Transcript Product Development Process

Knowledge Based Product & Process
Development:
An Executive Overview
Presented toCTMA Symposium
April 18, 2005
Michael Gnam
Lean Product Development Initiative (LPDI)
Industry Need
 New Product Development lead times have been
significantly reduced in recent years through CE and
IPPD methodologies and the use of product design
software.
 Lately, though, the pace of improvement has slowed.
 Best-in-class (auto) Domestic Lead Time-38 Months
 Toyota Lead Time-18 Months and Decreasing
 Needed: Great Leap Forward
7/17/2015
Page 2
Background
Project Participants:
 GM/Delphi - Champion
 Cincinnati Milacron
 Sandia National Laboratories
 Ortech
 Raytheon (TI DSEG)
 UT/Automotive (now Lear)
 Dr. Allen Ward (U of M)
7/17/2015
Page 3
Background
 After initial research by the team, it became
obvious that emulating other best practice
pdp processes was not the answer.
 Reason: Many of our team members had
already done that-benchmarked it to death
 Further research indicated that we needed to
go to the paradigm level to find the answer
 Result: Study paradigms, not processes
7/17/2015
Page 4
Why Study Toyota?
 FASTER: half the time of US competitors
–
Ipsum minivan: 15 months, styling approval to full
production.
–
Standard is now 18 months; may be aiming at one year.
One hour response to suggestion by tool builder.
–
 BETTER: Consistently highest quality ratings.
–
A car in top 3 of every category (four of them #1) in 2003
Consumer Reports reliability ratings.
–
Lexus again #1 in JD Powers quality survey.
–
“Toyota’s not just good. It’s always the best.”
—1995 Harbour
7/17/2015
Page 5
Why Study Toyota? (cont.)
 CHEAPER: at least 4X the engineering productivity of US
competitors
–
–
~ 150 product engineers per car program at peak
 not dedicated; ideal is two projects per engineer
 vs. 600 total at Chrysler for almost twice as long
Sales per employee 2 to 4 times those of Chrysler (with
similar vertical integration).
7/17/2015
Page 6
Why Study Toyota? (cont.)
 “Toyota makes lots of money and is overtaking
GM to lead the world’s car industry.”
 Target: 15% of global car market
 Market capitalization: worth 3x the American
big 3 combined
 Productivity grown 7x in last 25 years, Detroit
3.5x
» The Economist, January 29, 2005
7/17/2015
Page 7
Why Study Toyota? (cont.)
 Net profit (latest year, in $B)
–
– Toyota
–
–
–
–
–
Nissan
Honda
GM
Ford
D/Chrysler
Profit
Margin(%)
11.0
6.7
6.8
4.2
3.9
3.8
0.5
6.8
5.7
1.9
2.4
0.3
 Source: The Economist, January 29, 2005 7/17/2015
Page 8
The Toyota Paradox
• No requirement to co-locate teams or dedicate
engineers
• Does not establish early design specifications
• Delay, as long as possible, freezing the design
• No “design factory” process — no hand-offs
• Simple process, few “tools” — no reliance on QFD,
FMEA, PERT, DFM
• No Six Sigma corporate strategy
• No standard development process – or an initiative
to create one
• Lots of prototypes – lots of parallel designs
7/17/2015
Page 9
Conversely, typical U.S. Companies
 Product development excellence is based on
compliance to company standards
– Quality indices
– Functional performance indices
– Detailed processes
A STRUCTURAL PERSPECTIVE
7/17/2015
Page 10
The “Structural” Assumption
Compliance to rigorous design process /
quality standards will yield great products
on time
Wrong!
7/17/2015
Page 11
Issues: Current Product Development
System







Value-added productivity is 20 – 40%
Project management has become too administrative
Design reviews are focused on tasks, not results
Minimal learning between projects
Design engineers have little design experience
Planning and control systems are not maintainable
Design process loop-backs are systemic
7/17/2015
Page 12
The Nature of Product Development
 Product development is an iterative, uncertain
process: plans are results dependent
 Learned knowledge during any operation is the
only value added intellectual inventory
 Activities based strictly on compliance will
invariably create reams of non-value added
information
–wasted effort
–informational clutter
–costly maintenance
7/17/2015
Page 13
What if
 All the knowledge gained throughout the
design process, what works and what
doesn’t work, could be captured and
consistently applied for all future projects
 That is the power of the Toyota
development system
7/17/2015
Page 14
Lean Product Development
 Is not a re-application of the principles of
Lean Manufacturing!!
 It is complementary to Lean Mfg principles
and to DFSS principles
 Product Development requires innovation
and the open minded application of
profound knowledge.
7/17/2015
Page 15
Lean Product Development
 The Essence of Lean Development is the effective
management of knowledge
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Encouraging
Creating
Acquiring
Controlling
Sharing
Applying
Leveraging
 Toyota is only an example of excellence
7/17/2015
Page 16
The Toyota Development System
Creating and leveraging knowledge to create an
ongoing stream of great profitable products
7/17/2015
Page 17
The Toyota Paradigms
 Leadership
– Expertise based
 Solution Exploration
– Point based
– Set based
 Planning & Control
– Task based (stage gate)
– Responsibility based
 Personnel
 Foundation
7/17/2015
Page 18
CE integrates everything, is totally
responsible
Styling
Vehicle
Evaluation
Top management
Body
Manufacturing
Chief
Engineer
Power
Train
Chassis
•product plan
•concept
•design architecture
•targets and
specifications
•schedule
•budget
•drawing approval
R & D Customer
judged on corporate
objectives: profit, share,
learning
7/17/2015
Page 19
Leadership by expertise
 Technical expertise: Minimum 20 years experience as
engineer
–
–
Deep grasp of engineering fundamentals
(communication with any engineer)
Assignment(s) outside original area of expertise
(ability to adapt and learn quickly)
 System design skills and attitudes; strong personalities
–
–
–
Assignment(s) as assistant chief engineer
(integration experience)
“Push very hard — but know when to stop”
Pinball — reward is to do it again
 Communication skills and knowing the company
7/17/2015
Page 20
The Exploration
Paradigms: point-based
vs set-based
7/17/2015
Page 21
Point-based design: design as
iterative improvement of point
solutions
generate concepts
+
+
+
+
+
pick one
improve
synthesize
analyze
More costly
region
7/17/2015
Page 22
Set-based design
2. Integrate by
intersecting
minimum
constraints.
1. Explore cheaply by
mapping design sub-spaces.
3. Innovate and optimize without risk by
controlled narrowing of redundant solutions.
picture by Toyota GM of body engineering
4. Dominate markets and reduce costs
through market and conceptual
robustness.
7/17/2015
Page 23
Planning and control paradigms
Task based
Responsibility based
7/17/2015
Page 24
Task-based Plans Decompose
Centralized planning.
– written by staff
– standard
– high detail
Built around tasks: begin and end at information
hand-off points
A Push System
7/17/2015
Page 25
Responsibility-based Plans Integrate
the product.
– written by team leader
– simple
– subordinates fill in the
details
resources
 Process designed with
Finance
Mktg.
Styling
Body Eng.
Production Eng.
Concept Clays
P1
 Responsibility streams and integrating gates
–
–
–
–
time
clear, “whatever it takes” responsibility for subsystems
gates bring everyone together
everyone starts when they must to meet the gates, seeks
information as needed
known acceptable variation for each gate
A Pull System
7/17/2015
Page 26
Knowledge paradigms
– Model oriented
– Learning oriented
7/17/2015
Page 27
US: complex models as oracles
No change without measurable benefits.
Computer modeling is the key.
– finite element models by engineers who
don’t know beam equations.
– process improvements through analytical
prototypes “to be created.”
– expert systems will allow continued rapid
rotations of inexperienced engineers and
managers.
 Decisions based on accounting and marketing data, even
though we know it’s wrong.
7/17/2015
Page 28
Toyota: Tools or models as simple
servants
 Data informs, not substitutes for human judgment.
“ The chief engineer [not marketing
or accounting models] decided not
to paint the Corolla bumper.”
— A CE
“Good intuitive sense is crucial...
[and] is something we need to
foster. Marketing data leads to
designs that are too conservative.”
—Exec VP of R&D 7/17/2015
Page 29
Engineering “Checksheets”
 Toyota’s manufacturing engineers maintain design
standards.
–
–
–
–
–
Part by part, tool by tool.
Describe current manufacturing capability.
Contain solutions to past problems.
Working-level engineers update regularly.
Everyone can access them.
 Every project begins with the design standard.
7/17/2015
Page 30
Trade Off Curves: The Power of Visible Knowledge
Tradeoff curves are the visual
representation of basic product
and process physics and
economics
Noise level
They are the Toyota’s engineer’s
primary tool to
 Understand
 Communicate and negotiate
between specialties and functions
 Train new engineers
 Record knowledge
 Negotiate and communicate
between customer and supplier
 Conduct design reviews
 Communicate between developers
and managers
 Design quality into the product
Exhaust system family
Safe region
Infeasible
Back pressure
7/17/2015
Page 31
Personnel Management Paradigms
–
–
–
–
Boss based
Market based
Qualification based
System based
7/17/2015
Page 32
Results-oriented personnel management
 In the job long enough to acquire real expertise,
acquire a reputation for results
 Managers competent to judge engineering work
 Evaluated based on reputation by a council of senior
managers
 Deliberate effort to ignore appearances, where
schooled in what
 Non-value added is anything that doesn’t directly
please customers (such as reporting)
7/17/2015
Page 33
Developing engineer/managers at
Toyota
 min. 5 years in one specialty.
 min. 5 years in related specialty.
 assist. manager (5 years) in similar
specialty (player/coach for five
engineers)
 manager (5 years) in similar specialty
(player/coach 5 assistant managers)
breadth
depth
5 yrs
5-10 yrs
7/17/2015
Page 34
Foundation Paradigms
Advocacy
Hands-on
Entrepreneurship
“Other people
control my life”
persuasion is
the most
important skill
Goals,
programs,
“taking care of
people”
“I control my life”
Hands-on creation
is the most
important skill
“Yankee knowhow”
“Rugged
Individualism”
7/17/2015
Page 35
Can Culture Change?
Advocacy
Causal Attributes
Who leads industry
What solves
problems
How to pick solutions
What to trust
What to reward
What’s an engineer
Industrial
performance
Hands-On
Characteristics
Financiers, Marketeers
Government
“Engineers”
Technology
Argue
Procedures, education
Advocacy, plans, potential,
____ correctness,
contacts
White collar specialist nerd
Try them out
Judgment, experience
Results
Low
US
Hands-on systemdesigner hero
High
US
Japan Software
Before WWII
After WWII
7/17/2015
Page 36
PDP Project Findings
 Difference is in their set of Paradigms
 Counterintuitive to our thinking
– Delay, as long as possible, making
decisions
– More and more prototypes, both real and
virtual
– Pursue sets of solutions, not answers
 Analogous to JIT in late 70’s
 58 Paradigms catalogued & discussed
7/17/2015
Page 37
PDP Excerpts
 Top Toyota Engineer (equiv to CTO) spends 90
% of his time solving technical problems.
 Ford engineers suggested 3-4 layers down
before any technical problem solving done
 Toyota Chief Engineer feels he is a people
person--Mentoring
7/17/2015
Page 38
PDP Excerpts
 Beware of:
– GMAim, Aim, Aim!!
– Plans to produce plans
– High level people very busy but doing nothing
of value to customer
– Compliance for the sake of compliance
– Deviation from simplicity
– Ambiguous phraseology
7/17/2015
Page 39
PDP Excerpts
 Knowledge Based
– People selected &
 Structure Based
promoted based on
– People selected &
knowledge, wisdom,
promoted based on
and experience
perceived potential
– People selected &
(fasttracking)
promoted based on
– People selected &
results
promoted based on
– People selected &
presentation skills
promoted based on
– People selected &
teaching and
promoted based on
mentoring skills
promises and plans
7/17/2015
Page 40
PDP Excerpts-Knowledge
Hierarchy
Perceptions-Our first impressions
Data-Stored in a base
Facts-What is really happening
Information-Collection of focused data & facts
Knowledge-Proper application of useful
information
 Wisdom-Providing the best solutions





7/17/2015
Page 41
PDP Excerpts—Action Verbs
 Structure Based
– Organize
– Check
– Monitor
– Approve
– Support
– Plan
– Plan to Plan
– Ensure Compliance
– Oversee
 Knowledge Based
– Perform
– Do
– Design
– Create
– Solve
– Teach
– Mentor
7/17/2015
Page 42
The Gain Potential





2-4X
2-3X
2-4X
2-5X
2-5X
increase in development productivity
decrease in development cycle time
decrease in development cost
increase in innovation
decrease in development risk
7/17/2015
Page 43
Knowledge-based
Product
Development
The
Implementation
Perspective
7/17/2015
Page 44
The Change Process





Focus initially on one product family – or a subset
Assign clear knowledge / change ownership
Complete progression to set based within year
Expand to other product families as comfortable
Modify corporate infrastructure elements as you go
Leadership
Alignment
1
Expand to other product areas
Principles of Learning
Based Development
2
Capture Knowledge
3
Focus on one product family
Design by Knowledge
4
5
Set based
Development
7/17/2015
Page 45
How We Can Help – A Series of Kickoff
Workshops
Activity
Plan
Outcome
1. a. Executive Overview
b. Leadership Alignment
 One Day Workshop
 Follow up as required
 Leadership understands principles and commits to
becoming a knowledge based organization
Assessment and planning next stages
2. Learning based Development
Workshop
 Two day workshop
 Details of entire process
 Aligns customer processes
 The workgroup understands the whole, is aligned to
the leadership vision, and owns the change process
3. Knowledge Stream Mapping
 Two day workshop
 Build database model
 Follow up as required
 The development personnel understands the
alignment and importance of physics based knowledge
mapped to customer needs and design decisions
4. Knowledge based Design
 Kickoff workshop to establish process
concept
 Teams engaged to work the details
 Robust knowledge becomes an integral part of the
traditional point based design process
5. Set Based Design
 Kickoff workshop to establish process
concept
 Teams engaged to work the details
 Process is expanded to include set based design
7/17/2015
Page 46
Assessing the Risk of Change
 The potential is huge
– 4X productivity gain
– Extensive cross project learning
– Company wide knowledge and experience
– Increased innovation
– Time-to-market decrease
– Consistency in development performance
 The risk is minimal - any progress toward a
learning environment is positive
7/17/2015
Page 47
Knowledge Based Product Development
Paradigms:
 Questions ?
 Comments ?
 For additional information contact Mike Gnam at NCMS
– [email protected]
– 734-995-4971
– http://[email protected]
7/17/2015
Page 48