Clarity on PLM

What I learned this week … came from a conversation with Jeremy Johnson from IHS. Jeremy opened my eyes to a new way to make manufacturing more sustainable and ecologically friendly. I have written in the past about how companies are making their products compliant in Product Compliance – Hidden Tax on Innovation and  Making Product Compliance Sustainable. One way this is different is because it is not about the products, but the plant. But here’s the catch that makes this the most interesting to me. While product compliance helps to protect top-line revenue and market access across the globe, it is an activity that costs manufacturers money. As Jeremy explained, getting in control of the chemicals in the plant helps reduce environmental impact and increase employee health and safety - and also helps reduce cost at the same time. Now that sounds like something most executives would sign up for, regardless of whether their “green” philosophy focuses more attention on a greener planet or a greener wallet.

NOTE: Graphic from IHS White Paper, “IHS Chemical Inventory Greening”

Chemicals for MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul)
Manufacturers use a lot of chemicals. Most plants are filled with greases, solvents, and cleaners to name a few. These “indirect” materials frequently fall under lower levels of purchasing rigor, and companies tend to have a large number of similar products. This duplication offers a pretty straight-forward inventory reuse/consolidation opportunity. By gaining visibility and control over what chemicals a company uses (particularly if they are running multiple plants), companies can reduce procurement and handling costs. Simply consolidating from twenty hand cleaning products to a few could offer savings through bulk procurement contracts, reduction of duplicate inventory, and reducing other inventory handling costs including disposal.

Beyond cost savings, IHS acquired technology from a company called Dolphin Software. The Dolphin solution goes beyond part reduction to address employee health and safety and toxicity concerns. By using publicly available data, they pull together a “hazard profile” that indicates whether products contain known dangerous or environmentally unfriendly ingredients. When looking for opportunities to eliminate items, the decision can be made on cost, sustainability, and safety perspectives. By reviewing objective rankings of hazards in combination with spend, manufacturers can “green” up their operations while saving money.

Implications for Manufacturers

The opportunity for manufacturers is clear. Save money, and help save the planet. Most manufacturers I speak with would love to be more eco-friendly, but find themselves as cross purposes with making a profit. This initiative helps them operate in a more sustainable way without a big price tag. In fact, it comes with money back! Of course Jeremy points out that chemicals can’t be rationalized blindly, they have to meet the operational needs they are currently being purchased for. The approach is sound, and IHS has a number of case studies they shared with me that back up the approach.

So companies can go green without having to sacrifice profits, I hope you found it interesting. It’s a pretty compelling opportunity. Who knew? I didn’t, if you did let us know about it.

A quick peek into some research on … product compliance for formula-based companies in a report titled Issue in Focus: Product Compliance – The Hidden Tax on Innovation: Enhancing Innovation in Formula-Based Companies through Real-time, Automated Compliance Monitoring. One of the predictions that came true in Mythbusing Product Innovation and PLM 2010 Predictions was that PLM would expand to address product compliance. My past reports, such as the report on Making Product Compliance Sustainable, focused primarily on regulations like RoHS and REACH that impact product people that make discrete items like electronic or mechanical devices. But formula- and recipe-based product developers face their own set of compliance challenges. This report focused on their needs, and how PLM systems can help reduce the manual workload burden placed on them by product compliance. 

The Research Findings

The research included interviews with consumer goods companies including Revlon, Zotos International (a division of Shiseido Co,. Ltd.) and made a few key observations:

•  Early compliance checking helps avoid rework and speed time to market in product formulation and testing by ensuring product contents are acceptable early in the product development process
• Manual product compliance processes are slow, inneficient, and inhibits innovation by forcing key innovators to spend inordinate amounts of time looking up information and making it difficult for them to try new, innovative ideas quickly and with confidence

Given the need for early compliance checking and the potential for these checks to grind product innovation to a halt, companies appear to be between a rock and a hard place. The report goes on to discuss how real-time, automated compliance monitoring can help relieve the innovator of this compliance burden so they can focus on developing great products. This requires an infrastructure that:

• Provides knowledge of global compliance requirements
• Recognizes the full composition of their raw materials
• Understands the product formula as it is being designed
• Checks compliance real-time as the developer innovates
• Provides full, electronic documentation of compliance

There is more detail on each of these requirements in the report.

Implications for (Formula-Based) Manufacturers

For companies that develop and manufacture formula-based products, the compliance challenge will only grow. Government regulations and consumer sentiment will continue to push companies with greater scrutiny of their product contents, and restricted material lists will continue to grow. On the other hand, consumers will continue to reward innovate new products. In order to meet both demands, product developers must have the right tools to innovate rapidly, but with the comfort that there is a system behind them that will keep them out of compliance trouble.

So that was a quick peek into some recent research on making product compliance more efficient for product developrs in formula-based industries, I hope you found it interesting. Does the research reflect your experiences? Do you see it differently? Let us know what it looks like from your perspective. Please feel free to review more free research and white papers about PLM and other enterprise software for manufacturers from Tech-Clarity.

What I learned this week …serves as a cautionary tale for people responsible for product compliance – PLM can help, but compliance requires a multi-pronged approachthat includes strong data gathering, analysis, and docuumentation capabilities (this is where PLM comes in) but also intelligent supply chain relationships and physical validation. This reminder came to me courtesy of AP Enterprise: US buyers must beware in China. The article is a good read, although I had some issues about their dig on 3rd party testing. Their point is you have to know what you are looking for in order to test for it – isn’t that what RoHS, REACH, the SIN list, and countless other lists of substances of concern are all about? Otherwise, some excellent points and examples.

What PLM Can Do

As my previous post discussed, PLM solutions help by Making Product Compliance Sustainable. In other words, PLM helps companies achieve product compliance without excessive compliance cost. Developing products that meet REACH, RoHS, and other compliance challenges requires manufacturers to:

• Identify Requirements
• Document Product Structures / BOMs
• Gather and Validate Component Data from the Supply Chain
• Analyze Products and Perform What If Analysis
• Mitigate Risk
• Document Compliance and Achieve Auditability

Most PLM solutions can play a significant role in documenting products and BOMs. Other, more capable PLM systems have added features to help companies collect and analyze compliance information in the context of the product design and product lifecyle. Clearly, PLM is a major benefit for compliance.

What PLM Can’t Do

What PLM can’t do is ensure that the data is accurate. As the example in the AP article shows, there are unscrupulous suppliers who are polluting supply chains with improperly identified, toxic materials. No enterprise solution alone can prevent this. Reducing exposure to these problems requires:

• Knowledgeable supply chain personnel
• Validation

PLM can still help in these regards, but it is not the primary tool. For example, PLM can be used to document physical tests in the context of the product record and analyze data for inconsistencies and potential inaccuracies. Some PLM systems also manage supplier records that can be used to document vendor audits and other supply-chain validation functions. But in the end, compliance can’t be based on blind faith in PLM data.

Implications for Manufacturers

PLM is a big part of the answer to reduce product compliance risk. Manufacturers can also leverage compliance information to reduce product and component supply risk. But in the end, having the right data is only part of the challenge. Virtual validation such as documentation and BOM analysis must be accompanied by scanning and/or destructive testing to be sure. Testing should be risk-based, but should also continue throughout the product lifecycle and supplier relationship.

So manufacturers will have to keep on guard, and not just in China. I hope you found it interesting. Let us know what this looks like from your perspective.

What I learned this week … came after long reflection on my predictions for product innovation in 2010. As you may have noticed from the sparse number of posts in December, I must have been doing a lot of reflecting! I decided to look back at my 2008 research at Aberdeen Group called “The Product Innovation Agenda 2010″ to see whether or not my predictions came true, and bust those that didn’t. I hope you find it interesting. For a look at my take on this last year, please see the post What I Learned: Product Innovation and Engineering “2009 Style.”

Disclaimer on my Lack of a Crystal Ball

First, I want to say that my predictions were not based on a crystal ball or some supposed deep insight into the world of product innovation. As a researcher, I always find it better to ask the people who know the answer instead of guessing. In this case, I surveyed manufacturers about their plans for improving product innovation, product development, and engineering between 2008 and 2010. Then, I compared what the leading companies were doing – and planning to do – differently than average and poorer performing companies.

Predictions and Outcomes

Based on the prior research, here are my thoughts on where we stand as a manufacturing and engineering community against our plans for 2010:

Overall, I feel pretty good about how well the study predicted where companies would focus their efforts. Clearly companies made adjustments based on the economy, but the fact that PLM can help both the top-line and bottom-line was a big benefit.

What Did I Miss?

I missed the impact that social computing would have on product innovation processes. The report touched on open innovation and standardizing innovation processes, but I didn’t ask the right questions to see how the explosion of social networking would impact product innovation. I am not sure that if I asked the right questions that manufacturers would have been able to predict the boom in these technologies and their applicability to product development. I hope that I have made up for my miss by reporting on the trend in posts such as Going Social with Product Development, Social Computing Drives Innovation, Social Innovation in Simple Terms, and Enterprise 2.0 Adoption Study Good Sign for Social Computing in PLM. This is a space to watch in 2010 and companies plan on how to compete in 2011 and beyond.

Implications for Manufacturers

Last year I saw companies adopt a “survive and thrive” approach to innovation due to the down economy. The economic downturn forced companies to run lean and many had to downsize. But many companies I studied were keeping at least a subset of their resources on future innovation to be ready for the return of the market. I noticed that the long-term strategies for PLM were the same, but companies were shifting PLM strategies to short-term tactics to reduce cost and get the most out of existing resources.

Predictions for 2011 and Beyond

This year:

• I expect to see continued emphasis on innovation and PLM.
• I believe many companies will be picking up where they left off with PLM strategies, but maintaining their focus on keeping costs in check.
• PLM will continue to expand, as discussed in What I Learned: PLM, Please Take 3 Giant Steps Forward, and will play a large role in helping companies improve product innovation, product development, and engineering on a broad scale.
• Social computing will have a profound impact on product innovation, and 2010 will see many initiatives exploring the value that the intersection of web 2.0 technologies and process have with PLM.

So those are my thoughts on the past, present and future. I hope you found it interesting. What does 2010 and beyond look like to you?

A quick peek into some research on … how companies are meeting environmental regulations for their products, and doing so in a way that is sustainable to the business from a cost and risk perspective. As manufacturers face increasing pressure from regulations such as REACH and evolving regulations like the many flavors of RoHS, it is becoming more important to develop a platform and a capability to address compliance systematically as opposed to viewing it as a series of one-off projects by regulation. This study, Tech-Clarity Perspective: Product Environmental Compliance, combines interviews with three leading manufacturers with survey results from over 300 companies to help manufacturers understand environmental product compliance challenges and how companies are addressing them.

The Research Findings

This study was unique for Tech-Clarity because it involved both survey data and interviews with compliance leaders in several manufacturing companies. The report provides two perspectives. The first is a broad perspective on the approaches that companies are taking to address their product compliance challenges. The second is a more detailed look at how three leading companies – Motorola, APC, and Seagate – are addressing these challenges.

The results are very interesting. There are some interesting figures on how regulations are impacting manufacturers and where they are focusing. One finding that I thought was interesting is that REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals ) is now impacting products in manufacturers as frequently as RoHS (Restriction of Hazardous Substances). Both regulations were reported by 79% of respondents as impacting their products. As always, I suggest that you read the research for more information.

Beyond those results, however, the report also makes certain conclusions about how companies can address compliance challenges in a sustainable way. In summary, these recommendations are:

• Compiling a common set of product environmental performance requirements
• Gaining a better understanding of the substances that make up components
• Automating the analysis and monitoring of product structures and composition against requirements
• Documenting proof of compliance electronically

Implications for Manufacturers

Many manufacturers are struggling with choosing which regulations to address, how thoroughly to address them, and how to approach the problem. The study paints a clear picture of three manufacturers that have looked at the problem holistically, and developed a systematic approach to deal with the multitude of regulations. Manufacturers can’t afford the risk of stopped shipments, poor market perception of environmental stewardship, or losing access to markets. On the other hand, dealing with each regulation on a project basis will grind business to a halt and dramatically spike the cost of environmental compliance. The environmental product compliance challenge is here to stay, it will only get more difficult as customer requirements and regulations like REACH and RoHS expand and evolve, and will continue to drive unacceptable market risk and high compliance costs.

Manufacturers that develop a repeatable, systematic approach to address regulations will simultaneously reduce compliance risk and control total cost of compliance. As the examples in the report show, companies are leveraging enterprise software including PLM and specialized product compliance capabilities to meet these needs.

So that was a quick peek into some recent research on developing environmentally sustainable products in a commercially sustainable way, I hope you found it interesting. Does the research reflect your experiences? Do you see it differently? Let us know what it looks like from your perspective. Please feel free to review more free research and white papers about compliance, PLM and other enterprise software for manufacturers from Tech-Clarity.

Note: The link provides access to a free copy of a report summary or to the full report which is made available by PTC (registration required).

A quick peek into some research on … the importance of good supply chain information in A Risk-Based Approach to Component and Supplier Management: Mitigating Risk with Component and Compliance Intelligence. The research discusses how good intelligence on the supply chain can help mitigate risks such as counterfeits and fakes, obsolescence, and regulatory noncompliance. The report provides examples from a number of leading manufacturers including defense contractor BAE Systems, electronics industry service provider Jabil, and high tech company ON Semiconductor.

The Research Findings

There are a number of important observations based on interviews with the the three firms that agree to participate in the interviews. Please read the report for the full details. The main thing that stuck out for me was the need to build a framework that allows companies to leverage component and supply chain data to make good business decisions. This is critical to risk management, and helps companies avoid or reduce the impact of a number of common supply disruptions.  As the report finds, “The key is to arm the decision-maker with the right information in time to act strategically.” Like so many other aspects of product development and product lifecycle management (PLM) I have studied, supply risk is best addressed early, when there are still more options available.

The framework of information is not trivial, and requires an investment by the manufacturer to ensure complete, consistent, and accurate information. The elements of the framework include data from both the manufacturer and the supporting supply chain. For example, a good framework combines information from multiple sources, putting the supply data into the context of the company’s products and offering potential alternatives when issues do arise. This data can include:

• Bills of Material (BOMs)
• Approved Vendor Lists (AVLs)
• Approved Material Lists (AMLs)
• Component Specifications
• Supplier Data
• Obsolescence  Notifications
• Controlled Substance Lists
• Compliance Certifications
• Bills of Substance (material composition for purchased components)
• Notifications of Identified Counterfeits
• And more

Having a clean, trusted source of information helps companies identify risk, analyze the potential impact, and mitigate the risk effectively. I can’t imagine summing up the findings from the research any better than one of the company thought leaders I interviewed for the report who said “Knowledge is power, the more you know the better decisions you can make.” Well said, and quite true.

Implications for Manufacturers

I often write about the importance of good software to help manufacturers maintain product profitability. This research is a good reminder that having the right information is just as important. Sourcing product and supply chain knowledge is a frequently overlooked aspect of a solid PLM strategy, as I mentioned previously in my report on Making Engineering Efficient – with Electronic Reference Information. Having the right information – both internal and external – in a framework where it can be applied to make business decisions like risk management is an important tool in managing risk, but also to bringing profitable products to market in a broader sense.

So that was a quick peek into some recent research on mitigating supply risk with good supply chain intelligence, I hope you found it interesting. Does the research reflect your experiences? Do you see it differently? Let us know what it looks like from your perspective.

Please feel free to review a summary of this and more free research and white papers about PLM and other enterprise software for manufacturers from Tech-Clarity. The full report is also available for free courtesy of IHS.

What I learned this week … came from a post that I found in a Consumer Reports blog. The article,  Tailgating Alert: Gasoline-powered blender banned by California Air Resources Board could have come out of the Onion because it is pretty over the top (who needs a blender with handlebars!?). But the punch line is not funny for the manufacturer in Phoenix, who probably had no idea that they were violating a California law and got slapped with a $240,00 fine.

The Lesson Learned?

I am not going to go into detail on this particular case, as much as anything I liked the picture. But the implications are real, and can serve as a wake up call to manufacturers. Compliance is serious business, and getting it wrong can cost a lot of money.

More to Come – Upcoming Research

I am in the process of finalizing a research report on product environmental compliance that deals with RoHS, REACH, and other product-related compliance issues. I will share more when I roll that out. Coincidentally, one of the biggest challenges identified with REACH was understanding the regulations. As one Phoenix-based manufacturer just found out, ignorance of the law is not an excuse. I hope that the regulators don’t make too big an example of them, I picture two guys in a garage trying to figure out how to keep from losing their shirts. But the regulators are clearly sending a message that they are ready and willing to enforce their mandates.

So I will share more of my thoughts (and a framework for product compliance) soon. For now, that is one heck of a blender! I hope you found it interesting. Who knew? I didn’t, if you did let us know about it.