Learning-First Product Development · Manufacturing Lean Techniques applied to product development: - Value Stream Mapping - 5S - 3P Quality & Engineering Improvements: - Six Sigma

Copyright © 2012 Targeted Convergence Corporation

All Rights Reserved.

Copyright © 2012 Targeted Convergence Corporation and Set Based Solutions

Confidential Information of TCC & SBS. All rights reserved.

Lean Product Development

Seeing Product Development in a Different Way

X





Let’s Begin with an Observation

and a Question

An Observation:

• It is uncommon for the companies we work with to

truly know what their customers want,

• Furthermore, when you dig deeper, they commonly

do not know whether they can do what they think

the customer wants,

• And yet, they are working as fast as possible to do it

anyway.

Why?





Let’s start with some product development history

• 1887: Samuel Langley experimented with unmanned flight

• 1896: Two successful unmanned flights, 1/2 and 1 mile

• 1898: Secured $50,000 from U.S. War Department

• 1898: Began full scale development

• 1902: Ran out of money. Got $20,000 more





Yes…it ended up in the river

1903: Maiden Manned Flight

(without Langley as pilot)





In the meantime, the Wright Brothers were

observing…

• Most other investigators were spending thousands of hours

designing their aircraft and 5 seconds testing it….

(before it crashed and usually killed them).

• They did not believe this was a sensible approach,

so they focused their efforts on methods of experimentation:

“We thought that if some method could be found by which it would be possible to practice

by the hour instead of by the second there would be hope of advancing the solution of a

very difficult problem…and without any serious danger.”

Wilbur Wright

and began experimenting.





They focused their experiments • They divided the problem of flight into three critical knowledge areas:

– Lift

– Control

– Propulsion

• They focused on each independently – and nothing else until all were

resolved.

“Success is Assured”





Between May 1900 and December 1903 (very intermittent, part-time effort)

• Discovered

– lift and drag calculations others were using were incorrect

– optimum wing shapes and control surfaces

– there was no production engine with adequate power and low enough weight

• Invented

– A wind tunnel / mechanisms for measuring lift and drag

– wing warping technology for controlling plane in flight

– a highly efficient propeller (even by today’s standards)

– a lightweight aluminum engine

– the science of aeronautics





Comparison of Approaches

Langley Wright Brothers

Time Invested ~17 years ~22 months

over four years.

Money Invested ~$70,000 ~$1,000

Approach

Design

Build

Test

Repeat

Test & Experiment

Repeat until feasible.

Design

Build

Result FAILURE

Airplane never flew!

SUCCESS

1st Design Successful!





Very low (20%) Very high

(80%)

Ad hoc Systemic

Engineering Productivity

Routinely Never

Always Never

Almost always

(90%)

Very seldom

(10%)

Knowledge Shared Across Projects

Very high

variability

Highly consistent

across all projects Project Success Variability

Severe Manufacturing Start-up Problems

Published Schedules Maintainable

Unplanned Design Loopbacks

Here’s some simple metrics

- From NCMS project (Circa 1997)





Concept Phase Planning Phase Design Phase Test Phase Launch Phase

Process divided into Phases Management Review Gates

between phases.

Detailed, task-based

plans guide work.

Continuous Improvement

of Typical Phase Gate

Processes:

- more gates

- more checklists

- more forms

Manufacturing Lean

Techniques applied to

product development:

- Value Stream Mapping

- 5S

- 3P

Quality & Engineering

Improvements:

- Six Sigma

- QFD

- Design Automation

A Decade of Process Improvements





2007 Assessment of 24 product

development organizations.

Very low

(20%)

Very high

(80%)

Ad hoc Systemic


Routinely Never

Always Never

Almost always

(90%)

Very seldom

(10%)


Very high

variability

Highly

consistent Project Success Variability




Why Bother?

% wise, look like big

gains, BUT

Unfortunately, they

are looking at a much

smaller scale,

ignoring what’s

possible…

A Decade Later…Best Case Scenario





Very low

(20%)

Very high

(80%)

Ad hoc Systemic


Routinely Never

Always Never

Almost

always

(90%)

Very seldom

(10%)


Very high

variability

Highly

consistent Project Success Variability




Why Bother?

% wise, look like big

gains, BUT

Unfortunately, they

are looking at a much

smaller scale,

ignoring what’s

possible…

A Decade Later…Best Case Scenario

in 1997 That 1997 NCMS Study found one

exceptional company…





What is the state of Product Development today?

Here is what I see over and over:

• Schedules and detailed requirements are set early

• The system concept is set quickly

• This begins wide sets of planned tasks to meet requirements (Phase-Gate Planning)

• Eventually the critical knowledge gaps emerge

• The loopbacks start and continue for the life of the program

Consistent Results: project delays, cost overruns, 70% of engineers firefighting, problems repeat on next projects





An Ideal Product Life Cycle

.

Concept

Phase

Planning

Phase

Design

Phase

Test

Phase

Launch

Phase

Define

product

concept

Evaluate /

pick 1 or 2

Partition /

create design

specs

Plan tasks

Design

components,

subsystems.

Build initial

tooling

Build,

integrate &

test Initial

market

release

Check

Manufactur-

ability

Production

Phase

Order

Fulfillment

Need I

dentified

Obsole

te

Make a

profit.

Ideally, a smooth continuous flow.

create make & market





Unfortunately, a more typical Product Life Cycle

.

Concept

Phase

Planning

Phase

Design

Phase

Test

Phase

Launch

Phase

Define

product

concept

Evaluate /

pick 1 or 2

Partition /

create design

specs

Plan tasks

Design

components,

subsystems.

Build initial

tooling

Build,

integrate &

test Initial

market

release

Check

Manufactur-

ability

Production

Phase

Order

Fulfillment

Need Identified

Ob

so

lete

Make a

profit.

Problems are

discovered that

force design

loopbacks!

Knowledge of what is needed to

be successful is being learned

late in the process!





Concept

Phase

Planning

Phase

Design

Phase

Test

Phase

Manufact

-uring

Pro

fit

Imp

ac

t o

f L

oo

pb

ac

ks

(Typ

ica

lly M

illio

ns

of

Do

lla

rs)

Customer

Usage

• Lost customers • Lost revenue • High support cost

• Larger schedule and revenue delay • Larger PD cost overrun • Tool rework

• Schedule and revenue delay • PD cost overrun

Minimal

Loopbacks Cost Most Companies Millions Each Year

Some problems are too

expensive to fix.

There are also negative

consequences for the customer.

• Huge schedule and revenue delay

• Huge PD cost overrun

• Large Mfg cost overrun:

• Inventory rework and scrap

• Tool rework and scrap





The Land of Little Scrutiny

Start design early to finish on time.

Choose fast and be specific.

Product and process decisions are made:

Before customer needs are understood

Before feasibility is proven

Without knowing why past products succeeded or failed

The Fuzzy Front-End, aka:





Concept

Phase

Planning

Phase

Design

Phase

Validation

Phase

Manufac-

turing

Customer

Usage

Knowledge doesn’t flow

between projects.

Concept

Phase

Planning

Phase

Design

Phase

Validation

Phase

Manufac-

turing

Customer

Usage

Fuzzy Front-End

Fuzzy Front-End

It Get’s Worse





What challenge is product development trying to

solve?

• Product development is about innovating a solution that:

– Achieves your business goals

– Satisfies your customers’ interests

– Fits within your technical capabilities

Business Goals

Technical

Capability

Customer Interests

The goal is to find that sweet-spot.





Learning: How, What, When

Product

Development

Process

“how to”

Knowledge

Cu

sto

mers

Capability

Knowledge

Customer Interest

Knowledge

(learning)

How:

1. Problem Solving.

2. Focused study,

testing and

experimentation.

What:

1. Customer Interests

2. Decision impact on

Customer Interests.

3. Decision Interaction

When:

Before design

decisions are

committed.





What do we mean by ‘knowledge’ • Mean:

– Facts verifiable by objective direct observation or testing.

– Knowledge that explains ‘how’ and ‘why’ things work

• Not:

– Opinions, wishful thinking, guesses, assumptions or non-validated

hypotheses.

• Knowledge must be:

– Validated

– Visible





Product

Specs

Specific as possible Early as possible.

Rough targets to start. Details evolve with the project.

Design

Decisions Made as early as possible. Delayed as long as possible.

Testing Mostly after design, to fix. Mostly before design, to learn

Project

Management

Administrative – to manage process compliance

Technical – to manage knowledge growth into products

Innovation

Focus New product concepts

New product breakthroughs, but mostly subsystem platforms

Traditional Toyota

Toyota is in a different paradigm





The Toyota Philosophy

Product development is not about developing cars,

it is about developing knowledge about cars.

Great cars will emerge from the interaction.





Focused Knowledge

Development across

projects

Design Phase Validationt Phase Launch Phase

Design Phase Validation Phase Launch Phase

And the pull of

the knowledge

into a cadence

of products

RAPID CYCLES OF LEARNING & CONVERGNCE

RAPID CYCLES OF LEARNING & CONVERGNCE

Using LFPD, Product Development progresses

like this





Baseline knowledge

-Limit / tradeoff curves

(Checksheets)

Design Phase Validationt Phase Launch Phase Set Based Learning

New Knowledge baselines

This ensures knowledge reuse and continuous innovation

Learning / Problem

Solving

This ensures both quality and schedule

Knowledge integration

into product decisions Creation of new

knowledge through

Set-based design

Project Launch (“Success is

Assured”)

Key Integrating Events pull the knowledge





Validatio

n Phase

Manufac

-turing

Customer

Usage Design

Phase

IE

Business objectives, Target Customer, & Project Targets defined

Engineering understands Customer Interests

Define capabilities & knowledge gaps for alternatives.

Define alternatives: safe and desired.

Decide which gaps (problems) will be staffed and funded

Approve project (schedule / staffing)

Staggered transition to detailed design

Eliminate weaker alternatives & converge

IE

IE

IE

IE

IE

Close Knowledge gaps

Project Launch (“Success is

Assured”)

Capture the knowledge

The knowledge and schedule are aligned

throughout the project life cycle





Detailed

Design Production

Maintain /

Support IE IE

IE

IE

This is the project baseline schedule

What are your integrating set-based decisions?

IE

IE

This is the business objective & market

What are the key customer interests and targets?

What are your capabilities & knowledge gaps?

What are your alternatives and costs to pursue?

Do you have a solution for the gaps ?

These are your subsystem specs

IE

Their schedule says they are here

Their knowledge says they are here

For comparison, this is what we see at most companies

- Schedules out of sync with the knowledge

- Success is not assured





Learning Process

Knowledge grown via

LAMDA

Knowledge facilitating LAMDA Discussion

Design limits visible

Knowledge reuse pulled by

CHECKSHEETS

Knowledge

Documented

in A3’s

Knowledge Brief

C/A VISIBLE tradeoff decisions

P/D

LFPD tools are simple – but they pull PDCA





LAMDA

Learning

Process

Go to Gemba

See for yourself

True root cause

Visual to avoid

misunderstanding

Learn by reaching consensus with

knowledge not opinion

Take action

Verify results

Repeat

Solving Problems LFPD-Style:

Using LAMDA-based PDCA





The A3 Report

• Most obvious:

– One page

– Standardized communication

– On A3 size paper (11 x 17)

• Most important:

– Pulls a LAMDA-based PDCA story

– Drives LAMDA discussions and consensus





Problem K-Brief Example (equivalent to Toyota “A3”)





Learning Process

Knowledge grown via

LAMDA

Knowledge facilitating LAMDA Discussion

Design limits visible

Knowledge reuse pulled by

CHECKSHEETS

Knowledge

Documented

in A3’s

Knowledge Brief

C/A VISIBLE tradeoff decisions

P/D

That was the learning part

now capture and reuse the Knowledge





No

ise level

Muffler: goal is to minimize both noise and back pressure

Safe region

Infeasible

Back pressure

Multiple prototypes are

built and tested to

failure.

Test before design is

used to establish

feasible regions of

important design

interactions.

Generalizing and Visualizing the Knowledge





Tradeoff and limit curves are VISUAL representations of product and process physics and economics

They are Toyota’s engineer’s primary tool to:

Understand

Communicate between specialties and functions

Train new engineers

Record knowledge

Communicate between customer and supplier

Conduct design reviews

Communicate between developers and managers

Design quality into the product

Infeasible

Safe region

“The most important thing I learned at Toyota was their dependence on and the power of limit and tradeoff curves” Dr. Allen Ward

Introducing Limit & Tradeoff Curves





Product Development Value Stream

The flow of decisions,

people and equipment that

create the design, BOM

and Manufacturing

Processes for producing a

profitable product

Knowledge Value Stream

The flow of knowledge about

markets, customers,

capabilities, and technologies -

generalized and visualized for

reuse

Functional

Managers

Own

Knowledge

Value Stream

Chief (System)

Engineer

Owns Product

Value Stream

Design Phase Validationt Phase Launch Phase Set Based Learning

Design Phase Validation Phase Launch Phase Set Based Learning

The LFPD structure balances the system





Mentor to

ensure

success

Learning Process

A3

Reports

IE

Identify need

- Problem

- Opportunity

- Knowledge

PDCA

Functional Managers and Teams

Solves

problems

Document Establish & improve

the resulting knowledge

Checksheets

Everybody

Chief Engineer / System Designers pull their projects via

Integrating Events

KNOWLEDGE CONTINUOUSLY

FLOWS

Review, innovate, and

teach with the knowledge

The roles and responsibilities are well defined





Cross Project Knowledge-Driven Development

Pulled by Visible Knowledge

Balanced by Leadership

Summary: This is the LFPD System





now imagine…

success assured

Documents

Learning-First Product Development · Manufacturing Lean Techniques applied to product development: - Value Stream Mapping - 5S - 3P Quality & Engineering Improvements: - Six Sigma