The cycle time in this study was estimated by time study, using a stopwatch (or a

phone). Using the accessible data, the actual number of cycles to be measured was computed using Equation (1).

N = ( Z ⋅ S E ) 2 (1)

where,

N = Final number of cycles to be observed.

Z = Value from the Z table (Z = 1.96 for 95% confidence interval).

E = Accuracy (±5%) × Average cycle.

S = Standard Deviation of the cycle time.

A successful 5S event usually frees the available floor space previously held up by unnecessary items. Increased floor space is one of the visual indicators of a successful 5S event. The available floor space was measured.

Inventory (parts ready to be assembled) in the assembly area, This measure was monitored along with units produced on 6 particular day. A ratio between the inventory and the number of units produced in the particular day was calculated.

As shown in (Figure 2) management commitment of safety is more effective at group (A) than group (C). This could be attributed to the strict management

standards which were set up as a part of 5S standardize phase to emphasize improving work area and eliminating hazards which lead to reduce production time.

In addition, the result presented that although the group (A) act decisively and quickly to correct safety problems, the corrective actions are always taken when management is told about unsafe practices. Furthermore, the result revealed a contradictory situation at group (C) where, in spite of interesting in safety, management acts only after accidents have occurred. This concludes that management commitment to safety climate at Egyptian garment enterprises require a supporter system such as monitoring or alarming systems to detect the safety hazards and assigned a proper solution as fast as it can.

The result in a Figure 3 reflects the influence of 5S implementation on the communication topic of safety climate, where the group (A) (more 5S applicable) achieving a higher implementation than the group (C) (less 5S applicable). The explanation related to 5S philosophy which powers employees’ involvement and enhances their responsibility toward work improvements

Moreover, the results demonstrated that the highest communication policy at the group (A) traced to a continuous attention about safety information, while at the group (C) linked to approach an open door policy on safety issues. In the same vein the result clarified that the lowest policy at the two groups returned to the praise for working safety, which refer that sensitivity of safety issue may be decreased if the administration didn’t innovate a new procedures to empower and encourage labors.

Figure 4 presents a magnitude effect of 5S event on the priority of safety, where the group (A) are more considering to priority of safety than group (C). In addition, the results stated that although the group (A) following safety rules carefully & regarding safety as important to production, some safety rules and procedures

need to be developed in order to support occupational safety with respect to productivity. On the other hand, the result illustrated that while, the management of group (C) clearly considers the safety of employees of great importance, sometimes its depart from safety requirements for production’s sake indicating to necessary for carrying out more training and engagements.

The Scores in Figure 5 identify that group (A) conducts more concentrations on three topics to improve the environment of safety. 1) Cooperation on how to work safely, 2) encouraging to report unsafe conditions and 3) safety responsibility. While on Group (C) the main item associated to interact employees for safety work. On the other way, the result presented that the lowest item at the two groups related to using a no-blame approach to persuade people acting unsafely that their behavior is inappropriate which spotted to the possibility of decreasing on the supportive environment of safety with time. Generally, the chart in Figure 4 demonstrates that the supportive environment of safety climate on a group (A) is more investigated than group (C).

Relying on the findings at Figure 6, group (A) accomplishes a higher execution of involvement than group (C) which refers to a significant effect of 5S methodology on administration visions. At the same time, the results refer to a contradictory situation at the two groups as however involving employees with safety issues attained the highest rating, the joining in the ongoing review achieved the lowest, indicating to the necessity of building a strategy that increases the effectiveness of staff’s involvement in safety climate to ensure sustainability.

The impact of 5S methodology on personal priorities and needs for safety is presented in Figure 7 where the results stated that the personal priorities of safety are more increasing at the group (A) than group (C). Besides that, the results pointed that understanding the safety rules for the job are the most varied between the two groups.

Moreover, the results clarified that in spite of decreasing on personal priorities

and needs for safety at the group (C), employees are more considering to emphasis on safety than other group reflecting the potential of improvement can be in sample manner.

Figure 8 demonstrates the line chart for personal appreciation of risk. The results declared the magnitude of 5S event in appreciation of risk where the group (A) achieved a higher scores (meaning a lower risk and more safety implementation) than group (B).

Furthermore, the scores showed that workers at the two groups were rarely worried about being injured on the job, but at the same time they sure it’s only a matter of time before involved in an accident, which identifies that sustaining 5S practices need to be developed in a following manner:

1) Training should occur on a regular basis from top management to the labor force.

2) Equipment & tools should be placed on their allocated point and the pieces of the garment should be maintained in the defined area.

3) All procedures should be updated and adhered to on a daily basis.

4) An evaluation should be performed and kept as required for assessment at the end of each month.

The effectiveness of 5S principles on the work environment of safety climate was demonstrated in Figure 9, where the group (A) realized a higher implementation than group (C). In addition the results present that the highest investigation of the two groups returned to availability of enough people to get the job done safely while the lowest investigation connected to time reduction to get the job done safely which refer that standardize of time at Egyptian garment enterprises require more development and practicing in order to achieve target production in a safe manner.

The cycle time was defined as the time it takes the assembly worker to assemble a unit (T-shirt) with all the parts. All the parts were already available on the workstation. The average of total time for group (C) to assemble T-shirt parts was 46 minutes approximately (2.3) minutes per unit, as measured with 12 samples while The total time for group (A) to assemble was 42 minutes ~ (2.1) minutes/unit which is a 8.69% decrease. This showed that the 5S event effectively reduced the cycle time of assembling a unit

The floor space utilized by the assembly for material storage, handling and aisles were measured. In group (C) the average of the total area utilized by the assembly was 41.5 m² while the floor space utilized by the group (A) assembly was 52.7 m², which is a 26.9 % increase. The explanation related to 5S attribution to remove unnecessary equipment and parts which took up space in the workplace (the first stage: sort) and standardize of a pull concept as opposed to the traditional push concept which resulted in moving the units to the next step immediately after completion. So, the units were never placed on the floor, which freed up space (The fourth stage: standardization).

A ratio (inventory held up to the number of units finished) was calculated. Lower ratio equaled to better inventory management. A mean ratio of group (C) was 6.38 per unit ($146,866 in inventory held up to 23 units finished), while the mean ratio of group (A) was 3.74 per unit ($119,833 in inventory held up to 32 units finished). The ratio decreased by 41.3%. This showed that the 5S event effectively reduced the inventory held up in the assembly area.