At its core the ‘Make Through System’ is a form of tailoring, in which all the non-sewing aspects of spreading, marking, cutting, bundling, pressing, ironing, creasing and finishing are done by the tailor only, but in an industrial manufacturing setup all these aspects are dealt separately, i.e. not by the Karigars. The companies working only on the ‘Make Through System’, surprisingly are not doing the same due to low order quantities, however, some companies like AG Fashions have manufactured orders of 20,000 pieces on their Make Through sewing groups as well… delivering on-time while adhering to the quality requirements.
To understand the dynamics of ‘Make Through System’ Team StitchWorld interacted with 9 companies specializing in the different versions of Make Through System, namely Nancy Craft, Rajiv Exports, 360 Clothing, JUJAN Markfin, MN Enterprise, Cheer Sagar, Intime Knits, Mariko and AG Fashions. In the first article of the series, we discussed why and how the manufacturers in Delhi have been working on Make Through System, in this second article, StitchWorld discusses different approaches of Make Through System, along with the aspects of labour management, wage payment, skill management and quality control management, which define the success and sustenance of the indigenous sewing system, for manufacturing value added ladies tops and dresses.
Beyond the regular excuses of low order quantities and uncertainty of business, companies in Delhi-NCR have adopted the Make Through Sewing System for attaining the desired quality standards of high-fashion womenswear, which are made possible by the highly skilled Karigars. Companies have experienced much less rejections and alterations in the system, as the operator when working on piece rate are motivated to delivery ‘Right First Time’ quality as inability to do the same would affect their daily earning. These companies do not use the Make Through System as the only sewing system but also alongside operate assembly lines and some companies even outsource Make Through sewing, done by other players for the advantages that it gives. Here we will discuss about the different approaches that Make Through System generally follow and their operation criticalities.
The Make Through System is a form of tailoring, in which all the non-sewing aspects of spreading, marking, cutting, bundling, pressing, ironing, creasing and finishing are done by the tailor only, but in an industrial manufacturing setup all these aspects are dealt separately, i.e. not by the Karigars.
Approach I – Karigars using more than one type of sewing machine
The simplest form of the Make Through System is when one operator sews the complete garment. A system best suited in the case of garments or styles where only a single type of sewing machine is sufficient for sewing the complete garment. In case some sewing operations require different types of sewing machines like overlock and/or feed of arm, then one machine of each of those types are kept in the shop floor and every operator uses those machines on first-cum-first-serve basis. It leads Karigars to machine ratio to less than one resulting in machine idle time. For example, in a small unit of 50 single needle lockstitch machines working on Make Through System, there are two overlock machines. Then there will be total 50 Karigars but total 52 machines, while any two machines remain idle at any point of time.
Companies have experienced much less rejections and alterations in the Make Through system, as the operator when working on piece rate are motivated to delivery ‘Right First Time’ quality as inability to do the same would affect their daily earning.
In this approach a single operator completes the whole garment using more than one sewing machine. This approach has been outdated by the industrial manufacturing methods, but still the tailors sitting in small shops work in the same manner. It is the original method of garment manufacturing, for order quantities which do not cross the double digit mark and was modified by the manufacturers to the later discussed approaches, for accommodating the influx of orders. The major bottlenecks of this method are that every operator has to learn to operate every machine, workers have to wait for using a machine as another operator might be using it; it is impossible to do production planning and often great variations are seen in the quality of a single style or order.
Wage Payment – The operators are paid on piece rate as per the number of garments made by them per day/week/month.
Quality Management – The operators just show the initial pieces to the master, assuring their adherence to the non-written specifications. The operators work with a measuring tape and even a dress form at times, if working at a designer’s or hot couture manufacturer’s facility.
Approach II – Karigars working in informal groups with single point accountability
All the operators, part of the sewing group are highly skilled Karigars and each operator makes the complete garment. This approach is followed by majority of garment manufacturers, while ensuring total man and machine utilization, keeping aside the cases of absenteeism and lack of orders. At times the Karigars are being assisted by their relatives to carry out the non-sewing jobs (like ironing/creasing, marking, trimming, pairing, etc.) to boost productivity. Gradually their relative/apprentice is inducted into easier sewing jobs and eventually become full-fledged Karigar. Often these helpers help multiple Karigars improving the machine utilization factor. The companies do not pay anything extra to these helpers and neither do they object to the system.
Wage payment – Sewing operators are paid on piece rate as per the number of pieces made by them. Each operator keeps track of the operations done by him along with the line master and the company pays the whole group a cumulative amount as per the total garments made by them, without interfering in who did how much and what, because at times the sewing operators also share the operations among themselves.
Quality Management – The first motive of a quality management system in this approach is to keep track of which operator is doing what, and for keeping track of the production, ironical it may seem, most companies have given this responsibility to the line master of the group, who maintains a complete chart of which operator is doing which style, size and colour of the garment, and also distributes the bundles within the sewing operators. The same system might sound feasible for the 1st approach but is not followed due to lack of orders.
Suggestions – Use of a turret presser foot bar with three different types of presser foots as required, for enabling further flexibility in terms of the operations that can be done on the sewing machine.
Approach III – Karigars and operators (doing easier operations) working in teams/groups
This is the most interesting and also the most critical form of the Make Through Sewing System, in which the companies work with a mix of Karigars and unskilled or lesser skilled operators. The reasons cited by companies were surprisingly not because of the shortage of skilled labour, but because the garments at times have some easy but time-consuming operations, and if done by a Karigar would be a major portion of his/her ‘well paid’ time. Another reason for the same is the preference of even the unskilled or lesser skilled operators to work on piece rate for higher earnings. However these operators as beginners are kept on daily wages by the company. One more factor which pushes companies towards this arrangement is the inability of the company to make available specialized sewing machines to all sewing groups. Hence a single operator works on the specialized sewing machine doing that very operation for every sewing group. The man-machine utilization in this approach is 100% as no one has to leave the work station, similar to the 2nd approach.
Despite guaranteeing a lower style changeover time, the quality and productivity of the Make Through System is lower than that of assembly lines, due to absence of standards and practices for ensuring the same.
Wage payment – The big question is how Karigars can be paid as per piece rate when part of each garment is being done by some other lesser or unskilled operators? The problem is tackled in two ways for non-biased payments. In the first method, the Karigars working on piece rate are asked to work as per daily wages equivalent to what they usually make in a day and another operator is hired to work on a minimal daily wage or at times given a monthly salary.
For example the daily wage of a Karigar is US $ 24, so the cost of each minute if they are working for 8 hours is equivalent to US $ 0.0138. The operation which is not being done by the Karigar is of 5 minutes and 10 garments are made by each operator every day.
So the final amount paid to a Karigar as daily wage = 24 – 0.0138 X 5 X 10 = USD 23.31
Due to the high operating overheads, it is not feasible to manufacture small order quantities in factories a result of which a lot factories have been outsourcing Make Through system, as the actual CM exceeds the target CM by 10% to 15%
In case operators refuses to work on a daily wage, the piece rate of the garment is defined and per minute cost of the garment is calculated from the same taking in considerations its total SAM. Also identified, is the SAM of the operation being done by the other operator.
For example the SAM of the garment is 120 minutes and its piece rate is US $ 1.66, so the cost of each minute is US $ 0.0138. The operation being done by the other operator is of 5 minutes.
So the final piece rate per garment paid to each Karigar = 1.66 – 0.0138 X 5 = USD 1.591
Quality Management – It is easier to keep track of which operator is doing what in the 2nd approach when each operator is making a complete garment. But when a single garment is sewn by more than one operator, it not only becomes cumbersome but also essential as when rework and alterations arise, it should be known precisely who did that particular operation, as it affects the operator’s daily earning. A very simple methodology is followed to keep track of each operation against each operator. Each sewing group is given a code number which is pasted on the garments identifying the group, and within the group each sewing operator is given a number who sticks it adjacent/over the operation done by him/her. A more vague form of this system is that the 2-3 operators, who do a certain garment, write their names on a tag and attach it to the garment.
“The labour being migratory is very unpredictable… 50% of the people have been working with us since the start, while others keep switching every 6-8 months on an average.” – Uday Sehgal, Director, Mariko
Make Through System vs. Assembly Line
The limitations of both assembly lines and Make Through System can be better understood when companies who are working on assembly lines, are also maintaining Make Through sewing groups, solely for handling small quantities with good FOBs. Factors which decide the manufacturing system are interesting and continuously evolving, as some styles have a lot of hand embroidery work, which increases their movement in and out of the sewing lines, making Make Through a better choice. The people who have been working on assembly lines know that the system is not economical for such quantities; secondly the quality and productivity will not be up to the mark as by the time the learning curve stabilizes the order quantity exhausts. Despite guaranteeing a lower style changeover time, the quality and productivity of the Make Through System is lower than that of assembly lines, due to absence of standards and practices for ensuring the same, as all these aspects are dependent on the Karigars only and not on systems. Other interesting factors like frequent sewing specification change during sewing, duplicity of error before being identified, high absenteeism and labour turnover can be handled better in the Make Through System.
“The operators want to earn as much as possible and hence are always in favour of doing overtime.” – Sharan Gupta, Director, JUJAN Markfin
The most interesting fact which endorses the credibility of Make Through System is the outsourcing of the same by companies who have been running assembly lines for quite a long time. Due to the high operating overheads, it is not feasible to manufacture small order quantities in factories as the actual CM exceeds the target CM by 10% to 15%, explained the companies, who also didn’t want to let go of the small orders, as they fetch good FOBs. Another interesting aspect is the usage of Make Through System as an insurance to labour shortage in the festive seasons of Ramzan and Diwali; during this time the companies convert their assembly lines into small sewing groups, working as per the 3rd approach of Make Through System.
Moreover the Make Through Systems have actually helped companies control overheads as a lot of sewing operations are clubbed together, increasing the man-machine utilization, giving a greater production per operator per day and also reducing the overall style changeover time as2-3 styles are sewn at a time by a group. The companies who wish to venture into assembly line production are not able to do the same due to complacent attitude of the salaried workers as their performance does not have any impact on their earning.
