Introduction to MTM and MOST: Optimizing Processes with Advanced Methodologies

Introduction

In our continuous exploration of work measurement, we have seen the importance of direct time studies and common errors to avoid. However, industrial engineering constantly seeks more consistent, objective, and proactive approaches to analyze and improve efficiency. In this pursuit, Predetermined Motion Time Systems (PMTS) emerge as a powerful category of advanced work measurement methods.

Within the universe of PMTS, two names resonate with special force due to their global adoption and demonstrated impact: MTM (Methods-Time Measurement) and MOST (Maynard Operation Sequence Technique). These systems offer a radically different approach to direct timing, allowing not only to measure but also to design and optimize manual work with an impressive level of detail and objectivity. This article will serve as an introduction to the fundamental concepts of MTM and MOST, explaining how they work and how they can be key tools for process optimization with MTM and MOST in modern industry.

What are Predetermined Motion Time Systems (PMTS)? The Conceptual Basis

As we briefly mentioned in a previous article, the central idea of PMTS is revolutionary: instead of measuring how long it takes a specific operator to perform a task today, any manual operation is broken down into a series of fundamental human movements (such as reaching, grasping, moving, positioning, releasing). Through extensive research, each of these basic movements has been assigned a predetermined standard time value, usually expressed in TMUs (Time Measurement Units; 1 TMU = 0.00001 hours = 0.0006 minutes = 0.036 seconds).

This predetermined time is independent of the observed operator’s pace (eliminating the subjectivity of performance rating) and represents the time a qualified worker would need to perform that movement at a normal pace.

The key advantages of using PMTS in general include:

• Consistency and Objectivity: They eliminate performance rating, leading to more consistent standards between analysts and studies.
• Pre-Production Standards: They allow calculating standard times for tasks or products that do not yet physically exist, based on method design. Efficiency can be designed from the beginning!
• Detailed Method Analysis: They force a thorough analysis of each movement, facilitating the identification of inefficiencies and objective comparison between alternative methods.
• Universal Applicability: The basic times of human movements are (with nuances) universal.

MTM (Methods-Time Measurement): The Detailed Movement Analysis

Origin and Concept: Developed in the United States after World War II by Maynard, Stegemerten, and Schwab, MTM is one of the pioneering and most influential PMTS systems. Its philosophy is to analyze any manual operation by breaking it down into the basic movements necessary to execute it. The fundamental movements cataloged by MTM include: Reach, Move, Turn, Apply Pressure, Grasp, Position, Release, Disengage, and others such as eye or body movements.

Basic Operation: The MTM analyst observes (or visualizes from a design) the task and describes it as a detailed sequence of these basic movements. For each movement, they identify the variables that influence its duration (e.g., for ‘Reach’: the distance, conditions at start and end; for ‘Grasp’: the type of object; for ‘Position’: symmetry, ease of handling). With this information, they consult the MTM data tables (or use software) to find the TMU value corresponding to that specific movement under those conditions. The sum of the TMUs of all movements in the sequence gives the total time for the task (at normal pace, without allowances).

MTM Levels: Aware that the level of detail of MTM-1 may be excessive for certain applications, the MTM organization has developed aggregated systems:

• MTM-1: The original system, very detailed. Ideal for short cycles, high repetitiveness, and fine method optimization.
• MTM-2: Combines and simplifies movements from MTM-1. Faster to apply, good precision for medium-duration cycles.
• MTM-UAS (Universal Analyzing System): Even more aggregated than MTM-2, designed to be quick and easy to learn, useful for small batches and longer cycles.
• Others: There are additional variants such as MTM-MEK (for low volume/unit production), MTM-SD (standard data), etc.

Strengths of MTM: It offers an unparalleled level of detail for method analysis and improvement, identifies inefficient or ergonomically unfavorable movements, its data are internationally recognized and serve as the basis for other MTM systems.

Considerations: It requires specific certified training for each level to be applied. The application of MTM-1 can be time-intensive in analysis.

MOST (Maynard Operation Sequence Technique): The Sequence-Based Approach

Origin and Concept: Developed in the 1960s-70s by Kjell Zandin (working at H.B. Maynard and Company), MOST was explicitly designed to be a significantly faster alternative to MTM-1, maintaining acceptable precision for most industrial applications. Instead of focusing on individual micro-movements, MOST analyzes work in terms of standardized movement sequences.

Basic Operation: MOST uses three basic sequence models for general manual activities:

1. General Move Model: Represents the free spatial movement of an object with the hand. Its sequence is A B G A B P A.
   • A: Action Distance (distance traveled by hands/body).
   • B: Body Motion (body movements such as sitting, standing up).
   • G: Gain Control (gaining control of the object, e.g., grasping).
   • P: Placement (placing the object with precision).
2. Controlled Move Model: Describes the movement of an object that remains in contact with a surface or is constrained (e.g., operating a lever, pressing a button). Its sequence is A B G M X I A.
   • M: Move Controlled (guided movement).
   • X: Process Time (machine or controlled process time).
   • I: Align (final alignment).
3. Tool Use Model: Covers the use of common hand tools (wrenches, screwdrivers, measuring instruments, etc.). It adapts the previous sequences by adding tool-specific actions (e.g., F-Fasten, L-Loosen, C-Cut, S-Surface Treat, M-Measure, R-Record).

The analyst identifies which sequence model applies to each part of the task, determines the parameter values for each letter (using index numbers based on distance ranges, complexity, etc.), looks up these indices in the MOST data cards (or software) to obtain the TMUs, and adds them up.

MOST Versions:

• BasicMOST: The most common, for typical assembly, machining operations, etc. (cycles of seconds to a few minutes).
• MiniMOST: Designed for very short cycles (< 10-15 seconds), highly repetitive and requiring high precision (e.g., fine electronic assembly). Offers more detail than BasicMOST.
• MaxiMOST: For long-cycle operations (> 2-5 minutes), non-repetitive or with high variability (e.g., maintenance, heavy assembly, complex logistics). Less detailed but quick for this type of work.

Strengths of MOST: Significantly faster to apply than MTM-1 (reported to be 5 to 10 times faster for BasicMOST vs. MTM-1), relatively easy to learn, good precision for its speed, logical structure based on recognizable activity sequences.

Considerations: Requires specific certified training for each version. May offer less detail for fine micro-movement analysis than MTM-1.

MTM vs. MOST: When to Use Each One?

The choice between MTM and MOST (or their variants) depends on the objective and context:

• Detail vs. Speed: If you need maximum detail to optimize each micro-movement or design an ergonomically perfect workstation, MTM-1 is king. If you need to establish many standards quickly and efficiently for planning or costing, BasicMOST is an excellent option. MTM-2/UAS offer an intermediate compromise.
• Type of Task: For very fine electronic assemblies, MiniMOST or MTM-1/UAS may be suitable. For general assembly, BasicMOST or MTM-2/UAS. For maintenance or logistics, MaxiMOST.
• Process Phase: For conceptual design and comparison of method alternatives “on paper,” both are excellent. For establishing quick standards in existing production, MOST is usually more efficient.
• Culture and Training: The availability of certified trainers and the investment in training that the company is willing to make can be decisive factors.

Important: They are not mutually exclusive. Many organizations use different PMTS systems (including variants of MTM and MOST) in different areas or for different purposes, leveraging the strengths of each.

Optimizing Processes with MTM and MOST: Concrete Applications

Beyond establishing standard times, the true power of these advanced work measurement methods lies in their ability to drive process optimization with MTM and MOST:

• Proactive Workstation and Method Design: They allow evaluating the efficiency and ergonomics of different layouts or work sequences before physically implementing anything, saving redesign costs.
• Objective Comparison of Alternatives: They provide a numerical basis for deciding between different proposed tools, templates, or assembly methods. Which is really faster and why?
• Precise Identification of Waste (Muda): The detailed analysis of movements (MTM) or sequences (MOST) clearly reveals unnecessary actions, excessive distances, complex grasps, or difficult positionings that add time without value.
• Data-Based Ergonomic Improvement: They help identify and quantify movements that involve forced postures, excessive force application, or high repetitiveness, guiding redesign to reduce fatigue and injury risk.
• Foundation for Robust Standard Data: The elemental or sequence times generated by PMTS are ideal for building internal standard data bases, as they are consistent and do not depend on the observed pace.
• Early Cost Estimation: They facilitate the prediction of direct labor costs in product design phases, allowing informed decisions about manufacturing feasibility.

Final Considerations: The Indispensable Training and Technological Support

It is crucial to reiterate a point: the correct and ethical application of MTM and MOST requires specific training and certification granted by authorized bodies (such as national or international MTM associations, or licensed entities for MOST). Attempting to apply them based only on readings is a guarantee of errors and invalid results.

Fortunately, technology supports the application of these systems. There are specialized software packages for MTM and MOST that include time databases, guide the analyst in coding, perform calculations automatically, manage studies, and facilitate documentation, considerably streamlining the process and reducing manual calculation errors.

Conclusion

MTM and MOST represent the forefront in advanced work measurement methods. Going beyond direct timing, they offer systematic and objective approaches based on the analysis of fundamental movements (MTM) or movement sequences (MOST). Their key benefits –consistency, objectivity, pre-production analysis capability, and a deep potential for method optimization and ergonomics– make them invaluable tools.

While they require an investment in specialized training, their ability to drive process optimization with MTM and MOST positions them as strategic assets for companies seeking operational excellence. They are powerful tools that, correctly applied in the appropriate situations, complement and enrich the modern industrial engineer’s toolbox.

Additional Resources

To implement an effective work measurement system that combines the advantages of different methods, CRONOMETRAS offers an advanced technological solution that facilitates both direct timing and the management of standard data derived from PMTS systems. Our application allows for precise measurements, performance rating, application of allowances, and generation of detailed reports that directly connect with your company’s productivity indicators.

Request a free demo to discover how CRONOMETRAS can help you implement a comprehensive work measurement system that combines the best of each methodology.