Sometimes, it’s the simplest questions that are exactly the hardest ones to answer. In a post last week, I wrote about a book I read some time ago called The Goal (wikipedia entry). In it, the main character struggles to identify both the goal, increased profitability, and constraints of that goal, production bottlenecks and sales limitations, in a manufacturing plant he oversees in an effort to save it from being shut down. Based on that premise, I asked what the analogue is to engineering. What exactly is the goal for engineering? What are the constraints keeping engineering from that goal?
Now the first instinct with things like this is to start throwing out answers. However in this case, it makes sense to revisit the exercise that the main character, Alex Rogo, went through to find his answers. This specific approach is called the Evaporating Cloud method (wikipedia entry). Now, we’re not talk about about Cloud Computing (wikipedia entry). This methodology is a way to identify the goals and constraints within a system. The following is an excerpt from wikipedia that is found in the book.
Evaporating Cloud example from ‘The Goal’
Goldratt has illustrated the use of the evaporating cloud technique in a discussion of the economic production quantity model, as applied to a production line. The prerequisites are to run large batches (node D) and yet to run small batches (node Not-D). These are clearly in conflict. The requirement that D is trying to meet is to reduce setup cost (node B), whereas the Not-D prerequisite is intended to reduce carrying cost per unit (node C). Both requirements are aimed at the objective (node A): to reduce cost per unit.The assumed causal reasoning between the conflicting D nodes is something like “there is no way we can run large batches and small batches at the same time.” This conflict can be challenged by distinguishing between production batch size (between setups) and transfer batch size (between workstations), and so allowing different sized batches for different purposes.
A very useful exercise from the book that the main character used was to maximize or minimize a specific measure or constraint and see if that would obtain the overall goal. For example, what happens if you maximize the throughput of the plant? Does that mean it would be avoid being shut down? Of course not. That produced product had to be sold. After iterating he came to the final set of constraints or variables that really mattered.
Now that we have this context, what should our answers be?
This series of posts focuses on the perspectives on executives, managers and staff personnel in the engineering organization. This post specifically features Dr. Andrew Thomas, the CTO for Energist NA Inc., on their selection of Solid Edge as their MCAD and MCAE software solution. It includes video excerpts from an interview I conducted with Dr. Thomas at the Siemens PLM Analyst Event in Boston, MA.
Everyone likes to have a second opinion, right? I see it at many places like LinkedIn where people ask about the use of different software systems and applications. “Have you used system x?” one might ask. “Have you used application c” another might ask. Now of course, I have my own perspectives on engineering software systems and applications that I publish here at this blog. But an overall goal of mine is also to provide a platform to those in the engineering community to be heard. That’s why I conduct video interviews.
Today’s engineering voice comes from Dr. Andrew Thomas, the CTO from Energist NA Inc. For a little more on the company, here’s an excerpt from the background section at their corporate website.
Energist Group designs, manufactures and markets lasers and light-based systems for hair removal and aesthetic skin treatments, serving both the medical and beauty sectors. With over 8000 systems currently in the market world-wide, Energist Group operates in over 70 countries through a highly trained network of distributors, and direct sales operations. The company is widely seen as one of the leading players in the industry.
In this first video interview, I talked with Dr. Thomas about how they selected Solid Edge as their MCAD and MCAE application for design and engineering.
In the next post, I’ll let Dr. Thomas share what it was like to transition over to using Synchronous Technology. It wasn’t as easy as you might think. Stay tuned.
Take care. Talk soon. And thanks for reading and watching.
This series of posts covers a number of issues related to the differences in generations specifically in engineering organizations. Today’s post looks at the attitudes of the Gen Y cohort, those that are 27 years old and younger, in the workplace. In the context of an engineering organization, the traditional wait for ‘meaningful work’ for younger employees will have a more adverse effect.
Do you remember what is was like when you were first hired as an engineer? Do you remember the type of work you did? Did you enjoy it? Was it fulfilling? I imagine some of you are laughing at that last question. But in all seriousness. Think about it. Now hold on to that thought while we start to talk about Gen Y engineers. These are the people just graduating from engineering school and getting their first job. They’re just starting off their professional career. Think they’re in the same mental state you were in? Actually, that’s very unlikely. Before I dive into that, let me give you some back from a Tammy Erickson blog post at the Harvard Business Review on Generation Y’s First Impressions of Us and work overall.
They are happy to handle “big” jobs and tackle them with confidence. Without a doubt, the most engaged Y’s were those who felt that they’d been given very challenging assignments: “They gave me full responsibility for a project. Very cool.” “My project is visible enough so people know what I am doing.” “I’m doing something that has value.” They were not the slightest bit deterred by what older workers might perceive as their lack of experience or even limited qualifications for the task at hand. Most Y’s felt sure that they could tap into appropriate sources to learn how to do what needed to be done: “I like the fact that the boss gives me a project and I can just handle it.” “I’ll figure it out.”
They are impatient and want what they’re doing now to be as enjoyable and meaningful as possible. Although this extends to life in general for most Y’s, it certainly applies to the work environment. The least engaged Y’s in our groups were those who felt they had been given “prove it” work — tasks that had to be done to earn the right to move on to something more significant. As I argued in an earlier post (“What Are They Thinking?“), I believe this sense of impatience is not a reflection of youth (as many older bosses would love to believe), but will continue to be a defining hallmark of Generation Y throughout their lives. Teenage years marked by events such as 9/11 and Columbine have left most Y’s with the clear sense that making the most of things today is a pretty sensible rule to live by.
They don’t necessarily want your job. We were pretty surprised by the number of Y’s who said their boss’ job just didn’t look “worth it.” The trade-off of time and stress versus whatever incremental money or prestige that next job on the corporate ladder carries doesn’t appear like a smart deal to many in entry-level corporate jobs: “A manager’s schedule is hard. It’s a lot to ask, to give up your weekends, screw up your schedule and life, and not get paid enough more to make it worthwhile.”
And, they are positively amazed by corporations’ obsession with time — both the absolute amount we spend on work and our emphasis on specific times: “I need more days off . . . as a young person, you have to wait five years for three weeks vacation . . . by then you’re 28, you have kids, and you can’t do anything.” Most of the focus groups concluded that their work environments were pretty inefficient — they and their friends outside the office get “things” done (problems resolved, information shared) much faster and with less effort than they and their work colleagues. And, as habitual “time shifters,” (See “Do You Want a Date . . . Or a Quart of Milk?“), they prefer to do the work on their own schedules: “What is it with you people and 8:30 a.m.?”
Now that’s a little different from the attitudes of Boomer and Gen X engineers in the workforce, right? Most engineers when first hired into a manufacturer have to wait for 4-7 years before being assigned important work. On top of the shortfall of graduates from Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM, wikipedia entry), Gen Y engineers with this sort of mismatched expectation about doing important work early in their career will drive them to adjacent fields. As a result, the shortfall in STEM fields will only be exacerbated. And despite the fact that the Gen Y generation is almost as big as the Boomer generation, it will be increasingly harder to find employable engineers.
What do you do about it? With the issues around a jobless recovery where projects are understaffed, accelerate Gen Y into meaningful work with appropriate failsafes like frequent reviews and mentoring programs. It’s better to turn them into effective engineers that leave them on the bench. Especially right now.
This series of posts will cover new product releases, changes in product strategy and acquisitions by engineering software providers affect engineering stakeholders. New posts in this series will be published based on software provider activities. Today’s post takes a close look at PTC’s Windchill SocialLink to understand exactly what capability it provides to the engineering community.
When I attended the PTC/User conference and heard this announcement earlier this year, I thought it was an interesting concept. I knew it brought more social computing capabilities into product development. I heard a lot about the vision of what it would eventually become. But at that point, I had no idea exactly what capabilities it would offer. Since I was in Boston last week, I made it a point to drop by PTC and talk it over with Christian Barr, a product marketing manager for Windchill SocialLink.
Dates and Events: Back in June 2010 at the PTC/User event in Orlando Florida, PTC (wikipedia entry) announced the future launch of a new product called Windchill SocialLink (press release). This product is slated to launch on October 20th 2010.
Capabilities Provided by SharePoint 2010: This post is supposed to be about PTC’s Windchill SocialLink. Why should I talk about the SharePoint product from Microsoft (wikipedia entry)? The reason is that Windchill SocialLink actually sits on top of SharePoint. So it’s important to understand exactly what capabilities are first provided by SharePoint so we can then discuss how Windchill SocialLink enhances them.
Now there is a lot… and I mean a LOT… of capabilities in SharePoint. I couldn’t begin to do it justice here. There’s a Microsoft’s SharePoint site that goes into excruciating detail. However, for this discussion, there just a few capabilities in the Communities part of SharePoint that are relevant. Here they are.
You can post updates. Essentially, SharePoint provides a capability where you can enter updates on what you’re doing and what you’ve done.
You can follow other’s posts. This is basically subscribing to an RSS (wikipedia entry) feed of someone else’s activities. In aggregate across a number of people, you can keep track of what other people are doing.
Commentary on SharePoint for Product Development: All in all, these two capabilities let you update others on what you’re doing and see what others are doing. Why in the world would you want to that? Let me offer a couple of scenarios where this might make sense.
Project Status Meetings: Do you like these meetings? For individual contributors, I think they are one of the biggest examples of non-value added activities that exist. You sit in the meeting waiting while everyone else gives their updates until it’s your turn. Basically, you end up participating in the meeting for a single minute out of an hour. By updating via posts while you work, project managers won’t need to go into excruciating detail during meetings. At the least, the meetings can go much faster and perhaps be eliminated altogether.
Email for Communication: Have you ever been waiting on something from someone else so that you could move forward on your task? You might email or come by the desk intermittently to get a status update if nothing else. Instead of flooding your inbox with yet more messages or wasting time walking to another section of the building, you could track that individual’s updates instead.
Seems like reasonable scenarios where SharePoint could add some value. However, there have been some barriers to using the technology as described. The feed of posts needs a context. In SharePoint the only way to set that context by following a specific individual. So, conceivably, you could setup your feed to follow the other twenty engineers working on your project. But here’s the problem. Some of those engineers might post about a functional specific area not related to the product and, as a result, you get too much irrelevant information. Alternatively, some of those engineers might engage other experts about the product yet their responses might not be included in the feed. As a result, you miss relevant information. Furthermore, any back-and-forth response on a product issue isn’t caught in your feed. You only see the responses for the people that you are following. So, all in all, the context is wrong.
New Capabilities Provided by Windchill SocialLink: So what exactly does PTC’s Windchill SocialLink add to SharePoint? Here are the capabilities that will be available in the first release.
Adds two new community contexts. One of the new communities is created based on the product context within PDMLink. Basically, everything about and only about that product is included in the feed. The other is called a community of practice where the same types of functional stakeholders can be grouped together. For example, there might be a community of practice focused on system engineering, This let you catch all of the back-and-forth for a specific product or in a certain practice topic area.
Addsmicroblogging (wikipedia entry) capability.The new offering essentially provides a new way to post that also includes videos, images and other sorts of media that provides more context. This might include markups and picture of product failures for example.
Adds a social toolbar to Windchill.With SharePoint alone, you have to go into the SharePoint application to track your feed or post your updates. That’s not exactly convenient for the hyper-overworked product development stakeholder. SocialLink adds an ability to contribute to posts from within Windchill from this social toolbar.
Adds a desktop client. Last but not least, another way to track and contribute is through a desktop client instead of using a browser or going through the social toolbar in Windchill. This most likely will be useful for those using CAD and CAE clients where you don’t really need to keep a browser open constantly. Those stakeholders tend to use the Windchill integrations that are embedded in their CAD and CAE desktop clients anyway.
Commentary on Windchill SocialLink for Product Development: So what does this really mean for stakeholders, especially engineers, in product development? Let me start by saying that I firmly believe in the promise that social computing can address a lot of fundamental issues that exist in product development today. I’m a judge for the Spike Awards, which recognizes excellence in using social media for product innovation. Here’s a recorded interview where I talk about it’s potential benefits.
However, I think that historically there have been some serious technology and cultural issues barring the way. To my point, SharePoint and other product have provided generic social media capabilities for some time. Yet there’s been little to no adoption in product development organizations. The capabilities provided by Windchill SocialLink make it much more feasible to deploy social computing capabilities and make them stick. I am looking forward to additional capabilities in the next release to provide additive value beyond this first release. Beyond the capabilities provided, be aware that adoption of this technology involves much more than just installing the software. To really reap the value, you need to rethink what technologies you use for collaboration.
Summary: PTC’s Windchill SocialLink provides social technology capabilities above and beyond Microsoft’s SharePoint to make it feasible to track and contribute to information in product development. This product offers a new means to collaborate and correspond with others on the product development team. However, as this offering is being considered, take into account other efforts to get product development teams to rethink what technologies they use to get their job done.
Take care. Talk soon. And thanks for reading.
Our mission is to help executives reap more value from technology-led engineering initiatives in less time, with more surety, and less disruption. Lifecycle Insights provides research and educational insights on technology-led engineering initiatives for the development of smart connected products, enabling better investment and adoption decisions