3P makes the design of products and operations tangible by using physi-cal models typiphysi-cally created with sticks, cardboard, and other inexpensive, easy to work with materials. When more detail is required, the use of ste-reo lithography might be utilized. When possible it is preferred to construct
full-scale models; however, when this is not possible or practical, scaled down prototypes are still hugely valuable. The prototype models allow participants to see and touch what the final design will eventually look like.
They enable teams to rapidly explore numerous options for every process step and just as quickly collapse those options down to the very best. The prototyping process also enables product design options to be explored in order to evaluate end-product viability, cost, and.manufacturability.
3P considers every point of view and allows for a holistic design where the risk of change is embraced by all functional groups, gaining alliance and support to make radical improvements. Virginia Mason Medical Center (Seattle, Washington) presented their use of 3P on a tabletop to design their cancer treatment center at an AME West Region event in 2006. They later used a full-scale model to design the patient treatment delivery room.
(Example provided by Ken Rolfes, June 2011.) Figure 1.5 represents a typical approach to new product development.
R & D Controls Progression of the Product Development Process Research &
Product Development - Vertical Functional Inputs
Product Development - Shared Horizontally
All Stakeholders Own the Product Development Process Procurement
Figure 1.4 Vertical product development through silos versus concurrent horizontal product development.
All people exhibit preferential bias, a type of intellectual filtration sys-tem that validates new concepts and ideas in light of our prior life experi-ence, including our belief systems, and physical, mental, and even spiritual understandings. When acting as an individual contributor, this can skew our thinking and affect our output. Preferential bias tends to amplify those concepts that match our past experience and reject those that dif-fer. Combine these tendencies with the pressure to reduce time-to-market, or move on to the next project, and it is no wonder that designs rapidly focus on point solutions instead of developing alternatives that might prove to be superior. This is one reason that collaboration with others can be so beneficial in helping us expand our thinking and avoid these natu-ral blind spots.
Our natural tendency is to repeat the things that worked and avoid those that did not. However, in real life, feedback mechanisms are often limited or nonexistent. The product or process design groups may never know how well their ideas worked once the product has gone into production. If a new product struggles in the marketplace it can always be attributed to over-inflated sales forecasts, higher operating costs, delayed launch schedules, lower-quality rates or inadequate understanding of customer requirements, and the finger-pointing goes on. Lean 3P engages a cross-functional team throughout the development process, and the product and process design is developed collaboratively from the start and continues all the way through to product launch. This allows ideas to be tested, challenged, and developed at every step, and feedback is supplied from all functional areas in rapid learning cycles.
Typical Product Development Approach
Concept
Design
Production Engineering
Production
“Over the Wall”
Late to Market
Rework Pre-launch and Post-launch High Development Costs
Figure 1.5 Product development suboptimized through functional silos.
A colleague from a large dental supply company cited that one of the most powerful aspects of their 3P events was having all of the stakeholders and decision makers together in the same place for the weeklong event. The progress that was made in a week exceeded what would normally have taken 3 to 6 months to accomplish, and the quality and magnitude of the results were dramatic. The ongoing collaboration of their team continued to reap the benefits of the Lean 3P process long after the product had gone commercial.
Time and cost pressures also force us to minimize innovation and go with tried and true solutions, even if we appreciate that they are subopti-mal. Design personnel are encouraged or even forced to narrow the scope
THE.MICROSOFT®.KINECT™.PHENOMENON
In November 2010 Microsoft® introduced the Kinect™ for their Xbox 360® gaming system. Within 4 months it became the fastest-selling consumer technology product of all time, with over $10 million in sales. The Kinect was a new game controller that utilized infrared and color cameras to sense the location and movement of users within the space of a room. Microphones captured user commands and blocked out background noise, and most impressively it sold for a mere $150.
Previously the type of functionality found in this device would have cost tens of thousands of dollars and would have lacked the integra-tion that Microsoft built into the Kinect. Immediately hackers around the world began working to crack the system and begin applying this revolutionary technology to robotics and many other product types.
Microsoft initially resisted, and then eventually embraced the develop-ment of their Kinect by the outside technical community. In the July 2011 Wired® magazine that reported on this phenomenon, they quoted Hector Martin, a Spanish hacker who was the first to crack the Kinect.
“I think it’s sad that most companies can’t see the value of their prod-ucts outside their initial idea. There are millions of people who might have better ideas they would never have thought of.”
If this is true for one product by one company, why would the same problem of overfocusing not apply to an even greater degree to a prod-uct being developed by a single person, or a single department in a given company? Collaboration with customers, suppliers, and all facets of the enterprise can only help to make better products. Lean 3P helps achieve that and enables it to be done rapidly.
of change. Fear of failure and possible retribution is also a driver that fosters the status quo, even when better solutions sometimes seem apparent to all.
As we move through the process steps used in a 3P event, we see why it is so helpful in developing breakthrough solutions and driving innovation, and how it establishes an organizational safety net that permits the partici-pants to take calculated risk in order to gain substantial benefits.