Lean in new Product Development by Jim Morgan

engineering excellence Copyright James Morgan, 2013
Lean Product Process Development
and the pursuit of enterprise excellence
Discussion Workshop
James Morgan
jmor990@aol.com

Incredibly complex, hypercompetitive, highly technical,
environment of automotive product development
Extreme global competition
Significant investment
Increased customer expectations and product complexity
Product globalization and market micro-segmentation
Contribute to manufacturing competitiveness – across the
enterprise and around the world
Product development capability core competency and
critical competitive advantage
Body Exterior, Safety and SBU Engineering

Mutually supportive &
aligned elements
people
process tools
lean
product/process
development system
Socio-Technical Systems Model Of
Lean Product / Process Development

Complex Systems
Elements do not exist in isolation
Systems have behaviors that are not exhibited in any single
element. These behaviors are the product of interaction
between elements.
Emergent (Desirable / Undesirable)
Designed
Critical to think holistically in complex systems analysis &
design
Design to obtain & suppress undesirable behaviors.
Maximize robustness & sustainability of desirable behaviors.

The best people create the best products
So we develop people & products simultaneously
people
process tools
lean
product/process
development system

The best people create the best products
So we develop people & products simultaneously
people
process tools
lean
product/process
development system
PEOPLE
Developing Mastery (Towering Technical Competence)
Leadership in LPPD Systems
Organizing For LPPD
Culture
Organizational Learning
“When you pay attention to the data, you can make a decision.
When you pay attention to the people, you can make a
difference.”

Developing Skilled People - Mastery
How do you transform
A brand new college graduate
into a Technically Mature, Highly
Skilled and Efficient Employee?
E = MC2

Develop Towering Technical Competence in
All Engineers
Hire:
Japan classes of 200-300 from Kyoto or Tokyo University
Body and Structures Engineering
2 Ph.D.
198 M.S.
100 B.S.
Production Engineering
B.S. now required for all positions
Tool and Die
Associates degree or trade school
Significant hiring rigor
1.1% hired of those applying for engineering (Kramp). Must start right
to make a major investment (18,700 applied – 220 hired)
Toyota Hiring Process – Selection

All Engineers
Toyota “T” ⊥ TOWERING TECHNICAL COMPETENCY
Body and Structures
One month general training
3-4 months in assembly plant
2-3 months in dealership
Series of interviews and evaluations before engineering area selection
4-8 months “freshman project” (Mentor assigned)
2 years intensive OJT in specialty
Engineers do own CAD work
Minimum 3 years to first grade body engineer
Serious performance evaluations 3 times per year (new bonus system)
Equal emphasis on process or results
Specialize by component
At least 8 years to create a good door engineer
At least 10-12 years to make staff leader
Working engineers “protected” from meetings (20 mins beginning of shift)
Toyota Career Path – Body and Structures

All Engineers
Honor technical excellence and value creation @ Ford
Developing engineers as a priority
TMM
ITDP
Mentoring & targeted assignments
Design reviews
Technical mastery
Strong functional organizations
Foster deep technical knowledge – going deep
Provide an infrastructure for learning & continuous improvement
Organize around the value stream
Create a true competitive advantage

Technical Maturity Model @Ford
Technical Maturity Models (TMM) around Critical Functions
Skills required for Every Phase of
PD mapped to key Functions
Mixture of Industry/Specialized
Training/On-Job Experiences
Defined to meet requirements of
“Novice”, “User”, “Expert”
System must teach Employees
what they do not learn in school.
“Body Structures 101”
Mentoring role of Functional leaders
Global alignment on skills
requirements

Design Reviews
For developing great products and great people
Cross-functional and escalation mechanisms
Rigorous, candid…and challenging
Prep work for review critical for learning
Critical questions…Did you consider?…..How did you arrive
at that?...What’s the data say?.....Have you thought
of?....What are your benchmarks?.....How does it impact your
customer?
Scientific Method: Go and see, develop a hypothesis,
execute tests, analyze, action plan
Bring it back to foundation documents - document
Global and cross-functional alignment

Some thoughts on Product Development Leadership
Technical depth and strong process knowledge (tough to lead
what you don’t understand)
Passion for the product and vision for the team
Communicating “Context”
Passion for your team (right fit, develop, challenge, hug, )
Humility (comes from actually making stuff) and curiosity
(especially with larger scope)
Sufficient band width, ability to focus and communication skills
Courage, “heart” and Candor (team integrity and trust)
Energy and drive to keep stretching the team and moving the
product forward

Chief Engineer to Lead Development From Start to Finish
OVERVIEW OF THE CE (A special kind of leader)
The Chief Engineer system is fundamental to the Toyota PD system and
any effective product development system. But difficult to develop.
Chief Engineers are groomed as super engineers and superb leaders.
Deep foundation, strategic assignments and assistant C.E.
Chief Engineers have responsibility without commensurate “authority”.
Chief Engineers must work through people to be successful.
Drive for results. Very strong personalities. Unreasonable and demanding
– but focused.
Chief Engineers represent the voice of the customer and must use intuition
as well as technical understanding.
Chief Engineers success depend on success of the vehicle, win and you
get to play again.
The success of the chief engineers depends on all the other P.D. systems
and functional organizations.
Original Source: Optiprise

Role of Chief Engineer at Toyota

Assistant CEs
All engineers (not a cross-functional team)
Assistant integrators: typically two sets of responsibilities
Subsystem – interface with functional group
Overall vehicle – e.g. vehicle weight, vehicle cost, prototype build
Head workgroups to hammer out critical cross-functional
issues
e.g. engine compartment packaging, NVH
Complement the skills, expertise of CE
Rotated within project for broad exposure
Original Source: Optiprise (From Allen Ward)

ORGANIZATION
Toyota Technical Centers
Center Head Chief Engineer Functional Manager
Componentandsystemdevelopment
Center I
Center II
Center III
Adapted from: Cusumano and Nobeoka, Thinking Beyond Lean, 1998

Toyota Engineering Organization
Body and Structures Engineering
General Manager
Exterior
Manager
Interior
Manager
Kino
Manager
Trim
Manager
Electrical
Manager
Frt End
Structure
BIW Closures Underbody
CAMRY
Staff Leader
2 Frt End
2 BIW
2 Closures
2 Underbody
AVALON
Staff Leader
1 Frt End
2 BIW
2 Closures
1 Underbody
Chief Engineer
AVALON
Chief Engineer
CAMRY
Front End
MDT
BIW
MDT
Closures
MDT
Underbody
MDT
SIMULTANEOUSENGINEERING
8 to 10 team members per group
TOYOTA TECHNICAL CENTER
Organize to balance functional expertise and cross-functional integration

Ford Functional Matrix Organization
GLOBAL BODY EXTERIOR, SAFETY & STAMPING ENGINEERING
Create a high performance global team to deliver great global products.
Organize around the value stream.
Jim Morgan
Director Global Body Exteriors
& SBU Engineering
North America Europe FAPA FSA
Body Structures
Exterior Systems
Stamping Program Mgt
Stamping
Business Office
Safety
GlobalFunctionalSkillTeams
Craftsmanship
TDM

Include The Extended Enterprise
“Fully integrate suppliers into the system”

Fully Integrate Suppliers Into the PD System
Ford Matched Pair Process
“Matched pairs” at Director, Chief & Manager levels in Engineering
& Purchasing
Speak with one voice of Ford Motor Company
Align processes, tools & objectives
Deliver “physicals” based savings & maximize customer value
Increase understanding & effectiveness
Improved quality & speed decision making
“Aligned Business Framework” for most large suppliers
Align Engineering & Purchasing to strengthen supplier partnerships

Creative Supplier Strategies
Fully integrated TDM into Body Exterior, Safety & SBU
Engineering – but maintain unique character &
nimbleness
Reduce prototype lead time from 20wks to 12wks and
significantly improved on-time delivery through alignment
Added global prototype responsibilities for both I/S & O/S
sheet metal to coordinate the full system
Added M1 prototype & bridge parts engineering
responsibilities to increase learning – seamless
integrations with engineering
Vehicle modification centers (police cars)
Going global…
We went from “Get rid of them” to “What would we do without them”
Leverage creative organizational strategies to deliver greater value

Supplier development: APA example… another different
approach
In the APA region, we started with two people, six shops, and 12 parts in
2006 (10 days, 4 countries, 28 shops)
Completed the delivery of over 750 parts since 2006
Developed 32 die shops in China, Taiwan, & Korea since 2006 to
support on-going sourcing on all programs for all regions. Have
developed shops capable of delivering dies from simple structural parts
to bodysides.
Developed 5 casting foundry shops, 6 die standard component shops
and 3 material treatment shops to support die shop delivery.
Established and grew Ford local die engineering expertise to support
programs.
Quality & delivery equal to or better than traditional sources
Added stamping checking fixtures to strategy.
Internal technical competency is critical
Strong focus on active in region supplier development

Build In Learning & Continuous Improvement
“The ability to learn faster than your
competitors may be the only truly sustainable
competitive advantage.”
- De Geus (1988)

Two Types of Knowledge
Explicit Knowledge or
Information
Tacit Knowledge or
Know-How
Easily codified
Transfer without significant
loss of integrity
Facts, axiomatic propositions
and symbols
Complex and “sticky’
Difficult to transfer
Requires “dense ties”
between participants
Long period of time
Most sustainable competitive
advantage

Organizational Learning
Develop tacit “know how” knowledge through:
Hansei events
Structured mentoring
Learning focused problem solving
On the job training strategies
Strategic and aligned training
Genchi Genbutsu

Deeper Meaning Of Hansei
1. Rooted in Japanese culture
2. Learn growing up (“Do the hansei”)
3. A mental outlook – a mindset:
“Without hansei it is impossible to have kaizen. In Japanese hansei, when you
do something wrong, at first you must feel really, really sad. Then you must
create a future plan to solve that problem and you must sincerely believe you
will never make this type of mistake again.”
- George Yamashina, President, Toyota Technical Center
“Only Toyota would have a structured approach to continuous worrying.”
- Jim Womack

Three Types of Hansei
Post-Mortem Reflection: Program summary learning event.
Major Program Event Reflection: Held at critical program
milestones to reflect on program status and learning
opportunities close to actual event.
Personal Reflection: Typically assigned by supervisor –
written response required.

Learning At The “GEMBA”
“Go and See” what is really happening –
grasp the situation for yourself
Ask questions – deep understanding for all
Show Respect
Coach and set clear expectations
Come back and do it again - CADENCE

The Product Development Learning Network
Supplier technology demonstrations
Competitor tear down analysis (mono-sukuri)
Foundation document checklists, matrices
System of standards
Program manager conferences
Resident Engineers
Learning focused problem solving and A3 reports

PDVSM
e
ea
q t
u
uCC
CT 





−






 +
=
12
22
REDUCE
VARIABILITY
0 100%Capacity
Lead
Time
L = λω
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
STANDARD PROCESS &
ARCHITECTURE
people
process tools
lean
product/process
development system PERFECT DRAWING PLAN
STANDARDIZATION

people
process tools
lean
product/process
development system
PDVSM
e
ea
q t
u
uCC
CT 





−






 +
=
12
22
REDUCE
VARIABILITY
0 100%Capacity
Lead
Time
L = λω
CAPACITY UTILIZATION
STANDARD PROCESS &
ARCHITECTURE
PERFECT DRAWING PLAN
STANDARDIZATION
PROCESS
Study/KENTOU (Front Loaded process to create the
right product)
Product immersion
Chief engineer concept paper
Set-based collaboration
EXECUTION (to deliver the product right)
Capacity/Capability
Enabling process logic
Create Flow/Synchronize cross functionally
Compatibility before completion/minimum feasible maturity
System of standards (fixed and flexible / C.I.)
RUNNING THE BUSINESS
BPR process
Cadence
Obeya system

Product Development as a Process
P/D system must deal with multiple projects
simultaneously
Even though many of the specific challenges are
unique, much of the work, tasks, and sequences of
tasks are common across projects
P/D system can be viewed as a knowledge work “job
shop” with multiple work centers and an integrated
network of queues
Adapted process management tools and principles
can exploit those similarities by reducing variability
without destroying creativity

Product Development as a Process
P/D is inherently highly variable
Tends to work in batches
Lots of expediting
Many capacity mismatches
Ever expanding engineering work
Create tremendous system congestion, queues and
long lead times

Immersion – Getting the “right” Product
Understanding Your Product’s Unique Value Potential
Sienna
Rav 4
Lexus

Immersion: Customer Defined Value
Understanding and aligning around the “right product”
Toyota Chief Engineer – Voice of the Customer
Deep understanding of customer defined value & unique value
potential of your product and context/environment
Concept paper:
Vision for what the product must be
12-15 pages in length
Quantitative & qualitative
Operationalizes customer desires & the CE vision
Use “catchball” process for aligning product goals
Voice of the customer throughout PD process
Establish clear aligned objectives for attribute requirements
Integrate individual attributes into a single great product
Experience, technical depth and drive to deliver
Ownership, accountability, and alignment across the enterprise

Cross-Functional Plan To Deliver In Study Phase
Prior to clay freeze (open multiple clay
models)
Cross functional teams align with
program on what and how
Align on trade offs
Analyze data and set specific
measurable goals and clear DRI
Hundreds of study drawings generated
Set based concurrent engineering
Design in countermeasures (based on
pre-program analysis)
Guided by checklists and standards
Cross-functional innovation
PRODUCTION
ENGINEERING
PRODUCT
ENGINEERING
PRODUCTION
EXTERIOR
DESIGNPROGRAM

Front Loaded Study/Kentou – tools and methods to increase
understanding, alignment and create the right product
Create mechanisms to align the
enterprise around delivering value
to the customer
Mono-sukuri – Brings enterprise
together to deliver value to the
customer
Kama-kuri – teardown link to attributes
“Set Based” Approaches
Utilize mechanisms to examine multiple
designs/solution sets

Build In Critical Metrics & Make Quality Visible
Body Engineering Efficiency Health Charts

Set-Based Concurrent Engineering
“Generating multiple potential solutions to
a design or engineering challenge and
working through a convergence process
to arrive at the best possible solution”
- Al Ward

Two Models of Design
Synthesize Analyze
Modify
ITERATIVE
MODEL
CONVERGENT
MODEL

Creating Process Flow In Execution Phase
Capacity/Capability
Linked
Create flexibility
Dynamic
Capability study
Enabling Process Logic
Clear quality of event criteria
Scalable
Synchronize cross-functionally
Built in C.I. mechanism
Create Flow
CbC (Compatibility before Completion)
MFM (Minimum Feasible Maturity)
Virtual / Physical
Standardization
Detailed Scheduling / Execution Discipline
Block timing = “traveling hopefully”

Create Flexible Capacity

Develop A Plan For Every Part
• Commodity Specific Development Timing
• Defines Engineering Needs and Deliverables By
Milestone To Enable Success – Clear Quality of
Event Criteria
• Highlights Any Disconnects Between Program
Timing, and Commodity Timing
• Consistent Program to Program
• Template for Engineers
PDP Overview – “Recipe for Success” Program level logic
• Enable platform/tophat
development strategy
• Scalable
• Clear quality of event criteria
• Cross functionally synchronized
POWERTRAIN DEVELOPMENT
BUSINESS CASE
P/T CONCEPT
POWERTRAIN MANUFACTURING READINESS
VEHICLE
CONCEPT
(BRAND
ALIGNMENT)
BUSINESS CASE
STYLING CONCEPTS
ENG. CONCEPTS
TGT. ALIGNMENT
SYS. SELECTION
UNDERBODY
DEVELOPMENT
VEH. PLATFORM
VERIFICATION
STYLING
REFINEMEN
T
UPPERBODY (TOPHAT)
DEVELOPMENT
TOOLING CONSTRUCTION
ASSY PLANT LAUNCH
TOOLING
READINES
S
VEH. BODY SYSTEM VERIFICATION

Compatibility Before Development Completion
Focus on Component Completeness Drives High Levels of Rework
Compatibility
Should be a subset of completeness, virtual
(CAD/CAD) checks done prior to CAD freeze for
robust CAE. Includes spatial interfaces
Completeness
Engineering thoroughness of given
design including design analysis for
failure mode avoidance and
verification
CONCLUSION
LPPD synchronizes the
processes of compatibility
and completeness
minimizing rework, lead time
and workload
Understanding MFM level is
critical
Lean PPD
Process
Traditional
Release Point
Part Detail
Verify Attributes
Resolve Package
Identify Parts
Program
Start
Synchronization
Sequencing value-added work to eliminate rework loops

Digital Pre-Assembly
Engineering Compatibility
DPA 0 DPA 1
• Clearances
• Positional
correctness
• Interface
DPA 2
• Design Concept
• Fits
• Operation
Grains / Gloss
DPA 3
• VSA Focus
studies agreed
by Design,
Program & VO
DPA 4
• Removal
• Access
• Adjustment
• Damageability
DPA 5
• Formability
• Assembly
Process
• Ergonomics
• Process Control
DPA 6
• Ingress/Egress
• Reach
• Vision
• Accessibility
• Spacial
Relationships

Functional Build
Die costs are largest single
fraction of body development
costs.
Over 20% of die cost is in re-
working of dies often exceeding
$20 million (Hancock and Hearst)
Much of that cost is to achieve
nominal dimensions and 10% -
20% of component dimensional
issues account for 80%-90% of the
rework costs (Harnett, Wahl,
Baron)
As launch approaches, tolerances
are “negotiated” and many
components shipped out of spec

Functional Build – System Focused Optimization
A F/B is an ongoing series of engineering build events that
replicate production processes relative to the part assembly
datums and locators used at each geometry station in order to
identify system compatibility issues early in the process
Purpose of the F/B Event is to optimize the nominal values and
tolerances of the Body in White during the stamping tooling
development
The intent is to achieve the Body in White requirements while
simultaneously driving down the time & cost required for die
tryout
These builds will not only validate product design but also
validate the assembly process, locators, and geo welds
The team will diagnose and determine root cause to resolve and
design, quality or process issues via DCIS sheets

Basic D&R Engineer Development Management Tools
Synchronization
Design Development Chart (Perfect Drawing Plan)
Compatibility
DPA Checklist
Completeness
Verification Matrix

Global Standards
Process Driven Product Design (PDPD) Standard Architecture
Perfect Drawing Plan (PDP)
“Today's standardization is the necessary foundation on which tomorrow's improvements will be
based… the best you know today… to be improved tomorrow. But if you think of standards as
confining, then progress stops”
- Henry Ford
Global Standard Press Equipment

Leverage Standards
Efficient
Design
Level
Best Practices
Quality History
Launch
Lessons Learned
Quality
Foundation Documents
Hood Design Rules
Global BOP/BOD
PDPD
MDS
Best Practices
Quality/Reliability
Cost
Benchmarking
Benchmark
CBP
TVM
Cost
Material Utilization
Extrusion Strategy
SCT Strategy
AEDL
Inputs
SDS
Attribute Performance
ES
DPA
VVT
Program Specific Attributes
PAL Strategy
Benchmarking
Best Practices
Inputs
Engineered
Template
Quality
Cost
FunctionMFG
50o
Φ
65o
Adult
Head
Child
Head
Upper leg
Lower leg
50o
Φ
65o
Adult
Head
Child
Head
Upper leg
Lower leg
OR
Upper Leg
max 6p
Lower Leg
max 6p
Child Head
max 12p
Adult Head
max 12p
50o
Φ
65o
Adult
Head
Child
Head
Upper leg
Lower leg
50o
Φ
65o
Adult
Head
Child
Head
Upper leg
Lower leg
OR
Upper Leg
max 6p
Lower Leg
max 6p
Child Head
max 12p
Adult Head
max 12p
Pedestrian Protection
Stamping FEA
Consistent Process & Design
Yields Predictable Results
MUD – Optimization
Common Assembly
Equipment
CAE Hood
Bending Results
New
Failur
e
Mode
1. Hood Inner Asy
from Station 10
4. Hood Palm Dimpler
(Optional)
3. Hood Strut or Grille
Reinf Rh / Lh (Optional)
2. Hood Hinge
Reinf Rh
Current Margin 4.0 mm
BIC Margin 3.0 mm
Hood Assembly – Standard BoD/BoP

Standards Taxonomy
CAE Templates
• Correlation to Testing
• Template/Simplify Analysis
- Functional Checklist
Foundation Documents
• SDS
• MDS
• DFMEA
• Health Chart
• PDP
GAP Architecture
• Hood
• Roof
• Doors
• BOD/BOP…
Design Rules (“Hows”)
• “Engineering Cookbook”
• Draft Angles
• Beam Depth
• Craftsmanship
• PDPD
Parameters/Design Spec
• Parameter Sheets
• Target Management Tool
L
e
s
s
o
n
s
L
e
a
r
n
e
d
Engineered CAD Templates
• Catia Templates
• Assoc. Design
• Checklist and Health Charts
1 Std Architecture
1 Global BOD/BOP
50 SDS
30 MDS
1 DFMEA
80 Design Rules
30 Parameter Sheets
2 CATIA
1 CAE
Hood Standard Architecture

Enabling Standards & Innovation
Enabling standards and strong foundational knowledge allow
innovation in complex systems
A challenging environment
Skilled, creative, motivated people working collaboratively. An
enabling process. And drive – often stressful
Effective design reviews
Response to complex and conflicting market/regulatory
demands (“mother of invention”). Front end challenge: design
leadership/pedpro/LSD/crash/aero & CO2 emissions
“Adjacent innovation” to change an industry…
Scallop BlanksProg Die vs. In-Die AutomationMagnesium Liftgate
Hydroforming
Hydro-Forming Process:
1. Rolled tube
2. Pre-bend part to approximate configuration
3. Pre-crush the bent tube with an internal
pressure in the tube of approximately 1000 psi
to control the deformed shape
4. Pressurize tube to achieve final geometry
5. Final Trim and Pierce 1,000 psi
10,000 psi
PSH Process
Laser Welding
BIW Topology
Optimization

Detailed Schedule (Fundoshi)

Running The Development Business
Enterprise alignment on objectives and priorities through
BPR Process
Provide context
The power of cadence – critical elements with discipline
Short management cycles and unambiguous, timely
decisions
Clear direction and accountability (DRI)
Simple visual tools and vital few critical metrics
OBEYA system
“Gentchi-Genbutsu”
Stretch

Running The Business
Tools To Align and Stretch Your Team
A3 / Business Planning Process
Business Planning Process
1. Global BPR Process
2. A3 Hierarchy / Clear Objectives
3. Master Schedules
4. B.P.R. Metrics
5. Global Leadership Week
6. All Hands Meeting
STRATEGIC PLAN A3 DOCUMENT MASTER SCHEDULE
B.P.R. METRICS

Running The Business
Obeya System for Continuous Improvement & Transparency
GPDS Creation / Organizational Process Improvement / Running The Business

Tools That Enable People & Processes
people
process tools
lean
product/process
development system

people
process tools
lean
product/process
development system
Tools That Enable People & Processes
TOOLS and TECHNOLOGY
Adapt Powerful Technology to Fit Your People and
Process to Fully Leverage Their Capabilities. Create a
Seamless Digital Value Stream
Align Your Organization Through Simple, Visual
Communication
Use Powerful Tools to Support a System of
Standardization

“The first rule of any technology used in a business is
that automation applied to an efficient operation will
magnify the efficiency.
The second is that automation applied to an inefficient
operation will magnify the inefficiency”
- Bill Gates

Adapt Technology to Fit Your People and Processes
Integrate technology seamlessly into existing technologies and
PD system before using it
Use technology to support lead development processes – not
vice versa
Technology should enhance people, not replace them
Do not look for silver bullets to enhance your PD performance –
there are no short cuts
“Right Sized” not “Super Sized”

The Digital Value Stream
Leverage Digital Technologies For Speed & Accuracy
“Communicating digitally” across the value stream and around the globe
Common language from studio to shop floor
Eliminate data conversion steps, errors & other waste
Same data globally
Enabler for global PD strategy and re-usability
Stage 3 : Parameter Sheet
200 AL - Parameters
Nom Tol (+/-) Max Min Nom Tol (+/-) Max Min
A BDY SD OTR 27846 MATL THK mm 0.79 0.84 0.70 Dent & Ding: BY#### 0.75 200al bs_test_1 length
B A PLR REINF 513A12 MATL THK mm 1.89 1.47 Safety: 1.40 200al bs_test_2 length
C A PLR INR 202A66 MATL THK mm 1.89 1.47 Safety: 1.40 200al bs_test_3 length
E Standard Design Gap mm 3.0 E Coat Drainage Squeak & Rattle 200al bs_test_5 length
F A Line Offset mm 1.5 0.0 Dynamic Seal 200al bs_test_6 length
G Tangent Offset (from radii on flange) mm 3.0 200al bs_test_7 length
H A66 - AB WELD FLAT mm 13.4 18.1 14.5 14.6 16.0 12.2 Welding: ES-4G13-1N261-AC 200al bs_test_8 length
J A66 - ANGLE OFF AB FLANGE deg 99.6 123.8 112.3 93.0 124.5 200al bs_test_9 length
K A66 - FIRST SWEEP OFF AB THEO LENGTH mm 11.9 18.3 21.0 13.6 6.5 200al bs_test_10 length
L A66 - INSIDE SURF FLAT LENGTH mm 15.6 N/A N/A 12.9 12.2 200al bs_test_11 length
M A66 - W/S WELD FLAT mm 15.4 18.9 14.5 13.3 16.8 12.2 Welding: ES-4G13-1N261-AC 200al bs_test_12 length
N A66 - ANGLE OFF W/S FLANGE deg 82.6 99.5 91.3 93.0 78.0 200al bs_test_13 length
Where
Used
Program Specific Engineering Target
Units
Baseline Engineering Guideline
S197
C170
D385
Description UnitsDim
Engineering Requirement
2
Engineering Requirement
1
Parameter ID
D219/D258
CD338
U387/388
CAD/Engineering Templates
Studio Stamping Feasibility
Analytical Prototypes
Virtual Crash Simulation
Virtual Manufacturing
Shop Floor Die Design
Viewing, Measurement, &
Markup
Lighting Simulation
From Beginning… to EndVIRTUAL ENGINEERING DIGITAL SHOP FLOOR
Digital Design Verification

“Communicating digitally” across the value stream and around the globe
Common language from studio to shop floor
Eliminate data conversion steps, errors & other waste
Same data globally
Enabler for global PD strategy and re-usability
The Digital Value Stream
Leverage Digital Technologies For Speed & Accuracy
Detailed Die Build and Machining Plan
High Speed Pattern Machining
Sand Print Casting
Production Tool Simulation
Digital Scan & Optical Forming Analysis
High Speed Machining / Machine
Intensive Die Manufacture
Images Source:
Verosoft Inc.
Shop Floor 2D Linear
Cutterpath Creation
From Beginning… to End

“Intelligent” Parametric CAD Tools
Historical
2D Sections Establish
75% Feasibility
3D Explicit Design
Late In Process
Discrete, Non-sync.
Work Streams
Verbal Engineering
Direction
• Fully Engineered Standardized 3D Process
• Enhanced Integrated Team 3D Process
• Verbal & Parametric Design Engineering Direction
Stage 3 : Parameter Sheet
200 AL - Parameters
2 D – Data Early
Data Available at FC3
CAD/Engineering Templates
• Early 3-D CAD enables early learning and product optimization while solution space is broad
• Templates insure standard construction and maintain critical parameters/attributes
CATIA V5 – Parametric Templates

Assembly Review Process
Workability DA
Digital Tools for Assembly Compatibility
Comply with standard BOP
Build countermeasures into process
Safety and Ergonomics
Capacity planning
Built from plant scans and product
design 3D data
Lean manufacturing principles

Medical Analogy - Standard Architecture Strategy
Autopsy
Ford
Prevention Genetic Engineering
8-D/Lesson Learned
Engineering
Disciplines
- FMEA
- Design Rules
- Specifications
- DPA
Engineering
Templates
Standard
Architecture
& Knowledge
Base
Engineering
• What could provide a step function improvement in Quality
• Standard Architecture

Standards: Standard Architecture

Standard Bill of Process
Optimal manufacturing process for:
Safety
Ergonomics
Cost (investment and variable)
Product Quality / Craftsmanship
Manufacturing Efficiency and Flexibility
Global, standard foundation for “lean manufacturing”
Provides standard footprint, tasks/sequence of tasks/locators etc.
drives equipment/process design and development guides sourcing
decisions
Must align with the Bill of Design/standard architecture
Key to platform strategy
Central to manufacturing DPA process
Built into digital system and checklists
Built in continuous improvement process

Create Standard Manufacturing Processes
Standard Process “Hows” enablers to meet Efficient Process
Process Driven Product Design (PDPD)

Standards: Craftsmanship
Every Panel has a Standard “Hows” for Crown, Sweeps and Radii

Checklists
Provide guidelines for new designs
Improve quality of products
Reduce variation in products
Assist in part commonization
Improve design for manufacturability

Quality Matrix Usage at Toyota
Quality matrices are carried over from the previous model
redesign
Intersections between column and row element items are looked
at in order of importance (based on column rankings)
All intersections should have an existing standard already in
place to deal with the implied relationship – otherwise, a new
standard must be agreed upon before continuing with the
development process

Toyota Type Component Quality Matrix
HEADER COLUMNS
Represent different phases of product development cycle
Each development issue (specific characteristic) is ranked in
importance by the number of quality characteristics (rows
below) that it significantly determines
Each column is indexed

Toyota Type Component Quality Matrix
SIDEBAR COLUMNS
Represent different aspects of
product quality and
manufacturability
Each specific point is somehow
affected by upstream
characteristics of the product
development process (listed in
the Header characteristics)
Each row is indexed

Make Quality Visible: Health Charts
Standards Criteria Status
Quality Panel
Milestone
Requirement
PS
PSC
PTCC
PTC
PA
FDJ
PD Development
Process
Early HC
Assessments
• Health Chart of performance/design rules to meet customer “WHAT” and “HOW”
• Evaluate Health Chart early in the program to evaluate countermeasure content

Standard Efficiency Metrics – BIW Dashboard

Completeness
Component Verification Matrix
Part Name
Attribute
Categories /
Linkage
Requirement
# / Detail
DVM # /
Detail
Acceptance
Criteria
Test Completion
Plan / Actual Date Test Results
Status per item:
Plan, Complete, Issue
Added: Cost &
weight
verification
Countermeasures
Functional
Responsibility

Compatibility
DPA Checklist
Part
Identification
List of
Interfacing
Parts
Assignee
Actual
Clearance
Judgments
Countermeasures
Required
Clearance
DPA 0
DPA 1
DPA 2
DPA 3
DPA 4
DPA 5
DPA 6

DCIS (Detailed Concern Information Sheet)
Provides Issue Description
Root Cause Identification
Correction Identification
Interim Corrections Needed
Permanent Corrections Needed
Tracks the Timing of Permanent
Correction
Validates Issue Closure
Issues are Binned Relative to:
Quality
Process
Design
Coordination needed

A3 Reports
“Force yourself to filter and refine your thoughts to fit on one
sheet of paper in such a way that management has all of their
(major) questions answered by reading a singe sheet of paper”
- the essence of lean
“Imagine how it would make you think if you wanted to give me
a report, but I said you must draw a single picture that
summarizes the report – don’t give me a written memo”
“It’s much more about discipline thinking than about any
particular A3 writing technique”
“Only very short A3 training available – maybe an hour or two –
A3 report writing skill is learned from your supervisor and a lot of
experience”

4 Types of A3 Stories
PROPOSAL
STORY
PROBLEM
SOLVING
STORY
STATUS
STORY
INFO
STORY
PROPOSAL TYPE
STORIES
REPORT TYPE STORIES
Problem Consciousness Current Situation

• The standard
• Current situation
• Discrepancy / Extent of the problem
Rationale for picking up the problem (Importance to business
activity, goals, or values of the organization)
PROBLEM SITUATION
Measurable description of what you want to change;
quantity, time
TARGET / GOAL
PROBLEM:
Potential Causes
Most likely direct cause:
Why?  Why?  Why?  Why?
Root Cause:
CAUSE ANALYSIS
(Resulting from Cause Analysis)
• Temporary Measure
• Long Term Countermeasure
COUNTERMEASURES
IMPLEMENTATION
• Unresolved issues and actions to address them
• How will you check effects?
• When will you check effects?
• How will you report finding?
• When will you report findings?
FOLLOW-UP
Answers the question – “What are we trying to do?”
THEME
PROBLEM SOLVING REPORT STORY EXAMPLE
AUTHOR: ________________________
DATE: ______________
WHAT WHERE WHO WHEN
Actions to
be taken
Responsible
person
Times,
dates

Commodity Business Plan
Five year business and technical
plan for critical commodities
Align commercial and technical
vision anticipate changes and
develop initiatives
Benchmark competitors, other
industry
Supplier strategy development
Manufacturing footprint
development
Value chain analysis

Lean Product/Process Development System
Lean product/process development is a
powerful system that is profoundly
different than traditional methods of
product development and a key to a truly
lean enterprise…

Beyond Original Toyota Research…
Ford
Goodyear
Northrop Grumman Ship Systems
Menlo Innovations
Scania
LEI focus in 2014

THANK YOU
people
process tools
lean
product/process
development system

Lean in new Product Development by Jim Morgan

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (7)

Similar to Lean in new Product Development by Jim Morgan

Similar to Lean in new Product Development by Jim Morgan (20)

More from Lean Enterprise Academy

More from Lean Enterprise Academy (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Lean in new Product Development by Jim Morgan