A dedicated technical staff is not required to perform advanced development activities in most organizations. With integrated advanced development, simply allocate a small percentage -- say, 5 percent -- of each engineer’s time each week to evaluate a technology assigned to them. Assignment should be aligned with a product roadmap, and be based on the engineer’s interests and the needs of the organization.
This approach leverages engineers’ natural curiosity and their desire to learn new things, but keeps the activity aligned with organizational goals. Engineers spend this time gathering information about the technology, conducting experiments, creating concept prototypes, and identifying potential changes needed within the company -- all in an effort to learn how the technology works and how best to incorporate it into new products.
When should advanced development happen? In an ideal world, technology evaluations should be completed prior to the start of a new project. This provides input for planning, and removes the learning curve from the critical path of the project.
When time-to-market is a high priority, and schedule is greatly compressed, advanced development work can be done in parallel with the project. One approach can be to introduce the initial product without the new technology and then have a secondary release once the new technology has been fully integrated. With integrated advanced development, these activities are continually conducted by engineers, in tight alignment with product roadmaps, to ensure that resources are focused on the most immediate and relevant needs of the organization.
Implementing integrated advanced development can help reduce the risks of new technology introductions by improving initial project planning, maximizing scarce development resources, keeping engineers engaged with the latest technology advancements, and promoting cross-functional cooperation and awareness.
I should have replied to your post, but instead started an independent comment on this article.I should have replied because I'm drawn to your comments as if you read my mind; it seems we have worked in the same places.See my independent post a few paragraphs down the link, entitled, "Advance Dev is a seperate Group." Thanks for your comments!
Many companies I have worked with don't have the resources available for a separate group focused on Advanced Development. They barely have sufficient development resources to introduce new products with tight schedule constraints. Therfore, allowing the development engineers a small portion of their time to investigate targeted technologies helps mitigate the risks to schedule and product quality. For Advanced Development to be effective I think it takes the commitment of visionary leadership and a management team who can see the big picture. For those companies that have the ability to support a separate Advanced Development team it becomes crucial that they provide for a smooth transition of the acquired knowledge to the product design team.
Bill, I agree that a segregated AdvDev team takes big bucks – that's why I prefaced my comment with my history of working in giant corporations that are household names. They have the cash to afford that. Further, I concur to your point that transition of AdvDev into the product groups is a critical transition that often has roadblocks.I have lived that, as well.(the "NIH" {Not Invented Here} syndrome drives engineering egos all too often).
All of your points, I have to say, are good valid approaches which I would also encourage smaller companies to try.Except, in reality, the shared-time concept (the 5% idea) is theory not often successfully reduced to practice.
Bob, I agree with your comments on design reviews. Early in my career I was with a company that was really good about holding design reviews at multi-levels, inviting the right people and we always got really good feedback. Now most companies I deal with believe "design review" is a dirty word or don't know what it mean.
Some common things I've found are companies don't hold design reviews, material is distributed at the design review or a day in advance, design is given to one independent person to review. Trying to explain that people need time to review the material or even explain the importance of a design review was taking more years off my life they it was worth.
I don't think enough importance is put on design reviews, having the right people, providing sufficient time to review material to get good feedback can save a company time and money. Ideally design reviews attendees are invited because their expertise is needed in a specific area, so what I would do is highlight for each attendee's specific area I would like them to review, if they didn't have time to review the entire package. What I found was most would make time to review their specific area. Otherwise, more times than not they wouldn't review anything. I tell people if you have a review with no action items then most likely they didn't review the material. When will some compaies learn pay me now or pay me later and if you pay me later it will cost you a lot more.
The 5% rule sounds great!! But like Bob said not in today's world. I've had companies start out with something like that but it soon got lost in the "everything is HOT" so that 5% got eaten up by you trying to put out fires or just keep up with the daily duties.
An analysis of what’s needed to implement Design for Disassembly and Design for Recycling results in eight strategies engineers can use to design an intentional end-of-life stage into their products.
Government regulations, coupled with growing consumer sensitivity about data and identity theft, require that data storage organizations demonstrate proper protection and due diligence in protecting sensitive information stored inside datacenter enclosures.
When a crane doesn't have a monitoring system, crane owners schedule service every six months and simply scrap the parts they replace, even if a part has had little use and doesn't need replacing. This can cost thousands.
From Dell / Intel® New Paradigms in Design Work Scott Hamilton, vertical market strategist for Dell Precision workstations, 5/2/2013 3
Early in my career, I worked as a draftsman and remember the days of drawing on vellum with numbered pencils and Mylar with plastic lead. This was a fun experience in the sense that I ...
I've been using workstations for more than 10 years and love finding ways to get more performance from my system. With demanding professional applications that require more power each ...
A lasting memory from my first job as an engineer in an auto assembly plant is standing on hard concrete at six in the morning, vending-machine coffee clutched in hand, listening to ...
A quick look into the merger of two powerhouse 3D printing OEMs and the new leader in rapid prototyping solutions, Stratasys. The industrial revolution is now led by 3D printing and engineers are given the opportunity to fully maximize their design capabilities, reduce their time-to-market and functionally test prototypes cheaper, faster and easier. Bruce Bradshaw, Director of Marketing in North America, will explore the large product offering and variety of materials that will help CAD designers articulate their product design with actual, physical prototypes. This broadcast will dive deep into technical information including application specific stories from real world customers and their experiences with 3D printing. 3D Printing is
To save this item to your list of favorite Design News content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This
5 
