Value Stream Mapping for Marina and Boatyard Refit Operations: From Haul-Out to Relaunch Without the Trades Queue

Why map the refit value stream?

In a marina or boatyard, a vessel’s refit is a connected flow of work, not simply a series of trade bookings. Haul-out, inspection, hull work, mechanical repairs, electrical work, parts supply and launch readiness all compete for people, equipment and space. A delay at one step can leave a vessel occupying a hardstand slot while the next trade, required part or owner approval is unavailable.

Value Stream Mapping (VSM) makes that end-to-end flow visible. It records both the work that transforms the vessel and the waiting between work steps. The aim is to understand the current system, identify where owner value is delayed, and design a practical future state with better flow.

The example below is a hypothetical 16-slot yard. Its numbers are illustrative planning assumptions, not marine-industry benchmarks. For general background on managing refits and haul-outs, see MarinaPlan’s yacht refit guide and its haul-out and dry-storage guide.

Define the scope: whose value, and where does the stream begin?

The vessel owner is the customer. Typical critical-to-quality requirements include a reliable relaunch date, an approved scope and price, seaworthy systems, sound workmanship, and clear communication about changes.

Set boundaries before collecting data:

• Start: the owner approves the quoted refit scope and the yard accepts the job into its schedule.
• Finish: the work is checked, the vessel is launch-ready, relaunch is completed, and the owner accepts handover.
• Unit of flow: one vessel refit.
• Included steps: readiness planning, haul-out and survey, hull and structural work, fairing and antifoul, mechanical and electrical trades, fit-out, quality checks and launch.

Include waiting for parts, trade availability and owner decisions within the boundary. A VSM that counts only hands-on work would miss much of the owner’s actual lead time.

Current state: follow the vessel, not the department chart

The following snapshot represents an average refit during a busy season. Cycle time is hands-on processing time; queue time is the average wait before the step begins. Times are working days.

So, the average refit takes 48.5 working days from approved scope to relaunch: 19 days of processing and 29.5 days waiting. That makes process cycle efficiency, processing time divided by total lead time, about 39%. It is a diagnostic measure, not a target to pursue at the expense of safe inspections or proper cure times.

Other current-state indicators add operational context:

• Hardstand: an average of 14.6 of 16 slots occupied, or about 91% utilisation.
• Trades queue: 8 vessels are on hardstand waiting for a trade; five of those are also waiting for parts or an owner decision.
• Parts: the longest typical supplier lead time is 12 working days. Late identification or ordering means some parts-related waits extend the vessel’s schedule.
• First-time-right: 78% of refits pass the handover check without rework or a repeat visit within 14 days.
• Throughput: about 2 refits per week. At a 9.7-week average lead time, Little’s Law suggests roughly 19 vessels in the overall refit system on average (2 × 9.7), including vessels at different stages.

These figures point toward a system issue: hardstand occupancy is high, while vessels still spend significant time waiting. A yard can be busy without achieving smooth flow.

Find the eight wastes with DOWNTIME

Use DOWNTIME to organise observations from a walk of the yard. Confirm each with evidence (such as queue age, repeat-work records, movement distance or approval timestamps) rather than treating it as an assumption.

The key distinction is between necessary technical work and avoidable delay or effort around it. For example, a controlled antifoul cure time is part of the process; losing a further day because the next trade was not scheduled is a flow problem.

Build a future state around readiness and pull

A future-state map should preserve safety, technical standards and owner choice while making work release more deliberate. Instead of hauling a vessel simply because a slot is open, confirm that the planned work can progress through its constraints.

Practical countermeasures

1. Create a pre-yard readiness gate. Before confirming a haul-out date, check scope, vessel dimensions and lift compatibility, survey needs, likely trade hours, parts status, owner approvals and a feasible launch window.
2. Sequence dependencies, not departments. Complete hull and structural repairs before fairing and antifoul. Coordinate mechanical and electrical access to avoid trades blocking one another. Schedule rigging and fit-out against actual readiness, not a fixed calendar assumption.
3. Kit parts to the job. Place ordered items into a vessel-specific kit with a visible shortage list. Escalate long-lead items during scope planning; make the 12-day supplier lead time visible in the schedule.
4. Use standard work at handoffs. A short checklist should define what “ready for next trade” means: completed work, inspection status, access cleared, drawings available, parts present and any owner decisions recorded.
5. Level hardstand loading. Plan against the 16-slot constraint, aiming initially for about 13 occupied positions (81%) rather than filling every space. The remaining capacity provides room for movement, urgent work and schedule variation; the yard should validate this buffer against its own demand and economics.
6. Pull work into the yard. Release the next vessel or task when the downstream trade, parts and work area are ready. Maintain a visible queue with reason codes so work is not launched into the system simply to keep every resource apparently busy.

This approach also requires clear governance: document change approvals and schedule impacts, but make routine decisions at the lowest appropriate level so that formal checkpoints do not become avoidable queues.

Current versus future state: set targets the yard can test

The future-state figures below are proposed targets, not guaranteed results. They assume improved readiness, less handoff waiting and better coordination. A pilot should verify actual performance before the yard scales changes.

The lead-time target follows directly from the table: 16.5 days of work + 11 days of queues = 27.5 working days, or about 5.5 working weeks. At 2.5 completions per week, Little’s Law gives approximately 14 vessels in the system (2.5 × 5.5). Measure the actual result over a representative period and check that rework, safety and customer requirements remain controlled.

A 90-day kaizen sequence

Days 1–30: establish the baseline

• Select a representative refit family and map it with yard planners, trades, stores and owner-facing staff.
• Record timestamps for approval, haul-out, trade start and finish, parts receipt, owner decisions and relaunch.
• Confirm hardstand capacity, queue definitions and first-time-right criteria.
• Identify the top three causes of waiting and validate them with recent job records.

Days 31–60: run a focused pilot

• Trial the pre-yard readiness gate and vessel-specific parts kits on a small group of jobs.
• Introduce daily visual review of vessel status, blockers, next trade and forecast relaunch.
• Test standard handoff checklists and dependency-based sequencing.
• Compare pilot results with the baseline; adjust any checklist or schedule rule that adds administration without improving flow.

Days 61–90: standardise and sustain

• Extend the successful practices to another refit type or hardstand zone.
• Review queue age, hardstand occupancy, lead time, first-time-right performance and schedule adherence weekly.
• Assign owners for the process, data and escalation rules.
• Update standard work and launch a new improvement cycle for the next largest constraint.

VSM is most effective when it becomes a repeatable management practice: observe the work, test changes, measure results and sustain what works. For a useful companion on WIP, throughput and lead time, see our guide to Little’s Law.

Develop the skills to lead measurable improvement

A well-run mapping workshop is a strong starting point; sustaining cross-functional change takes structured problem-solving, measurement and project leadership. A Green Belt can build capability to lead focused improvement projects, while a Black Belt develops the advanced skills to lead complex initiatives and mentor teams.

Explore Lean 6 Sigma Hub’s CSSC-accredited online certification courses, including Green Belt and Black Belt, and build the skills to lead practical, data-driven improvement in marine operations.

Kaizen. Kai-Care. Kai-Done. Lean Six Sigma.