
This summer, Deloitte released the results of a sustainability survey conducted in late 2009 to early 2010 with 48 companies. Although Deloitte defined the survey as cross-industry, I'd classify all but four of those respondents in manufacturing.
I particularly liked the way Deloitte complemented the results with its own experience to present key messages Deloitte believes many sustainability leaders might tell their executive teams as important lessons learned. Here's one of my favorites:
“Give us the structure we need to get things done.”

What's in a name? Environment, Health & Safety, Carbon, Emissions, Energy, or Sustainability Management? Take your pick.
The past couple months, I've been struggling through a multi-report research project that tries to achieve multiple goals, including mapping software applications that serve the spectrum of needs manufacturers have between environmental health and safety (EH&S) and sustainability. I've also defined this as the range between regulatory compliance and voluntary stewardship. (The first report from this research published August 18th: Technology Selection: Environment, Health, and Safety - A Necessary Foundation for Asset-Oriented Manufacturers.)

According to Automotive News, GM will upgrade OnStar software on its vehicles remotely using a wireless connection, without requiring the owners to visit the dealership service department. This may be yet another technology evolution that challenges traditional dealership business will reshape the future of automotive service.

Last week I received an email from one of the top PLM vendors with this question: "could PLM have prevented the recent recall of Toyota cars?" Earlier today, I was interviewed by a top-tier business magazine, and, perhaps not surprisingly, one of the questions was: "why wasn’t simulation able to predict the increased friction in the accelerator pedal mechanism and prevent the failure?"
My response to both was that no, I did not think that PLM could have prevented the failure altogether. It is my opinion, however, that when used effectively, PLM can reduce the likelihood of failures, expedite root-cause analysis, and the formulation of remedial steps. In the case of a recall, PLM, combined with other tools, can reduce the number of recalled cars, thereby reducing costs and damage to the brand image.
Before I discuss the rational behind my responses, I am interested to hear your opinions whether PLM could have / should have prevented this or similar product failures.
See more on this recall here http://idc-insights-community.com/posts/073f490f43

SAP's user conference, SAPPHIRE Now, received a noticeable face lift this year. A sprawling show floor with integrated session and keynote theaters provided ample opportunity for attendees (SAP co-hosts the show with the independent ASUG user group) to attend sessions, talk to partners, and meet with executives. The layout communicated innovation and the production group behind the show deserves high praise. The high production values would have been minimized if SAP didn't bring content to match. The early keynotes discussed innovation and direction, but most manufacturers would have been encouraged by the message and intrigued by some specific innovations available now. For manufacturers and retailers, these offerings included:

IDC Manufacturing Insights has just published a major new research report on Formula and Specification Management (F&SM) in brand-oriented value chains. Formula and specification management is an increasingly important issue forbrand-oriented value chain manufacturers, particularly those in the sub-segment of food and beverage where companies are experiencing the classic productivity "vise." They are expected to innovate better and faster, manage global and regional compliance obligations, and ensure the safety of their products and consumers – all with less resources.
Source: IDC Blogs - MI Blog
In a recent web conference, I talked about how the manufacturing landscape is changing. We are seeing a shift from cost control to a focus on expansion – expansion into adjacent processes, expansion of process competence, and geographic expansion.
One of the areas that prompted a lot of questions during the conference was the notion that China and other parts of Asia are investing significantly into Research & Development (R&D). There are a number of interesting dimensions to this.
Firstly, we are seeing governments around the region put increasing emphasis on developing R&D capabilities and seeking to increase the amount of knowledge work that is being conducted in-country. This is being pushed due to a number of drivers. One, to provide stimulus to create and grow start-up companies that have IP as a key asset, and two, to provide a skilled labor force to attract and retain foreign companies.
Secondly, we are seeing the local, indigenous manufacturers place higher and higher importance on IP. Asia has continued to grow through the recession, making it attractive to foreign companies, with many looking to their Asian operations to offset the stagnation and/or shrinkage of their traditional markets in Europe and the U.S. With this increased competition, consumers in the region now have a much wider choice of products. This has caused a growing need for local manufacturers to differentiate themselves, or at least, be able to provide the same/similar product features and functions as their Europe and U.S competitors. This has also led them to increase their investments in R&D and product development. Coupled with the heightened competition is the growing need for compliance, especially the need to meet customer requirements which tend to be even stricter than legislative requirements. The need to meet these requirements, especially for companies that export, is driving increased investment into R&D.
Thirdly, we are increasingly seeing Western and Japanese companies set up R&D centers in Asia. As manufacturing is moving to this region, so is their R&D, especially since companies need to make modifications to the products they sell in the region. One company that has been particularly good at this is Siemens which has a "Designed in China", "Made in China", "Sold in China" policy for its numerical control systems, drives, HMI and PLC from its Nanjing plant. Foreign companies are also taking advantage of lower R&D cost , and the larger pool of engineers available in Asia. A good example is Toyota who reportedly opened up an R&D center on the outskirts of Shanghai, the first fully self-funded R&D facility outside of Japan, taking advantage of the lower cost of engineers, the availability of engineers and the need to gain insight into local market requirements. The Toyota center is expected to open this year.
Having covered the drivers for increased R&D in Asia, another question that was asked, was what are the R&D areas that Asia is investing heavily in. To a certain extent, Governments can drive the type of industry they want to support by providing funding. Funding can take many forms. For example, grants to companies to establish R&D operations, development of centers of excellence for R&D in specific areas, whether it be university or research institute based, etc. This type of approach requires the country to put in place a strong roadmap . The country must also be committed to implement the roadmap. Taking Singapore as an example, the government has identified a number of key industry sectors, and funding has been put in place to establish R&D centers, train manpower, and encourage the set-up or start-up of companies. In Singapore, amongst a long list, one of the key industry sector that has been identified is aerospace engineering and alternative energy. Typically, what we have seen is that R&D government funding is pushed into industries where the country has some history. For example, Taiwan invests in electronics research, but also looks for adjacent type areas such as "lab on a chip". The more visionary countries identify areas where they would like to be in a number of years and look to establish competency in that area. An example would be Singapore moving into clean fuels.
One of the issues that concern many companies as they set up R&D operations is the protection of IP, especially in China. China has been making great efforts to show that it is respecting IP. The recent ruling that two Chinese companies infringed the rights of Strix in the UK, shows that IP is being recognized, although there is still some way to go. However, with the influx of western companies setting up R&D centers, this can be taken as a sign that the state of IP protection is improving.
In the longer term, I expect more and more "knowledge" work to be done in Asia. From the demand side, this is where there is an increasing growth in the form of consumers, and from the cost and capacity view, that there are a large number of young engineers, working in lower cost countries as compared to the west.
Source: IDC Blogs - MI Blog
Over the last few weeks, issues related to Chinese manufacturing have been all over the news. On one end, we have the continued pressure of the U.S. government for China to revalue its currency, and on the other end, we have the increasing discontent of Chinese workers, demonstrated by suicides at the Foxconn plant, and strikes at well-known brands such as Honda and Brother.
While the currency discussion continues with no end in sight, the RMB is unlikely to reduce in value in the near future. In addition, with the various strikes and labor disputes, the management of these companies is responding by raising wages and improving working conditions. With a 24% wage hike at the Honda plant being implemented, the costs will need to be allocated. Even with the parent company absorbing some, part of the cost will be passed on to end customers. Theoretically, Chinese manufactured products are going to get more expensive.
However, this is only true if there is no change to the manufacturing process within the factories. Recent research from IDC Manufacturing Insights shows that Chinese manufactures are increasingly interested in automation; for both manufacturing processes and the adoption of information technology to support information flow across the various support processes within the factory. However, implementing automation will require a detailed understanding of the underlying business processes.
I remember a discussion with a Chinese manufacturer a few years ago when I asked about automation and process efficiency. At that time, he said that he could not justify the investment in technology and would simply put additional people to work on a task when the need arises. With the recent changes in workforce behavior and currency issues, the mind-sets of Chinese manufacturers will have to change with times.
| type | name | rating | author | activity | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Question | Is there a future for smarter manufacturing? | 0 | 795 | Miriam Kutcher | 7/21/09 | |
| Question | How do you mitigate risk with suppliers when their companies... | 0 | 942 | Miriam Kutcher | 7/21/09 | |
| Question | Is the "reset" economy just a normal business... | 0 | 763 | Miriam Kutcher | 7/21/09 |
New to our Community? Here's how to participate:
1. Join Now
It's free! Community members have access to research and tools and the ability to participate in discussions. Members can also network with their peers and industry analysts.
2. Access Leading ManufacturingTech Resources
Community members have access to ManufacturingTech research and tools. Not a member? Join now.
3. Read the Latest ManufacturingTech Blogs
Do you agree with our analysts? Share your comments & insights as a member (see #1).
Almost all of the content in this Community is visible to the public. However, if you want to access research materials and tools, contribute content, comment, or network with your peers -- you first need to join.