HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
Page 1/2  >  >>
gsmith120
User Rank
Platinum
RE: the 5% rule
gsmith120   3/8/2012 6:54:53 PM
NO RATINGS
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. 

 

 

gsmith120
User Rank
Platinum
RE: the 5% rule
gsmith120   3/8/2012 6:50:16 PM
NO RATINGS
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.

JimT@Future-Product-Innovations
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Advance Dev is a seperate Group.
JimT@Future-Product-Innovations   3/8/2012 1:05:49 PM
NO RATINGS

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. 

Bill Devenish
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Advance Dev is a seperate Group.
Bill Devenish   3/8/2012 11:58:22 AM
NO RATINGS
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.

JimT@Future-Product-Innovations
User Rank
Blogger
RE: the 5% rule
JimT@Future-Product-Innovations   3/8/2012 12:50:22 AM
NO RATINGS

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!

JimT@Future-Product-Innovations
User Rank
Blogger
Advance Dev is a seperate Group.
JimT@Future-Product-Innovations   3/8/2012 12:37:19 AM
NO RATINGS

I respectfully disagree with the idea that advance development efforts can be done by the same product group spending 5% of their time on advance research.

I've spent my entire career at big companies (household names you've all heard of) and have logged years in both product development engineering and in advanced R&D roles.  The best solution to keep profits  high (meaning continual new product releases, i.e. cash flow) -- is the one that big companies do – they segregate the two roles. 

For the Development Engineering Team, their job is to get the product to market.  Their effort is Schedule and Cost driven (aren't they always-?) and they have aggressive milestones and timelines to meet.  They cannot afford the risk of obstacles caused by various "unknown's" such as Bill is referencing. 

The solution is the Advance Development Team, a separate team who works on bread-board and proto level products to test and characterizes the interaction & behaviors of the desired new feature.  For example, to use Bill's example of adding a modem to a product;  an embedded modem on a dual transceiver board faces  power drain issues, transmit signal strength interference, and cross talk between circuits,  -- just three of many problems that can happen, which the Advance Development Team must examine. 

There are always solutions – sometimes even easy answers  – but the Product Development Team doesn't have the time to mess around with ANY problems.  They need to keep their heads down, designing with only "known's," and maintain the sprint toward the goal of the market launch.

To Bill's point of the engineers natural curiosity as the catalyst for  success; I do agree with that; but even AdvDev gets routine after several programs.  So a good solution is to rotate your staff between the two groups to keep them always fresh.  They appreciate the change of pace.

Nancy Golden
User Rank
Platinum
GREAT approach...but not easy to implement in this economic climate.
Nancy Golden   3/8/2012 12:22:13 AM
NO RATINGS

"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."

I want to go to work for you, Bill! This is a test engineer's dream. And while I agree with your ideas completely, unfortunately most companies I have observed remain short-sighted in this area. The current economy has caused many companies to run on smaller staffs and people are required to handle larger workloads, especially where down-sizing has occurred. While I absolutely advocate your ideas, I am thinking that we won't see companies operating out of fire fighting mode until the economy gets better, no matter how much sense it makes to do otherwise.

 

BobGroh
User Rank
Platinum
RE: the 5% rule
BobGroh   3/7/2012 4:31:33 PM
NO RATINGS
@Dave Palmer: you are totally right. But it is a very hard sell.  And it doesn't stop just with 'pre-Gate zero' activities.  At my last employer, they were very big on design reviews all along the design process.  A very good thing.

BUT the design reviews were just a meeting in a conference room with 30 or 40 other engineers there for a couple of hours. You talked about your design, got a couple of comments and the meeting done.  You then wrote everything up (comments and responses) and, bam, all done.

How much better if the design review had been a real design review where you had 3 or 4 engineers from other departments or projects who spent some real time really digging into your design.  Well, I tried doing that one time and got roundly slapped down by the managers in the other department - they were not about to have their engineers taken off their present assignments to 'work' on your project.  No way.  Anything more than one meeting (couple of hours) - nope. Not here. Not now. Not ever.

Memories!  Why I'm glad to be retired.

 

Dave Palmer
User Rank
Platinum
RE: the 5% rule
Dave Palmer   3/7/2012 3:26:42 PM
NO RATINGS
@BobGroh: You're probably right to be pessimistic about this.  But if companies want engineers to focus all of their energies only on current projects, they are potentially undermining the success of these very projects.  As I pointed out before, a big part of a project's success is determined before the project starts.  Companies neglect these "pre-Gate Zero" activities at their own risk.

BobGroh
User Rank
Platinum
RE: the 5% rule
BobGroh   3/7/2012 10:21:30 AM
NO RATINGS
Oh, please!  Management giving engineers or anyone 5% of their hours each week for 'non-productive' (their words) work?  The chances of that in today's world?  Approximately zero. Sure, there are a few companies (and high 5's to them!!) that do.  And probably many more who used to. But today?  Hah!

So I am a pessimist - well, I've been around for a long while so I guess I am entitled to be.

In the real world, the drive to efficiency and productivity has firmly shut the door on most (I almost said 'all' but that would be pessimistic) non-funded, tightly controlled projects.  In some (most?) companies, the marketing folks have total control over the budget reins and, if a proposed project does not have a specific cost savings, it will NOT be funded. Such an environment (very oriented to immediate and short term financial results) does provide for a healthy and profitable company. 

Even 20 years ago, my attempts (even as a manager) at implementing even limited opportunities for projects outside the normal marketing centric world.  The answers ranged from a flat 'no' to '..you can spend as much of your time as you want' (sure, when I was already working 60+ hour weeks).

So a good idea.  But a dream for most of us.

Page 1/2  >  >>


Partner Zone
Latest Analysis
With erupting concern over police brutality, law enforcement agencies are turning to body-worn cameras to collect evidence and protect police and suspects. But how do they work? And are they even really effective?
A half century ago, cars were still built by people, not robots. Even on some of the country’s longest assembly lines, human workers installed windows, doors, hoods, engines, windshields, and batteries, with no robotic aid.
DuPont's Hytrel elastomer long used in automotive applications has been used to improve the way marine mooring lines are connected to things like fish farms, oil & gas installations, buoys, and wave energy devices. The new bellow design of the Dynamic Tethers wave protection system acts like a shock absorber, reducing peak loads as much as 70%.
As U.S. manufacturing booms, companies are beginning to invest in new equipment.
Automobili Lamborghini is joining the ranks of supercar makers who are moving to greener powertrains.
More:Blogs|News
Design News Webinar Series
12/11/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
12/10/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
11/19/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
11/6/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Dec 15 - 19, An Introduction to Web Application Security
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  67


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2014 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service