Breaking down Walls

How it’s always been done

Traditionally, a product’s manufacturing lifecycle looks something like this:

Step 1: Market need for a product is established

Step 2: Engineering designs a product that meets specifications

Step 3: Procurement sources parts and materials

Steps 4 to ?: Engineering revises design over and over, based on feedback from procurement and manufacturing

Eventually: Production starts

Often: Errors are discovered along the way that require engineers to go back to the drawing board

Finally: The product goes to market

What’s wrong with the old way?

While straightforward, the traditional method is rife with issues that have made it unsuitable for the modern manufacturer. Among the massive cracks in the system are:

1. Linear processes that leave no room for flexibility: Step 1 is followed by step 2, etc. When one department is delayed, everyone else must wait.
2. Distinct processes that are corralled by rigid walls. In fact, the traditional method is also referred to as over-the-wall, because as one team finishes their part, they toss it over to the next team, effectively washing their hands of it.
3. Delayed discovery of issues that push back delivery dates. For example, materials chosen at the procurement stage, may be found to be unsuitable at the engineering stage or no longer available right before the production stage.
4. Silos within silos that occur within each step. At the engineering phase, electrical and mechanical teams work to meet their own requirements without consulting one another. This often results in pieces that don’t fit together.
5. Stilted communication caused by silos that is akin to communicating via snail mail. One team sends their feedback in hopes that the other team will act on a correct interpretation; a remarkably sluggish process in an industry where time to market is critical.
6. Missed opportunities for innovation that are inevitable as teams have limited opportunities to learn from one another.
7. Diminished control over product release date as unplanned iterations delay time to market.

Each of these issues used to be accepted as part of the cost of doing business. Manufacturers would buffer their time and cost estimates to account for them.

Then customer demand began changing more quickly than ever before and the traditional method had to be replaced with something better.

Breaking the barriers

Collaborative design gets everything right before the design leaves the paper. It is the wrecking ball that pulverizes walls between design, engineering, manufacturing, procurement… all disciplines involved in creating and bringing your product to market.

If you are working with a contract manufacturer, the team also includes key point people to further facilitate communication.

Whether literally or figuratively, back-and-forth conversations take place in real time across the table. Together, your diverse team anticipates and solves issues that may come up.

7 game-changing differences of collaborative design

Bye-bye buffers

Once delays had to be factored into project and production plans. Today, they can cost you your competitive edge. Collaborative design enables you to predict costs, timelines and requirements with heightened accuracy. Critically, it also builds a hyper-agile team that understands all dimensions of the product and process, who communicate well and therefore can spring into action if disruptions occur further along in the lifecycle.

Don’t let status quo procedures block your path to success. Talk to us and ask about our collaborative success stories.

Would you like a copy of this post to share?