Comments on: Product Design – the most powerful (and missing) element of lean http://www.shipulski.com/2009/12/01/product-design-the-most-powerful-and-missing-element-of-lean/ Innovation, Product Development, Design Fri, 10 Sep 2010 15:33:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Peter Tweddle http://www.shipulski.com/2009/12/01/product-design-the-most-powerful-and-missing-element-of-lean/comment-page-1/#comment-172 Peter Tweddle Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:44:30 +0000 http://www.shipulski.com/?p=401#comment-172 Forgive me for missing the point BUT didn't the Design Engineers design the product in the first place? If they had not designed so many parts in the initial drawings then there wouldn't be this opportunity. We lean guys call that rework. Thanks for the thoughts though - very thought provoking! Peter Forgive me for missing the point BUT didn’t the Design Engineers design the product in the first place? If they had not designed so many parts in the initial drawings then there wouldn’t be this opportunity. We lean guys call that rework.

Thanks for the thoughts though – very thought provoking!

Peter

]]> By: Be http://www.shipulski.com/2009/12/01/product-design-the-most-powerful-and-missing-element-of-lean/comment-page-1/#comment-115 Be Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:15:48 +0000 http://www.shipulski.com/?p=401#comment-115 Mike, Great post I agree whole heartedly there is only so much improvement left once the design is set. However, I would assert training product development folks in DFMA is not the end all (and may not even be the start). Most organizations do some form of DFMA. The problem is it's normally not well organized, disciplined, or part of a well functioning process. Furthermore, like any other tool DFMA is only be useful in the right hands employed the right way. There needs to be an organization wide focus on continuous improvement supplemented by mentoring or else DFMA easily becomes just be another misused tool. The entire process of product development from concept to released for production' needs to be analyzed from a lean perspective. All the sub processes and their interactions need to be understood, analyzed, and improved. An organization may find implementing more regimented DFMA as their first step on the journey, or a more glaring obstacle may be uncovered. Great stuff, Be Mike,

Great post I agree whole heartedly there is only so much improvement left once the design is set.

However, I would assert training product development folks in DFMA is not the end all (and may not even be the start). Most organizations do some form of DFMA. The problem is it’s normally not well organized, disciplined, or part of a well functioning process.

Furthermore, like any other tool DFMA is only be useful in the right hands employed the right way. There needs to be an organization wide focus on continuous improvement supplemented by mentoring or else DFMA easily becomes just be another misused tool.

The entire process of product development from concept to released for production’ needs to be analyzed from a lean perspective. All the sub processes and their interactions need to be understood, analyzed, and improved.

An organization may find implementing more regimented DFMA as their first step on the journey, or a more glaring obstacle may be uncovered.

Great stuff,
Be

]]> By: Nick http://www.shipulski.com/2009/12/01/product-design-the-most-powerful-and-missing-element-of-lean/comment-page-1/#comment-114 Nick Wed, 02 Dec 2009 20:25:03 +0000 http://www.shipulski.com/?p=401#comment-114 Mike, Its hard to dispute Boothroyd Dewhurst's knowledge of product cost, but in my experience the stated cost split between part cost, labor, and overhead is slanted heavily towards end products which are comprised of nearly all purchased parts and the only value-add in those products is final assembly. That split moves much closer to 50% labor/50% material when you manufacture a fairly mature/vertically integrated component or sub-system. BD acknowledges in their presentations that there is a fair amount of labor in their part cost calculation, which substantiates my statements. I've found that once a manufacturer finds themselves with less than 30-40% of the product cost content it becomes very difficult to differentiate yourself and you start becoming close to a commoditized product. Time to turn to the Product Development team for new products! Admittedly though this can vary by product, industry (profit margin acceptance), and manufacturing region. Regards, Nick Mike,

Its hard to dispute Boothroyd Dewhurst’s knowledge of product cost, but in my experience the stated cost split between part cost, labor, and overhead is slanted heavily towards end products which are comprised of nearly all purchased parts and the only value-add in those products is final assembly. That split moves much closer to 50% labor/50% material when you manufacture a fairly mature/vertically integrated component or sub-system. BD acknowledges in their presentations that there is a fair amount of labor in their part cost calculation, which substantiates my statements.

I’ve found that once a manufacturer finds themselves with less than 30-40% of the product cost content it becomes very difficult to differentiate yourself and you start becoming close to a commoditized product. Time to turn to the Product Development team for new products! Admittedly though this can vary by product, industry (profit margin acceptance), and manufacturing region.

Regards,
Nick

]]>