Automation, Marketing and Manufacturing Blogs

Not much relationship, but I know both of these bloggers and follow their writing. One is thinking business strategy and the other operational. Both are important.

Death Spiral

Jon DiPietro's Domesticating IT blog today includes a must-see video of Douglas Adams discussing parrots and death spirals. Oh, the answer is "42".

Jon discusses several industries, including mine, that could exhibit the death spiral response to stress that Douglas Adams describes--you gotta follow the links to the video.

The problem for probably all of us when we are up to our butts in alligators is to be able to think long range enough to see the horizon. I have been in so many businesses that were boom and bust that I try often to stop and sniff out the horizon. Then change behavior (in my case change industries and even careers).

When I started at Airstream we were manufacturing about 50 travel trailers a DAY in three plant with about 1,800 employees. It's done about 12 a MONTH for the past 30 years (I think, on average). At my first pure marketing position, we made a PC add-on board that outputted high-resolution printer graphics to dot-matrix printers. At that time, the Intel 80386 microprocessor came out. I thought, "Hmm, this can do everything our board does while also running all the rest of the system and more. We're SOL." And we were. I got a job back in manufacturing automation. See where that landed me!

I'm in publishing now. I don't think print is going away. I don't think magazines are going away. But both need to continue to morph. Magazines serve niche markets (the general ones are struggling). You must always be sensitive to your niche market. How many suppliers and how many readers still care about that niche? If it dwindles, then you'd better be ready to find a new niche.

Magazine people in general have had a terrible time figuring out digital (better than newspapers, but that's another story). I agree with Wired's Editor in Chief Chris Anderson that each has its own strength and purpose. Print magazines are an event. It's a once a period thing that combines information around a niche market and presents it in a package. Digital (Websites and the like) are either a repository (where people visit as the result of a Google or Bing search) or (better) they are a constant stream of news and ideas that also serve the niche. What was that song, "different strokes for different folks"?

Operational Gains

Meanwhile, Jim Cahill at Emerson Process Experts searched out one of his experts whom I've interviewed several times about how the proper use of Foundation Fieldbus can improve your operations. That is also good thinking.

Manufacturing and Engineering Education

If you missed the movie "The King's Speech," you need to see it. It's an artistic success. There is a sub-theme, though. There were many "proper" Englishmen who had training and certification to treat speaking problems. The future King George VI, though, sought out an unorthodoxly trained, uncertified Australian. Of course, it worked.

Don't let that theme get extrapolated too far afield, though. Certification can mean something significant. Just evaluate the person, too, not just the paper. But even without the "paper," the therapist was trained.

Today, we need many more young people trained both in "book" knowledge and practical, reflective experience. There are technology companies and foundations working on that problem. Here are a couple of recent examples.

National Instruments

National Instruments has developed a Student Design Competition. It is now open for submissions. This is a worldwide contest showcasing innovative student projects that integrate NI LabView and other NI technologies to engineer a better world. NI will select the top four projects and fly two members from each student team to Austin, Texas to attend NIWeek 2011. The grand prize winning team will be announced at the conference and receive $2,000. Additionally, the winning project will be highlighted at the Graphical System Design Achievement Awards.

SME Education Foundation

The Society of Manufacturing Engineers has developed the SME Education Foundation, not for political lobbying, but for helping kids. I just received a release from the Foundation that essentially details some of its accomplishments. Perhaps your organization or company can get ideas for similar work.

The release cites a recent study by the Kauffman Foundation that found that in any given year, the top-performing one percent of firms is generating roughly 40 percent of all new jobs. The SME Education Foundation accelerated its efforts through relationships with this one percent of major companies to deliver its STEM-based programs and expand job growth. Managing an $18 million endowment, Foundation Director, Bart A. Aslin and his five person staff are changing public perception of manufacturing with Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM)-based education programs the result of a series of highly successful collaborations with business and industry over the past 30 years.

As the Bureau of Labor Statistics continues to report U.S. unemployment levels above 9 percent, the SME Education Foundation accelerated its Planned Giving efforts. A direct mail program targets five distinct audience segments ranging from ages 25-40 to those in the 70-plus age group (many of whom have benefited from successful careers in manufacturing). The Planned Giving program encourages support for the Foundation’s Gateway Academy, Computer Integrated Manufacturing (CIM) Program offering courses in high schools and its critically important SME Education Foundation Scholarship Program.

Today, more than ever, companies clearly understand their organization’s vitality and long-term sustainability are dependent on being able to hire technically skilled workers. Committed and more knowledgeable, they are making long-term investments in the Foundation’s STEM-based programs and encouraging entrepreneurial small business partners to join them.

Working with Bart Aslin, Grant Writer and Fund Developer, Peggy McIntyre, identifies strategically compatible organizations interested in financially supporting the Foundation’s many programs. In 2010, funding for scholarships, youth programs and capital equipment for schools included support from the Andersen Foundation, Gene Haas Foundation, Siemens PLM Software and the National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering (NACME).

Students and their parents have benefited of career direction and financial support through the Foundation’s Scholarship Program. Program Officer, Kathleen Carter, who has worked with Foundation’s Scholarship Committees since 1998, has seen over $4.2 million dollars in financial aid granted through its various scholarship programs. Advancements in technology, enjoyed by consumers today, has increased awareness and generated excitement, and as the economy improves— about careers in advanced manufacturing.

Last year, a gift of $270,000 established the new Walter E. Panse Scholarship, honoring the memory of a Michigan tool and die executive. “Our scholarship committee represents all levels of manufacturing, “says Carter. “They are very aware of the challenges facing aspiring engineers and in many cases arrived at their own present position because of a scholarship. They consider scholarships an investment in the future of manufacturing and evaluate applications accordingly.”

A $150,000 grant from the Gene Haas Foundation is helping qualified students interested in machine operation and maintenance coursework. In addition to supporting the Haas Machining Scholarship, these dollars also funded the introduction of the Computer Integrated Manufacturing (CIM) Centers at 400 Project Lead The Way schools across the country which engage other industry partners and SME Chapters.

In 2010, $382,250 in scholarships was awarded to 140 students in the United States and Canada ranging from a minimum $1,000 to $70,000. These students are now able to take advantage of career opportunities opening in emerging technology and advanced manufacturing. Carter encourages students to visit the website at www.smeef.org where more than 45 different scholarships are available. The deadline for 2011 scholarship applications closes on February 1, 2011.

The SME Education Foundation’s Computer Integrated Manufacturing (CIM) course has reached 2,000 students in 25 states where CIM classes are currently taught. Funded states included Alabama, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin. Requests for funding reflect high unemployment rates. With the exception of seven states, each of the remaining 18 states has a current unemployment rate of eight to 12 percent.

Laurie Maxson, director of the Foundation’s youth programs, and an award-winning teacher and former Career and Technical Education Director for Project Lead The Way (PLTW), successfully served as a conduit between PLTW and the SME Education Foundation. Her involvement helped secure financial support and in-kind donations from organizations such as 3M, Intel and the Kauffman Foundation, making it possible for the Foundation to offer STEM-based youth programs. Today, she is working to identify PLTW schools interested in offering the CIM program.

Attention to detail in managing the SME Education Foundation’s myriad programs is Christine Milantoni, program coordinator, who has worked at the Foundation for nearly ten years, and who brings a parent’s eye to the program. Monitoring the Foundation’s website, including its Manufacturing is Cool and CareerMe.org web sites; she is available to students seeking information on applying for a scholarship best suited to their background and interest.

Other sites are advanced manufacturing careers and the Website for young people,Manufacturing is Cool.

Beware the false manufacturing dichotomy

I have been reading "Doing Both: How Cisco Captures Today's Profit and Drives Tomorrow's Growth," by Inder Sidhu, Sr. VP, Strategy and Planning, Worldwide Operations at Cisco. For example, he begins through use of examples how a company can pursue both growing the current business and developing the disruptive innovation that will propel the company into a new growth curve.

This message resonates with me. For most of my life when presented with an either/or proposition, I wonder things like "how about both" or "how about something else instead." An either/or choice that eliminates further available choices or that are not mutually exclusive is called a false dichotomy. You run into those all the time. This is a great book if for nothing else, it awakens you to choices.

But I was particularly struck by this passage that any of you working in an organization will recognize immediately:

"Despite all the gains made, both inside and outside the company, some Cisco leaders resisted the changes. Several asked for transfers, and a few even left the company. One reason: The new organizational culture put an end to the 'blame game.' If there was a problem, it had to be fixed by Mendez's team. No more blaming a vendor, another Cisco department, or some outside force; if it impacted the supply chain team, it had to be fixed by the supply chain, Mendez insisted. As much as anything, the mindset and culture of the organization had to change. Employees had to accept accountability, anticipate and embrace change, and work together as a cohesive unit."

Wow, does this hit the mark. In my brief experience as quality assurance manager for a manufacturer, my boss kept telling me "don't try to solve the problem; write a memo to the manufacturing engineer (or whomever) and copy the general manager." Nothing ever got done that way. I'd wind up out in the press room helping adjust dies or whatever else would get good quality parts out. It was a no win situation. We happily parted company.

Any of this ever affect you?

Video Essay Up at Automation World

Here's a video essay on automation acquisitions, stumbles by manufacturing companies and opportunities for involvement. 

Lean and mean manufacturing

When I started my career in manufacturing lean was what I was at 150 lbs. and just-in-time was when I rolled into the drive as my wife was finishing dinner preparations. But I tried hard to do many of the things that Lean (or the Toyota Production System) systemized later or that just-in-time scheduling has done with automobile assembly. Ever try to order parts to minimize inventory when the lead time is 36 weeks and the production schedule is solid for only two weeks out? Anyway, to me it was just common sense and good management.

Systemized tools such as Lean, Six Sigma and the like have done much toward improving the efficiency, effectiveness (two different things--see Drucker) and profitability of manufacturing. My belief in the principles are what has led to my following the Evolving Excellence blog. Bill and Kevin have many insights on the news from manufacturing.

Perhaps no company epitomized the best principles of manufacturing years ago than Motorola. In the mid- to late- 80s it was doing some really cool stuff. They could also design products well.

Look what's happened to it--it no longer exists. It imploded and has divided into two parts or MOT-->MSI + MMI (Motorola Solutions and Motorola Mobility. Bill Wadell remembers the history of the great manufacturing company and lays the blame firmly where it belongs--poor top management and leadership.

See for example: "Motorola had all of the traditional accounting data that called inventory an asset and classified cycle time compression as a negative, and they had all of the typical labor-centric performance metrics. Bob Galvin simply ignored them, symbolically relegating financial discussion to the end of the staff meetings, rather than the beginning where they had always been. He put quality discussions first. And Mot had a traditional, functional, command and control organizational structure. Again, Galvin ignored it, pushing decision making down and empowering lower level people by the force of his position and personality. Big mistake - he should have changed the systems, metrics and structure. Chris Galvin took over without the benefit of his father's deep institutional knowledge and the force of convictions that such knowledge enables. So from 1993 on, Motorola inevitably and inexorably reverted back to its former self as decision making was driven more and more by the traditional financial inputs and the advice of Galvin's siloed senior staff."

The EE writers are often negative and somewhat cynical about modern manufacturing, but they also can point out people doing it right. Here's a story about a manufacturer of pianos in Estonia that offers great value--not the cheapest price--as the path to success.

"The story has repeated itself many times recently, and will continue to do so over and over. Lean manufacturing is not about cost cutting - it is about eliminating waste - costs that do not create value for customers. The lean producer is not the one who spends the least, but the one with the highest percentage of spending going to value creation. Estonia pianos are cheaper than Steinways, more expensive than Chinese made - they succeed because they are a better value for the price than either."

And here is another positive story from Kevin Meyer. He recently took a trip to Southeast Asia and experienced tremendous service at a low price on Bangkok Airways. Read his account of the service and think of the kind of management that pays careful attention to details and how people work. It scripts and then trains people impeccably. And offers tremendous value for the price. Could you do the same at your company?

"He then pointed out the lounge that every passenger could use. Yes you read that right - they have a nice dedicated lounge, perhaps not as plush as a Red Carpet Club, but still with free drinks, snacks, nice ambiance, and entertainment - for everyone. Keep in mind their prices are half of their competition.

"About a half hour before the flight was to leave we went to the gate expecting to start the boarding process. No plane, quite a few people waiting. Here we go... the reason they're cheap. 25 minutes prior... 20, 15. Aha - the plane! Off come the previous passengers, then the doors open and we're ushered on. Not by section or row - a free for all. We'll be lucky to get out of there in an hour.

But no. In 10 minutes we were all boarded, settled in, and the plane left the gate 5 minutes early. Not just any plane - a fairly new, spotless, brightly-colored, A320."

Bill Waddell points to an article in The Atlantic Monthly about Lean where the writer calls Lean "management by stress." He rebuts the article a little, but I'll add a little. First, to implement Lean in a way that works, there is a trust and implicit (or explicit) agreement that workers helping improve processes will not lose their jobs in that process. Next, I found out early in my career just as managers are discovering every day that involving front line workers in discussions about the best way to do things is a winning formula.

Too many managers and consultants never worked. I've had a drill and saw and whatever else and used to make everything our department manufactured. I worked with the guys (few women in those days, remember I'm old), talked with them, watched them and listened to them. With few exceptions they were always thinking about ways to do things better. When I was a quality manager, I found that almost all workers thought about how to make a quality product that they could have pride in. Involving workers in the improvement process is not management by stress. It's common sense.