Small and medium sized businesses may appear smaller and more nimble than their large corporate counterparts, but they have the same need to manage engineering, inventory and process changes. Their need for this change management is just on a smaller scale. SMBs should have access to the same high-tech solutions for Product Data Management (PDM), only scaled to meet the needs appropriate for their size.

PTC Windchill: for PDM Essentials

Engineering projects both large and small require up-to-date product versions. Design, production and quality control teams all require quick access to the correct and most current product information. And access to this change management process must also be controlled to prevent unauthorized changes.

Windchill PDM Essentials is an easy to deploy system that meets these goals. You do not need to spend countless hours configuring the software to meet your individual needs. Configuration and installation wizards allow for fast, easy setup with less cost to the company.

CAD with Creo

CAD data management is essential for effective product improvement. Teams need the ability to work together to share their ideas. CAD models are stored in a central location with revision control features. With the included ability to use a 3-D viewer and markup utilities, those without the CAD capability installed can still work with the same stored model designs and provide their input.

Small and medium businesses can especially benefit from the ability to reuse and re-engineer existing designs. This is how a smaller business can leverage its prior work and find ways to grow. Control over different design versions allows small teams to be nimble and avoid design mistakes that could lead to increased costs and lost time. This is why Windchill PDM comes with PTC Creo View Lite and it works with a variety of other CAD systems, including AutoCAD.

Office Documents and More

This same change management can also be applied to regular office documents with a check in and a check out function. Check out locking prevents other users from modifying documents while the work is in process with a different team. Check in releases the document to other approved users. The history of when changes were made, and who made the changes, is stored to track the most current versions and ensure the changes were authorized.

Database searching is simplified to reduce the time needed to locate designs and documents. The interface allows you to search with multiple terms, from product numbers to created-by dates and names.

Keeping it all Moving at the Right Pace

Data publishing can also be scheduled to allow for viewing and access of documents at exactly the right time. This is how product lifecycle functions control when teams have access to data. It ensures that parts for manufacturing are not ordered before the final design is approved. Keeping everything on the right schedule is key and this level of lifecycle control ensures that all the people in your organization (regardless of size) are kept in the loop and product development flows smoothly and quickly.

These are the ways that PTC Windchill with PDM Essentials gives small to medium businesses the data and change management solutions that meets their current needs with the ability to add solutions as the company grows. From EAC’s perspective, we see PDM Essentials as an excellent base foundation that can be modified to meet your unique business needs – large or small. Please contact us so that we can tailor a solution that fits your business and your budget.

Computer-aided design (CAD) changed the way engineers, architects and draftsmen work from countless pencil and paper drafts to drawing on a screen. CAD designs can be changed and manipulated in numerous ways without crumpling a paper and starting over at the beginning and this technology that emerged out of the 1980s is still advancing rapidly today.

In 1886, Karl Benz received a patent for a gasoline powered automobile engine. This turned automotive engineering from steam power to the beginning of modern engine designs. Unfortunately, for auto enthusiasts, starting these engines was most often done by getting out and cranking an impossible handle. The first electric starter appeared on an Arnold in 1896. It was not until 1911, that Charles Kettering gave America a true electric starter motor.

You may wonder: what do cars and CAD have in common? The most important similarity is that they represent continuous advancements in technology that are designed to make life easier, better and more productive. Keeping up with advancements in technology can keep your business advancing and increase your bottom line. If you are still using a compass and protractor to create ink on Mylar drawings, you are driving a Model T. If you are using a FORTRAN based system, you are driving a Yugo. You are going, but not very far or very fast.

Upgrading Your CAD Software

Many businesses are relying on CAD software that is outdated. It functions like an old trusty car, but does not offer cruise control, power windows or air conditioning. Who could imagine driving in a car without these amenities? Likewise, CAD is no longer simply two-dimensional modeling. The latest CAD software uses 3D surface and solid modeling, dynamic mathematical modeling and even photorealistic rendering.

PTC Creo gives you CAD software that you can customize to your business needs and then build on, without having to learn to drive all over again. If you are only comfortable with front-wheel drive, you can work with 2D software. When you are ready for all-wheel drive, your 2D can seamlessly move into 3D.

If your business uses an entire fleet of different CAD solutions, you do not have to worry about putting a Ford muffler on a GM SUV. PTC can provide you with the right tools for Multi-CAD environments. You can even test drive PTC Creo software for free.

Using Your Upgraded CAD Software

Have you heard enough car related puns yet? Well there’s more.

Upgrading to the latest software is just the start. If you do not use the functions your upgraded CAD system offers, you are driving a Porsche in first gear. You have the capability but something is holding you back. Many users fear change or do not understand how to implement the change. With PTC Creo, you simply push in the clutch and shift. For instance, PTC Creo Flexible Modeling Extension (FMX) allows you to make rapid design changes at the last minute by selecting only the parameters you need to change.

PTC Learning Exchange offers free tutorials so you and your employees can learn to drive your CAD software and utilize all of the benefits. So getting the most out of new technology is not as difficult as you may fear.

Taking a horse and buggy across the country will take you forever, but embracing PTC Creo FMX will shorten design cycles and lower production costs. Let EAC show you how easy Creo is to use so you can get your business on the road to success. All puns intended.

I have been involved in many projects for many different topics. I have worked on everything from global new product development to ERP or PLM implementations to detailed global change process implementations.
There is a lot to the makeup of a successful project. However, for this blog, I am going to focus on the personality of the overall project team members.

What I have found interesting is that I can pretty much tell how well the project will go within the first 30 minutes of the first meeting. It has nothing to do with the abilities of the group, but more about the psychological makeup of the project team.

Many times the team is forced together from a corporate directive. Maybe one or two people are truly behind the project, but the rest are there because they have to be. The team selection is not thought out. The people selected are the ones with spare time or more commonly are the expert of the area being affected. When this happens I can almost guarantee the project will take longer than planned and be difficult to execute.

Here are the typical people I see in almost every project:

Old school is better: These are people who feel that there is no need for change. The way they do it now is fine and, in fact, better than the new way. The main reason these people are usually on a project team is because they tend to know the most about the current way things are done. They have detailed knowledge of the old process so management tends to feel they must be involved in the new project. I question that decision. You don’t always need the resident expert directly involved in a project. In fact often they are too close to the current process to see past it. Even if their attitude is good, the “expert” is not always best to have on the project team. They should be a key resource, but not necessarily on the core project team.

The know it all: This person can also bring a project down fast. They tend to dismiss or belittle other team member’s opinions. They will often quickly cause team friction. Once your team stops being understanding and open to one another’s opinions, you might as well scrap the project. Having team members that are willing to consider everyone’s comments is a good trait to have on a project team.

Leader: This is not always, and does not have to be, a manager. Many times it’s not even the project manager, but it is ideal when it is. This person drives the project. They take control and in some cases push the project along when it starts to stall from team inactiveness. They tend to be very hands on. This person is great to have on the team and helps to have a successful project.

True team player: They just get it. These are the people I love to see on the team. They truly understand what is trying to be accomplished in the project. They are forward thinking and understand that the reality of any new project is never cut and dry. These people can come from any discipline, but their good attitude and willingness to work through issues help to make the project successful.

There are other roles I see, but the above are the most common. Plus, I did not want to make this blog so long no one reads it.

Many times in smaller companies you don’t have a choice of who is on a project team. There are limited resources to pull from. You have to use who you have. However, no matter the size of the company, I would highly recommend considering the personality of each of your team members prior to establishing your project team. The people on a project team do not always need to be the expert of each department affected. They do need to have good knowledge of their department, but not necessarily be the expert. They will need access to the local expert, but a good understanding of how a successful project functions is more important than topic expertise in many cases.

Once you have a good project team established, a good realistic scope and milestones of the project needs to be defined. Too many times I see a scope of a project being set that is too aggressive and unrealistic. This is all relative of course, but keeping the project scope and milestones achievable is important. You can’t expect a complete 360 of an existing complex process in 30 days. Realistic (yet aggressive) achievable goals will help keep the project team optimistic, upbeat and energized to follow through with the entire project.

I don’t claim to know what makes up the perfect project team. You will always have some element of each role personality on a team. As long as they are not too extreme it can still be a manageable team and a successful project. I should know…I have had many successful projects with a team I had no say in selecting. The projects still succeed; but it can be a much more difficult than necessary with the wrong team psyche.

What personalities have you seen hurt or help a project? I would love to see some good stories on overall project team personalities posted here (no names please).

An enterprise’s ability to manage projects and programs will determine to a large extent the success or failure of the products they produce. Benefits reported by those companies that have completed Program Management Initiatives include:

• 27% greater return on investment in projects
• 30% improvement in project budget performance
• 34% improvement in project schedule performance
• 24% improvement in project risk
• 39% improvement in project requirements performance

Bottom line; Companies with a more comprehensive business perspective of program management are more successful. So how do these companies realize their program management goals?  By clearly defining key success factors, phases, milestones, roles and executing in accordance with these outlines.  Below we will define these characteristics and present a way to describe your organization’s implementation maturity.

The items we identify as key success factors are sometimes referred to as competencies.  We identify these as Key Success Factors to underline their importance in driving your project’s success. The order presented here is for convenience and should not be mistaken by the reader as ranking importance.

Key Success Factors

• Governance
• Alignment
• Coordination
• Management
• Planning
• Finance

Governance is the metrics and operations utilized to guide and measure progress. The development and adoption of these metrics enable the program team to gage progress. Incomplete adoption of this key success factor will cause misalignment of the team and the business decision points required for success.

Alignment is the ability to maintain the team’s view of strategies. Product portfolio, sales and overall corporate strategies need to be within the program’s targets to ensure the product contributes to the overall success of the enterprise. Failure to align program goals with overreaching strategies will cloud decision making at every turn.

The coordination of data across the team and enterprise enables all stakeholders to work from the same assumptions. Incomplete data will disable the team’s ability to work effectively. Delays and missed targets will result if current data is not available to all.

Management’s ability to provide guidance, insure accountability and remove obstacles will set the tone for the program. Managers need to be proactive to deliver a best practice solution. Driving decision making and ensuring the team is equipped for the challenges presented.

The planning required to connect information and resources to maintain schedule and meet deliverables is the responsibility of program management. Aligning goals with the availability of information and resources will enable schedule attainment. Conversely, excessive dwell or loopbacks in the dissemination of data will cause delays.

Tracking financial goals and progress across program checkpoints to determine target alignment and support decision gates is imperative to the program’s success. Failure to do so will result in missed targets, ballooning budgets and ultimately canceled programs.

Incorporating a continuous improvement process to assess performance and take advantage of lessons learned. This is a way of institutionalizing the capture of tribal knowledge. Process improvement initiatives reduce the opportunities to repeat mistakes.

Mastering the above factors increases the enterprise’s ability to execute projects. As an enterprise’s execution maturity increases program management efficiency will follow. Continuing to monitor and improve performance will enable more projects and drive growth. Delivering successful products to the marketplace efficiently becomes engrained within the organization. On time and within budget are the typical metrics cited to define a program’s success. But, neither sufficiently define a product’s success once in the market. To do this meaningful metrics need to be established and tracked. Market share, profitability, and performance criteria targets need to be defined early in the program and tracked throughout. The phases and their respective phase gates described below enable the program team to track their progress and move the program forward

Program Management Phases

Step 0: Establish Processes for Various Types of Development Programs

• Define standard phases, gates, and decision criteria
• Develop templates for standard process deliverables
• Define guidelines for process execution and gate facilitation

Step 1: Initiate Program Phase

• Identify and recruit core program team
• Review program phase objectives and inputs
• Review standard operating procedures & identify exception
• Allocate responsibility and accountability

Step 2: Monitor, Control & Report

• Monitor process tasks, deliverables & metrics
• Manage development schedule & costs
• Manage program-level issues and risks
• Conduct internal program reviews
• Communicate to external stakeholders as appropriate

Step 3: Conduct Gate Reviews 

• Assemble gate packages for review
• Evaluate program performance against evaluation criteria
• Adjust allocated resources and funding as appropriate
• Review objectives, resources and deliverables for next gate
• Communicate to stakeholders as appropriate

Step 4: Transition Program

• Transition product to steady state management, if appropriate
• Archive program deliverables for reuse and historical reference
• Evolve, improve & institutionalize lessons learned

The above steps and their respective descriptions are provided here as the minimum criteria for a program to meet the established goals. Therein lies the secret to a program’s success; establishing the goals at the program’s inception. Without clearly defining the goals a program is essentially rudderless. After the goals have been established by a small cross functional team, a broader team can be engaged to initiate the program. Once initiated, progress is monitored to track goals and insure that all stakeholders are still informed. Monitoring is a way to manage risks as they arise. Gate reviews are performed only as necessary to maintain alignment with stated goals and milestones. As the program progresses the steps above and the associated reporting assure all stakeholders that the original targets established are to be met. Towards the end of the program when success is near certain the program transitions to archiving the success and developing a maintenance and improvement plan.

Program management is the work done to add substance and value to a set of disparate inputs to deliver products and services.  An enterprise’s success in the marketplace is determined by the ability to deliver products and services that meet the needs of the target customers. Obviously the success of the enterprise is driven by the capability to manage programs. Developing the capability of consistent governance to establish project goals and coordinate project teams will fuel growth. As these capabilities mature the enterprise will find it easier to aggregate performance metrics with financial targets.  Mastering the Key Success Factors through all phases of the program will drive increased maturity.  The ability to increase the problem solving and decision making capacity across an organization will enable the mastery of the competencies driving maturity. How an organization creates distributes and consumes data will provide the tools for solving problems and making decisions.

In an earlier blog we talked about the Lean concept of Cadence in organic terms as a heartbeat.  And then we moved out of the comfort of that pat analogy to suggest that other periodic organic processes might serve as a better analogy of cadence in Product Development in consideration of its extended cycle times. Today let’s move back to the analogy of the heartbeat and explore the concept of Perfect Cadence.

If we look at takt time on a production line as a two beat cycle — in one cycle the line advances, in the other the value adding tasks are executed – the heartbeat and our circulatory flow do serve as clarifying models for the Lean elements of Cadence and Flow.

Heartbeats have been in the news recently with the minor dustup over the suspicions of privilege in Dick Cheney’s successful heart transplant.  Below that opinionated noise there is a far more interesting story, and one that has caused my Lean head to spin — continuously — and to muse.  This other story begs the question of what would happen to the relationship of Cadence to Flow, and to our heartbeat analogy if there were no driving beat but rather continuous flow.

Prior to his heart transplant, Dick Cheney had an LVAD (left ventricle assist device) implanted to help support his failing heart and to keep him alive until a candidate heart could be found.  There are over 10,000 heart disease patients who now have one of these LVADs embedded.

The development and adoption of artificial hearts have been constrained by the rapid wear and tear on the implanted mechanical pumps, as well as by the difficulties of supplying power to the devices. The hundred days of life extension given to Barney Clark by the Jarvik 7 heart in the 1970’s set a course for medical engineering research, but the goal of a natural life with an artificial heart has remained unfulfilled.  Because of the practical limitations of artificial hearts, they have been used exclusively as devices to prolong life while patients waited for an available heart for transplant.

In the 1980’s, a doctor-engineer was inspired by an experience he recalled. A decade earlier on a volunteer mission to Africa, he had observed how water was pulled from wells by an Archimedes Screw, essentially an auger in a pipe. His inspiration and subsequent research led to the development of heart devices that moved blood not by pumping, but by means of compact turbines. Early fears that the rotating blades of the turbine would do damage to blood cells were allayed and this technology became the basis for LVADs.

LVADs are not intended as artificial hearts, but rather as ‘crutches’ for diseased hearts.  Because of their compact technology they provided mobility and freedom from hospitalization for patients awaiting transplant. Astonishingly, LVADs also demonstrated the ability to help reverse heart disease apparently in the same way a crutch relieves the burden on a leg and lets it heal.  But even greater astonishment awaited as the LVAD patient population grew and flourished.

In 2003, a patient from Central America came to the United States and was fitted with an LVAD. Communicating through a language barrier, he misunderstood the instructions for him to return frequently.  Upon release from the hospital, he disappeared. A year later, he returned for a checkup and explained that he had not returned sooner because he felt so great.  During his physical, astonishingly, he had no pulse.  His heart had given out entirely and he was being kept alive solely by the circulation provided by his implanted turbine.

Since that experience, an artificial heart based upon dual turbines has been developed and has been implanted successfully into a small number of patients as a treatment of last resort.  For now, those patients thrive and there is optimism that research has embarked on a path to a practical, long lasting artificial heart.

The circulation that results from these turbine-based artificial hearts gives continuous flow (Perfect Flow?) but no pulse, no cadence.  The critical value-add process of gas exchange in the lungs can be accomplished as the blood flows continuously. So does Perfect Cadence result from the absence of the no-value-added-but-necessary half of our two part cycle? Is it achieved when we are able to provide all necessary value contributions under the condition of continuous flow?  I think in theory it is, but as I try to visualize this in practice the only image I can summon is Lucille Ball laboring and stuffing her face at the candy factory.

Cadence is often a conscious feature.  We consciously create cadence to regulate workflow.  This enabling control feature also carries a cost, and the cost is that it keeps us from Perfect Flow.  If Perfect Cadence is that which enables Perfect Flow, then the approach to Perfect Cadence is the cadence that results as the duration of the no-value-added-but-necessary part of the cycle approaches a limit of zero.  This may not exist in the organic model that we choose to apply to our knowledge work, but it likely has conceptual value in areas like production where, like in the world of medical devices, both organic and mechanical models apply concurrently.

Cadence.

In the world of Lean, the timing of the complex dance of syncopated work is managed through cadence.

The most visible and familiar example of cadence in Lean systems is the concept of takt time that controls the production line. The work of each station along a production line or in a work cell is executed within the same time-duration bounding-box. The concept of cadence enables load leveling, the act of shifting work from one production workstation to a neighbor so that the time of execution at all workstations can be balanced to fit into the shortest, most efficient takt time. The most efficient takt time produces the most efficient total cycle time and serves the high-level goals of Lean production systems.

One of the five fundamental principles of Lean is Flow, the uninterrupted movement of value across boundaries. Cadence is the heartbeat that determines the flux of value within the system. The analogy of a heartbeat is doubly appropriate.

Like a heartbeat, the cadence of production has a systolic stage that forces flow, as work in progress moves from one station to then next. And the cadence has a diastolic stage of low flow pressure, during the execution of the tasks at each station.

The second valuable aspect of the analogy of the heartbeat is its organic nature. With increasing focus on knowledge work and management efforts to humanize the workplace in the pursuit of greater productivity, mechanical models have been increasingly displaced by organic, systemic models. And so the heart organ replaces the ticking clock or the metronome as the timing event.

In Lean Product Development also, cadence serves to both coordinate and drive the timing of events. But unlike in the manufacture and assembly of product, the cycle times of product development are much longer and the model of the beat-per-second human heart is useful, but less insightful. An example of the use of cadence in Lean Product Development is the use of Integrating Events in Set Based Concurrent Design. These events are used to put innovation ‘on a clock’ but in a way that is not counterproductive to the creative work.

The period of this development cadence extends over several weeks. For what kind of creature does this describe their heartbeat? Obviously, none, and so some other organic cadence function likely serves as a better model. The menstrual cycle leaps to mind — appropriate by period of cadence, by its somewhat variable regularity, and by its key role in the creative (innovation?) process. Of interest to me is the time variance between the two strokes of the integration event cycle, if fact of any cadenced cycle. It gets me thinking.

In a heartbeat, the two halves of the ‘lub-dub’ cycle are approximately equal in duration. In a factory setting, the division of takt time between the task of adding value and the task of movement to the next station are ideally not approximately equal in time, but rather the value-add time is maximized and the non-value-add-but-necessary time is minimized.

Allow me to detour for a quick, justification side bar here. A common caution to Lean practitioners is to avoid blindly applying the tools of Lean, but rather to use them with an understanding of the underlying principles that guide their application, the ‘why’ of the tools. Like the standards that we have developed to make our work more efficient and more effective, the principles of Lean themselves must be analyzed and sometimes challenged in the cause of continuous improvement. And so I embark on a perhaps Quixotic dive into thinking about flow and cadence.

My thinking calls into focus another fundamental principle of Lean, the pursuit of Perfection. Principle based Lean practitioners recognize Perfection, the idealized future state, as being more of a compass heading than a destination. And so the question is begged, what is Perfect Flow? Is it the reduction to zero of non-value-add but perhaps-necessary time? And if that is so, does that mean no movement (so no flow) or that value-add can be done during movement? We’ll rip this apart in our next blog. And we invite you to send your thoughts on this and all future blogs in to us to help guide our thinking and our learning.

And so as we speak of the next blog and of the value of cadence, we are announcing that we will now put a cadence to our postings, to make it easier and more predictable for those who wish to follow. We will put up some new thoughts on the first and third Tuesdays of the month, with the occasional ‘organic’ variation to our regularity. And on occasion, we may throw up an intermediary blog as we get something off our mind and into words. And, again, we are interested in your feedback, so please share your thoughts with us.