves you shorter-handed, which means more overtime and more rushing for everyone else, which makes the floor harder still. The turnover number looks like an HR issue, but the operational conditions are manufacturing it.

Cost of inaction

Approximately $6,888 per month unaddressed — about $82,658 per year if this continues.
≈6.8 replacements/yr (22% of 31) × $12,120 fully-loaded cost per hire (recruiting + training + ramp productivity gap).

Cash opportunity

$17K – $41K  annual replacement-cost reduction

See the Options tab for the full calculation.

FINDING 07
HIGH

Supplier quality problems and late deliveries cost roughly $80,000 a year

What the data shows

You're seeing 4 supplier quality issues a month at about $1,200 each — roughly $57,600 a year — plus 7 late material arrivals a month and $22,000 in expedited freight over the last 12 months. Together, supplier unreliability costs about $79,600 a year, before the production disruption it causes downstream.

Root cause

Late and defective material forces two bad choices: stop production and wait, or pay to expedite. Seven late arrivals a month suggests order timing and supplier follow-up are reactive, and 4 quality issues a month points to suppliers whose incoming quality isn't being held to a standard. With purchasing likely sharing the controller's stretched bandwidth, supplier performance isn't being actively managed.

The non-obvious part

Supplier problems don't stay in receiving — they ripple onto your floor. A late or defective shipment forces a schedule change (one of your 3 a week), which forces an extra changeover, which strands WIP and drives overtime to recover. Some of what looks like internal scheduling chaos and quality cost actually originates at the supplier's dock. The $80K is the direct cost; the indirect cost is spread across three other findings.

Cost of inaction

Approximately $6,633 per month unaddressed — about $79,600 per year if this continues.
4 quality issues/mo × $1,200 × 12 ($57,600) plus $22,000 annual expedited freight.

Cash opportunity

$20K – $52K  annual supplier-reliability cost reduction

See the Options tab for the full calculation.

FINDING 08
MEDIUM

The line of credit is stuck at 64% and never pays down — leaving 1.9 weeks of cash headroom

What the data shows

You're drawn $480,000 against a $750,000 line — 64% utilization — and it isn't getting paid down between draws. That leaves $270,000 of headroom against $145,000 in weekly cash outflow: about 1.9 weeks of cushion. At roughly 8.5%, the current draw costs about $40,800 a year in interest.

Root cause

The line is permanently drawn because the cash that should pay it down is trapped elsewhere — $548,000 in slow receivables and over a million dollars in inventory, much of it stranded WIP and dead stock. The LOC has quietly shifted from a timing tool to a structural source of operating cash, which is exactly the shift you flagged when we started.

The non-obvious part

This finding isn't really its own problem — it's the scoreboard for the others. The LOC balance is where slow collections, bloated WIP, and dead inventory all show up as one number. That's also the good news: you don't fix the line by talking to the bank, you fix it by freeing the trapped working capital. Pay it down with recovered AR and inventory cash and the interest, the fragility, and the dependency all ease at once.

Cost of inaction

Approximately $3,400 per month unaddressed — about $40,800 per year if this continues.
Interest on the $480K current draw at an estimated 8.5% LOC rate; excludes the larger risk of operating on under two weeks of headroom.

Cash opportunity

$19K – $41K  annual interest saved as the line is paid down

See the Options tab for the full calculation.

Options

Three paths per finding — you choose the goal
FINDING 01   HIGH

Reactive maintenance costs far more in lost production than in repair bills

OPTION A · Conservative
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to start immediately with no capital outlay and prove the approach before investing in systems.

Build basic PM checklists for your top revenue machines and stage the spare parts that cause the longest repair waits. Move from 68% toward 50% reactive. No new software and no new headcount — your existing maintenance person works from a schedule instead of a radio call.

How this number is calculated
Annual maintenance spend$148,000
Reactive portion (68%)$100,640
Avoidable premium (40/140)$28,754
Downtime hrs/yr264
Revenue/hr (2-shift, ÷4160)$2,024
Throughput cost of downtime$534,336
Total annual cost of reactive$563,090
Recovery (~30% of total)$168,927
Time to first cash

First measurable downtime reduction within 90 days — PM checklists take 6–8 weeks to start showing fewer breakdowns.

What can go wrong
Risk: PM stops get skipped the first time a hot job comes through, and you're back to 68% reactive within a month.
Prevention: Lock the PM windows into the two-shift schedule as fixed blocks, the same way you'd schedule a customer job — not as 'when we get to it.'
Risk: Checklists get built but never followed because no one owns them.
Prevention: Assign each top machine's checklist to the operator who runs it most, and review completion at the existing shift handoff, not in a new meeting.
OPTION B · Balanced
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to build a maintenance system that survives staff turnover and gives you data to manage by.

Stand up a simple CMMS to track work orders, PM schedules, and failure history, and pre-stage critical spares. Target 40% reactive. You start seeing which machines eat your uptime and can attack them by name instead of by symptom.

How this number is calculated
Total annual cost of reactive$563,090
Target reactive level40%
Recovery (~55% of total)$309,700
Time to first cash

60–90 days — CMMS setup runs 3–4 weeks, with downtime results following in 8–12 weeks once the PM cadence holds.

What can go wrong
Risk: The CMMS becomes a data-entry burden no one keeps current, so the failure history is useless within a quarter.
Prevention: Track only your five worst machines at first, not the whole floor — a small dataset that's actually maintained beats a complete one that isn't.
Risk: You over-buy spares and trade a downtime problem for an inventory problem — you already carry $1.085M of inventory.
Prevention: Stage spares only for the failure modes that historically caused 4-plus-hour waits; let the CMMS history justify each part you stock.
OPTION C · Aggressive
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to recover the maximum production as fast as possible and you're ready to invest in condition monitoring.

Add condition-based monitoring (vibration and temperature sensors) on your highest-value machines on top of the CMMS, so you catch failures before they happen. Target 25% reactive — essentially planned maintenance with rare surprises.

How this number is calculated
Total annual cost of reactive$563,090
Target reactive level25%
Recovery (~80% of total)$450,472
Time to first cash

About 120 days — sensors need to collect baseline data before they reliably flag developing failures.

What can go wrong
Risk: Sensor alerts get dismissed as false alarms before the baselines are tuned, and the team loses trust in the system.
Prevention: Run sensors in observe-only mode for the first month to calibrate thresholds before anyone is asked to act on an alert.
Risk: The install pulls your maintenance lead away from actual maintenance, so reactive work spikes during the rollout.
Prevention: Phase the install one machine at a time and keep the Option A checklists running underneath, so coverage never drops during the transition.
FINDING 02   HIGH

Customers take 52 days to pay on Net 30 terms, trapping $548,000 in receivables

OPTION A · Conservative
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to start immediately with zero cost and test tighter collections without straining customer relationships.

Have your controller make a friendly 'just confirming you received the invoice' call at day 20 on your largest open accounts, before anything is late. No new system and no collections agency — just a consistent early touch on the accounts that matter most.

How this number is calculated
AR balance at actual DSO (52d)$1,240,000
AR balance at terms (30d)$692,055
Excess AR (cash trapped)$547,945
Recovery (40–50% of excess)$219,178–$273,973
Time to first cash

30 days — the first invoices worked under the new follow-up come due and collect within a normal cycle.

What can go wrong
Risk: The owner or controller reverts to relationship-based hesitation and the day-20 calls quietly stop.
Prevention: Script the first call as a customer-service check-in ('any issues with the order or the invoice?'), not a collections call — it's easier to make and customers welcome it.
Risk: You chase small accounts and ignore the few that hold the most cash.
Prevention: Sort the aging by dollars, not by days late, and work the top 10 balances first.
OPTION B · Balanced
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to build a collections cadence that holds without your personal involvement.

Put a standing weekly AR-aging review into your existing controller meeting, with defined touchpoints at day 20, 35, and 45, and tighten terms on chronically slow accounts. The cadence does the work, not heroics.

How this number is calculated
Excess AR (cash trapped)$547,945
Recovery (60–75% of excess)$328,767–$410,959
Time to first cash

45–60 days — the cadence needs a couple of cycles to move entrenched 52-day payers.

What can go wrong
Risk: The cadence gets set up then abandoned by week three when other priorities take over.
Prevention: Embed the aging review into the existing weekly controller meeting — never a new standalone meeting, which is the first thing to get cancelled.
Risk: Tightening terms pushes a price-sensitive customer toward a competitor.
Prevention: Apply stricter terms only after a documented pattern of late payment, and pair it with a small early-pay incentive so the customer has a path that helps both sides.
OPTION C · Aggressive
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to recover the maximum cash quickly and you have the relationship capital to ask for it.

Offer a 1–2% early-pay discount (e.g., 1/10 net 30) to your top accounts, enforce terms firmly on the rest, and require deposits on new large jobs. You're actively buying back your cash and resetting payment behavior.

How this number is calculated
Excess AR (cash trapped)$547,945
Recovery (80–90% of excess)$438,356–$493,151
Time to first cash

30–45 days — early-pay incentives pull payment forward faster than follow-up alone.

What can go wrong
Risk: The early-pay discount triggers customers to renegotiate other terms or expect the discount permanently.
Prevention: Cap the discount window at 10 days and limit the offer to your top 5 accounts by volume first; review before extending it.
Risk: Aggressive enforcement on a key aerospace or defense account strains a relationship you depend on.
Prevention: Hand-carry the change to your largest accounts personally before it goes out as policy, so it lands as a conversation, not a dunning notice.
FINDING 03   HIGH

Long changeovers and constant schedule changes burn $408,000 in idle crew time a year

OPTION A · Conservative
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to start immediately with no capital and cut the worst of the changeover waste.

Run a focused SMED exercise on your two most frequent changeovers — stage tooling, fixtures, and materials before the machine stops, and convert internal setup steps to external ones — and freeze the schedule 24 hours before release to stop mid-stream reshuffles. Trim the 24-minute excess by about a quarter.

How this number is calculated
Excess changeover hrs/yr600
Idle crew × loaded rate20 × $34
Excess changeover cost$408,000
Reduction (~25%)$102,000
Scheduling OT relief~$6,000
Total recovery~$108,000
Time to first cash

45–60 days — the first standardized changeovers show time savings within a few weeks of the SMED work.

What can go wrong
Risk: The schedule freeze breaks the first time a key customer wants a rush job, and reshuffling resumes.
Prevention: Build a small, named capacity buffer for rush work so hot jobs have a lane that doesn't blow up the released schedule.
Risk: SMED gains fade as crews drift back to old habits without standard work posted.
Prevention: Document the new setup as a one-page standard at the machine and time a few changeovers a week against it so drift is visible immediately.
OPTION B · Balanced
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to make faster changeovers the normal way the floor runs, not a one-time event.

Extend SMED to all high-frequency changeovers, post standard setup sheets at each machine, and add a short daily scheduling huddle so Sales and the floor commit to a stable sequence. Cut the excess changeover time roughly in half.

How this number is calculated
Excess changeover cost$408,000
Reduction (~45%)$183,600
Scheduling OT relief~$11,750
Total recovery~$195,350
Time to first cash

60–90 days — standard work plus the daily huddle take a couple of months to hold across all setups.

What can go wrong
Risk: The daily huddle turns into a status meeting that doesn't actually change the sequence.
Prevention: Keep it to 10 minutes at the board with one decision — what runs in what order today — no status, just sequence.
Risk: Cutting changeover time exposes a different bottleneck, so throughput improves less than the labor math suggests.
Prevention: Track parts out the door alongside changeover minutes so you catch the next constraint as soon as it appears.
OPTION C · Aggressive
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to recover the maximum capacity and you're ready to change how jobs are sequenced.

Combine a full SMED rollout with scheduling logic that batches similar jobs to cut changeover frequency, not just changeover time, and hold the released schedule firm. Cut excess changeover time by about two-thirds and meaningfully reduce overtime.

How this number is calculated
Excess changeover cost$408,000
Reduction (~65%)$265,200
Scheduling OT relief~$16,460
Total recovery~$281,660
Time to first cash

About 90 days — sequencing changes need a full planning cycle to take effect.

What can go wrong
Risk: Batching similar jobs stretches lead times on small or one-off orders, frustrating customers who expect quick turns.
Prevention: Cap how long any job can wait for a batch; if it exceeds the cap, it runs regardless of changeover efficiency.
Risk: Reducing overtime too fast leaves you short when a genuine demand spike hits.
Prevention: Cut overtime in steps tied to confirmed changeover savings, so capacity is real before the hours come out.
FINDING 04   HIGH

Scrap and rework consume an estimated $230,000 a year in material, labor, and machine time

OPTION A · Conservative
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to start immediately by attacking the most common defects with no new equipment.

Pareto your scrap and rework by part and cause for one month, then put simple error-proofing — first-article checks, clearer travelers — on the top two or three defect drivers. Target a 20–30% reduction in current rates.

How this number is calculated
Scrap+rework last quarter$38,400
Annualized (×4)$153,600
Adjusted by 1.5× multiplier$230,400
Recovery (20–30% reduction)$46,080–$69,120
Time to first cash

30–45 days — first-article checks catch defects within the first production runs.

What can go wrong
Risk: The Pareto identifies the defects but no one is freed up to fix the top causes.
Prevention: Assign each top-three cause a single owner with a two-week deadline, reviewed at the existing production meeting.
Risk: Tighter first-article checks slow throughput on a floor already behind.
Prevention: Apply checks only to the part numbers driving most rework, not every job, so inspection effort follows the dollars.
OPTION B · Balanced
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to fix the information problem feeding defects, not just inspect for them.

Tighten the order-to-floor handoff so specs are confirmed before a job releases — attacking the 18% clarification rate — add operator training on the highest-rework parts, and standardize work instructions. Target cutting rates 40–50%.

How this number is calculated
Adjusted annual cost$230,400
Recovery (40–50% reduction)$92,160–$115,200
Time to first cash

60–90 days — cleaner order data and training take a cycle or two to show in the rework numbers.

What can go wrong
Risk: Spec confirmation adds a step that delays job release and pushes back delivery dates.
Prevention: Build the confirmation into order entry, not as a separate gate before release, so it happens before the clock starts.
Risk: Training the experienced crew on parts they 'already know' meets resistance.
Prevention: Frame it around the specific high-rework parts and let your senior operators write the standard work — they own it instead of receiving it.
OPTION C · Aggressive
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to drive quality to its structural floor and you're ready to invest in process control.

Add in-process inspection or SPC on your highest-volume programs, root-cause the recurring defects to the machine or fixture level, and tie quality metrics to the production huddle. Target a 60–70% reduction.

How this number is calculated
Adjusted annual cost$230,400
Recovery (60–70% reduction)$138,240–$161,280
Time to first cash

90 days — SPC needs data collection before it stabilizes a process.

What can go wrong
Risk: SPC generates charts no one acts on, so it becomes overhead without payback.
Prevention: Chart only the two or three characteristics that drive scrap, and require an action whenever a point goes out of control.
Risk: Chasing the last few points of quality costs more than the scrap it saves.
Prevention: Stop tightening once the cost of the next control exceeds the rework it would prevent — let the dollar math, not zero-defect ideals, set the target.
FINDING 05   HIGH

$1.08M in inventory carries $92,000 a year in cost — 42% stuck in WIP, 11% dead

OPTION A · Conservative
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to free cash quickly from inventory you already know you'll never use.

Identify and liquidate the 11% that hasn't moved in 12 months — sell back to suppliers, sell to other shops, or scrap for recovery value — and stop carrying and insuring it. Recover a meaningful fraction of the $119K and end its carrying cost.

How this number is calculated
Dead stock (11% not moved 12mo)$119,350
Realistic recovery (~50%)~$60,000 one-time
Carrying cost ended~$7,500/yr
Time to first cash

30–60 days — slow-moving material can often be returned or resold within a quarter.

What can go wrong
Risk: You scrap something at salvage value that a future program would have used.
Prevention: Cross-check the dead-stock list against your repeat-program forecast before selling; hold only what a known program will consume within 12 months.
Risk: Liquidation proceeds disappear into operations instead of paying down the line.
Prevention: Direct inventory recovery straight to the LOC so the cash does the job it's meant to.
OPTION B · Balanced
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to release WIP cash by fixing the flow that strands it.

Clear the dead stock (Option A) and attack WIP by pulling the trigger on the scheduling and downtime fixes so jobs stop stalling between operations, then set max-WIP limits per work center. Release part of the $520K WIP plus the dead-stock cash.

How this number is calculated
Dead-stock recovery~$60,000
WIP reduction (~10–15% of $520K)$52,000–$78,000
Plus annual carrying savingsongoing
Time to first cash

60–90 days for dead stock; WIP release tracks the scheduling and maintenance fixes (90-plus days).

What can go wrong
Risk: WIP limits choke a work center that genuinely needs a buffer, stalling jobs.
Prevention: Set limits from observed flow, not theory, and start at the work centers feeding your bottleneck.
Risk: WIP creeps back as soon as scheduling pressure returns.
Prevention: Tie the WIP target to the scheduling fix (Finding 3) — they move together or neither holds.
OPTION C · Aggressive
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to right-size inventory structurally and stop overstock from rebuilding.

On top of dead-stock liquidation and WIP limits, set min/max reorder points on raw materials by usage, negotiate consignment or shorter lead times with key suppliers, and review inventory monthly against actual consumption. Target the largest sustainable reduction in tied-up cash.

How this number is calculated
Dead-stock recovery~$60,000
WIP reduction (~15–20%)$78,000–$104,000
Plus raw-material right-sizingongoing
Time to first cash

90-plus days — supplier terms and reorder discipline take a planning cycle to implement.

What can go wrong
Risk: Leaner raw-material levels raise stockout risk — you already see 3 stockouts a month.
Prevention: Right-size only materials with reliable suppliers and steady usage; keep buffers on long-lead or single-source items.
Risk: Consignment deals trade inventory cash for higher unit prices that erode margin.
Prevention: Compare the carrying-cost savings against any price premium before signing; only convert items where the math nets positive.
FINDING 06   HIGH

22% production turnover costs about $83,000 a year to replace and retrain people

OPTION A · Conservative
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to keep more of the new hires you already invest in, starting now.

Assign every new hire a named veteran mentor for their first 10 weeks and add a structured 30/60/90-day check-in. No pay changes — just a deliberate ramp so new people get traction instead of sinking. Move turnover from 22% toward ~17.6%.

How this number is calculated
Production headcount31
Cost per replacement$12,120
Turnover 22% → 17.6%~1.4 fewer hires
Annual saving~$16,532
Time to first cash

One to two quarters — retention shows up as new hires pass the 90-day mark they currently don't reach.

What can go wrong
Risk: Veterans asked to mentor are already stretched and treat it as a burden, so it's mentoring in name only.
Prevention: Give mentors a small, visible time allowance and recognition; don't bolt it onto an already-full plate.
Risk: Mentoring can't overcome the underlying floor chaos, so new hires still leave.
Prevention: Sequence this after the scheduling and overtime fixes begin — a calmer floor is what makes the mentoring stick.
OPTION B · Balanced
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to build a ramp that reliably turns new hires into productive operators.

Add a structured onboarding curriculum for the highest-skill stations, cross-train so coverage doesn't depend on any one person, and gather exit feedback to fix the specific reasons people leave. Target ~14.3% turnover.

How this number is calculated
Cost per replacement$12,120
Turnover 22% → 14.3%~2.4 fewer hires
Annual saving~$28,930
Time to first cash

Two quarters — curriculum and cross-training take time to build and show in retention.

What can go wrong
Risk: The curriculum is built once and goes stale as parts and processes change.
Prevention: Have the veterans who do the work own and update their station's training; keep it on the floor, not in a binder.
Risk: Cross-training pulls experienced people off production to teach, denting output short-term.
Prevention: Cross-train during the slower scheduling windows the daily huddle (Finding 3) makes visible, not during crunch.
OPTION C · Aggressive
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to make retention a structural advantage and you're willing to invest in pay and progression.

Combine structured onboarding with a skills-based pay ladder and a clear progression path, so newer hires see a future and a reason to push through the hard early weeks. Target ~11% turnover — half of today's rate.

How this number is calculated
Cost per replacement$12,120
Turnover 22% → 11%~3.4 fewer hires
Annual saving~$41,329
Time to first cash

Two to three quarters — pay and progression changes take time to influence behavior and reputation.

What can go wrong
Risk: A pay ladder raises labor cost faster than turnover savings materialize.
Prevention: Tie each pay step to a demonstrated skill that adds capacity, so the raise is funded by the productivity it unlocks.
Risk: Veterans see new hires getting a structured ladder they never had and morale dips.
Prevention: Place existing staff on the same ladder at their earned level so it reads as opportunity for everyone, not favoritism for the new.
FINDING 07   HIGH

Supplier quality problems and late deliveries cost roughly $80,000 a year

OPTION A · Conservative
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to stop the bleeding from your worst suppliers without re-sourcing anything.

Rank suppliers by issue count and freight cost, then have a direct, data-backed performance conversation with the top two or three offenders — set clear delivery and quality expectations. Target a ~25% reduction.

How this number is calculated
Quality issues (4/mo × $1,200 × 12)$57,600
Expedited freight (12mo)$22,000
Total supplier reliability cost$79,600
Recovery (~25%)~$19,900
Time to first cash

30–60 days — the worst suppliers usually respond quickly once held to specific, documented expectations.

What can go wrong
Risk: A problem supplier is also your cheapest or sole source, so pressure risks supply.
Prevention: Line up a backup source before the conversation so you're negotiating from options, not dependence.
Risk: Expectations are set verbally and fade without follow-up.
Prevention: Put the agreed delivery and quality targets in writing and review them against actuals monthly.
OPTION B · Balanced
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to manage supplier performance as a routine, not a reaction to fires.

Stand up a simple supplier scorecard — on-time %, quality issues, expedite cost — reviewed monthly, add incoming inspection on the highest-risk materials, and adjust order timing to cut the late-arrival rate. Target ~45% reduction.

How this number is calculated
Total supplier reliability cost$79,600
Recovery (~45%)~$35,820
Time to first cash

60–90 days — scorecard trends and inspection take a couple of months to change supplier behavior.

What can go wrong
Risk: Incoming inspection adds labor and slows receiving.
Prevention: Inspect only the materials and suppliers the scorecard flags as high-risk, not every receipt.
Risk: Scorecards get produced but nothing changes because no consequence follows.
Prevention: Define in advance what a failing score triggers — a corrective-action request, then re-sourcing — so the data has teeth.
OPTION C · Aggressive
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to structurally de-risk supply and you're ready to consolidate or re-source.

Consolidate volume with your most reliable suppliers for leverage, dual-source critical materials, negotiate quality and delivery terms with penalties, and re-source chronic offenders. Target ~65% reduction.

How this number is calculated
Total supplier reliability cost$79,600
Recovery (~65%)~$51,740
Time to first cash

90-plus days — re-sourcing and qualifying new suppliers takes a full cycle.

What can go wrong
Risk: Qualifying a new supplier for aerospace or defense work is slow and certification-heavy.
Prevention: Start qualification on non-critical materials first, where the certification burden is lower, and phase in critical parts.
Risk: Consolidating volume creates a new single-source dependency.
Prevention: Keep a qualified second source active on anything critical, even at slightly higher cost, so leverage never becomes exposure.
FINDING 08   MEDIUM

The line of credit is stuck at 64% and never pays down — leaving 1.9 weeks of cash headroom

OPTION A · Conservative
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to restore breathing room fast using the quickest cash you can free.

Direct the first wave of recovered collections cash (Finding 2, Option A) straight to the line — don't let it cycle back into operations. Paying down ~$220K cuts the draw to ~$260K and roughly doubles your weeks of headroom.

How this number is calculated
Current draw$480,000
Pay down (from collections)~$220,000
Interest saved at 8.5%~$18,700/yr
Headroom 1.9 → ~3.4 weeksimproved
Time to first cash

30–60 days — tracks the first collections recoveries.

What can go wrong
Risk: Freed cash gets absorbed by day-to-day operating needs before it reaches the line.
Prevention: Sweep recovered AR to the line automatically rather than leaving it in the operating account where it gets spent.
Risk: Paying down a revolving line then re-drawing it accomplishes nothing.
Prevention: Pair the paydown with the collections cadence (Finding 2) so the inflow replacing the draw is durable, not one-time.
OPTION B · Balanced
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to get the line back to a timing tool, not a cash source.

Combine sustained collections recovery with dead-stock liquidation (Finding 5) and route both to the line. Paying down ~$370K brings the draw under $110K and headroom to a healthier range.

How this number is calculated
Pay down (collections + inventory)~$370,000
Interest saved at 8.5%~$31,450/yr
Draw falls under$110,000
Time to first cash

60–120 days — combines the collections cadence and inventory liquidation timelines.

What can go wrong
Risk: Operational cash drains (overtime, expediting) keep refilling the line faster than you pay it down.
Prevention: Sequence the maintenance and scheduling fixes alongside, so the recurring leaks shrink while you pay down.
Risk: The bank reduces the line when it sees lower utilization, cutting your safety net.
Prevention: Talk to your banker before the paydown so reduced usage reads as strength, and keep the limit even as the balance falls.
OPTION C · Aggressive
Choose this if your goal is

Choose this option if your primary goal is to fully reset the line to optional and you're executing the cash recovery across the board.

Drive collections, inventory, and the operational fixes together and route recovered cash to the line until the draw is near zero — restoring the full $750K as available, used-by-choice capacity, which is the outcome you described wanting.

How this number is calculated
Pay down toward full~$480,000
Interest saved at 8.5%up to ~$40,800/yr
Full headroom and limitrestored
Time to first cash

90–180 days — depends on the broader recovery landing.

What can go wrong
Risk: Going to a zero draw leaves no buffer if a large customer payment slips during the transition.
Prevention: Keep a deliberate minimum cash reserve rather than putting every freed dollar on the line; the goal is optional, not empty.
Risk: Chasing a zero balance starves a genuinely good growth investment.
Prevention: Once the line is optional, judge new draws on return — the aim is to choose when to use it, not to never use it.