## 5 Method Verification  
The verification of the method was carried out in the Lower Silesian branch of an automotive company. An assembly line for the main foot brake valve, consisting of three production stations, was designated for the implementation of the method. Most assembly operations are performed manually using simple tools and a press. The aim of the research was to assess the effectiveness of the production line's utilization of resources in the process by identifying and categorizing production losses and then expressing them in numerical form. Measurements were carried out in two stages: first for the current state, and then for the state after the implementation of improvements. Each stage covered 20 days of measurements of availability, performance and quality losses in the areas of the operator, logistics, organization and management, and maintenance. For the measurements, a time period outside the holiday season and free from audits and visits was chosen. All measurements were conducted on the first production shift. Time measurements were conducted to the accuracy of 1 s. The measurement sheet includes:  
* various types of possible production losses,
* assigning these losses to availability, performance or quality,
* the categorization of losses in terms of responsible areas,
* basic assumptions of the production plan. The other sources of data were an electronic tracking system, production documentation, and interviews with operators. The average value of the effectiveness indicator for the first stage of measurements was (Figure 3):  
* 91% for the operator's area,
* 92% for logistics,
* 97% for maintenance,
* 98% for the area of organization and management. Several problems were noted at the first station (Figure 4), the second station (Figure 5) achieved the worst results, while the results for the third station turned out to be satisfactory. Workstation 1 obtained the worst results in the availability coefficients in the area of logistics and the operator, while workstation 2 only obtained good results in the qualitative coefficients and in the organization and management area. The source of losses in the operator's area turned out to be, i.e., conversations, both on and outside the workstation, which resulted in short but quite numerous downtimes, as well as a reduced production rate and excessive time spent on preparatory and finishing activities. In the area of logistics, the main problem turned out to be the lack of material for production. This resulted in the need for the operator to leave the workplace and to bring the necessary elements, which involved a time-consuming search due to the multi-variant nature of the product. In the area of maintenance, the problem of an inoperative press became apparent, resulting in a slower production rate. It is worth noting that despite the use of certain waste identification methods in the company, most problems had not been documented earlier; even if they were noticed, they were ignored due to the seemingly small scale of the entire production line. Only their analysis in terms of separate organizational units, and their expression in quantitative form, resulted in corrective actions being taken. Figure 4: Average values of effectiveness coefficients for workstation 1. Figure 3: Average values of the effectiveness indicator for three workstations. Different solutions were implemented in the form of:  
1. reorganization of the place for the storage of materials delivered irregularly,
2. updating information about the location of elements,
3. a new standard for marking containers,
4. a new method of repackaging materials in the warehouse,
5. repair of the press,
6. an incentive system,
7. employee training,
8. a new standard of preparatory and finishing activities. The average value of the effectiveness indicator after the implementation of improvements increased to (Figure 6):  
* 96% for the operator's area,
* 99% for logistics,
* 100% for the other two areas.