lean product development...lean product development product development efficiency is strategic and...

June 2008

Lean Product DevelopmentReal results from Lean Product Development & Teamcenter

1Copyright © 2008 Deloitte Consulting LLP. All rights reserved.

Topics of Discussion

• Case studies

• How and when to best apply Teamcenter tools to a lean process

• Looking beyond common approaches

• Common lean approaches

• What is lean product development

• Introduction and overview


Introductions

Brian is a Senior Manager and leads our product development practice for the East Coast/Midwest and has 12 years of consulting experience working with automotive, industrial products, high-tech and consumer product companies. He has led a number of lean product development and engineering effectiveness projects for a variety of clients. His other relevant experiences include the redesign and implementation of new product development processes and PDM tools (UGS – Teamcenter and Agile). Brian holds an MBA from Case Western Reserve University and a BS from Miami of Ohio. He has also been certified as a Black Belt by Deloitte's Enterprise Lean-Six Sigma practice. Brian is currently leading a Lean Engineering Transformation using TCe 2007 and TcSE at a heavy equipment manufacturer.

Brian MeekerSenior Manager


Deloitte’s Product Development ServicesDeloitte Consulting offers 360º services to address our clients’ strategic and operational challenges in product development.Key Issues Addressed:

• How do I enable “virtual”product development –potentially across company lines?

• How do I link the sales and customer service functions to product development?

• How do I effectively integrate regulatory compliance into the overall product innovation strategy?

• How do I enable the product development and lifecycle management processes with technology?

• How do I leverage and share all of my product data throughout the development effort?

• How do I efficiently and effectively manage product changes?

• How do I manage the stage-gate/spiral product development process?

• How do I balance core and contingent R&D strategies to achieve a flexible growth strategy?

• How do I get the most out of my current product and technology portfolio?

• How do I reduce product line complexity while increasing customer satisfaction and profit margins?

• How do I get the most out of my engineering and product development resources?

• How do I quickly and cost effectively ramp production of new products and manage change throughout a product’s lifecycle?

• How do I efficiently manage complex, collaborative product development programs?



• Case studies







Translation of Lean Principles to Product Development

Customer Focus

Pull / Flow

First-Pass Success

Standard Work / Work Balancing

Demand Smoothing

VOC Demand-driven manufacturing

VOC QFD Requirements prioritization

Demand forecasting / shaping Capacity planning Time-fencing

Product & technology roadmaps Portfolio planning Resource planning

Single piece flow Replenishment signals Bottleneck management and

material flow optimization Work linkage & synchronization Cellular manufacturing Takt and throughput analysis

Single project flow Critical path analysis Task linkage and synchronization Integrated cross functional

product teams Throughput / velocity

improvement

High WIP levels Reduced velocity Lack of priorities Expediting Excessive hand-offs

Over investment in low-value areas

Lack of customer collaboration

Erratic work spikes Expediting and

overtime

Inconsistent work practices

Work “starving” or “queuing”

Rework Non-conformance Lack of process

capability

Lean Concepts Common Issues Manufacturing Solutions Engineering / NPI Solutions

Standard work instructions Works standards Line / takt balancing

Error proofing Process capability analysis Process control Root cause and corrective action

Standard deliverable templates Reuse of designs and

specifications Resource load planning

Error proofing Root cause analysis Engineering churn metrics

There are strong parallels between manufacturing lean and lean applied to product development


Lean Promotes Innovation; Decreases Time to Market

Lean Product Development in ActionLack of Knowledge Promotes Average Results

18 month : Concept to Launch

9 month : Concept to Launch

CADSCODS

CODSCODS

CVSPADR

CODSCADS

CADS

PADRCADSPADR

TSOMACPAC

CODSCODSCODSCODS

CADS

CADS

CADS

TSO

4

EPDMEPDMEPDM

EPDMPro EPro

Interlink

EPDM

EPDM

EPDM

EPDMEPDMEPDM

EPDM

EPDM

MACPAC

MACPAC

Orga

niza

tiona

l Informational

Physical

Policy

Actual workflow is analyzed via work visualization tools

Reconfiguration in multiple dimensions using lean and Six Sigma techniques

New work configuration is modeled and expressed as new process


Lean Product DevelopmentCompanies often have fundamentally sound product development processes, yet operational problems regularly compromise product launches

Late engineering changes Untimely development decisions Design trades and testing out of phase with

development schedule Supplier development schedule and quality problems Delayed product launches Extensive finished goods rework Unanticipated component failures Frequent recalls; often several on same model Unacceptable warranty costs Customer safety concerns Number of configurations

Inadequate forecasting of targets Lack of early consensus on program strategy and

alignment of objectives Overly optimistic roadmaps Frequent, uncoordinated product changes from product

development executives Poor process discipline Cultural bias against raising issues and making timing

adjustments

Observed product development problems Cited Root Causes

Late to market launches Higher than expected product costs Higher than expected development cost

Symptoms of Inefficient Engineering Processes

A lack of discipline to comply with standard product development processes is often the leading cause of product development related business failures



• Case studies







Searching for

Information

Rework

Approval Wait Time

Meetings & Conference

CallsProject Work ~35%

Other

Lean Approach #1 – Eliminate Non-Productive Time

In our experience, 50% to 60% of development time on a project can be non-productive:

– Inadequate access to the correct data

– Too many versions of the save data and no master record or owner

– Poor communication of information within the development process

– Engineers waiting for approval to start work on the next series of activities

– Endless unstructured standing meetings where no decisions are made and/or work progress made

“Employees believe only two days per week is value-added time on projects”

Source: Various DC client projects


Lean Approach #2 – Rationalize the Systems

• There are multiple systems performing the same functions

• There are multiple sources of master data

• Engineers are recreating designs because they cannot find previous/similar designs

• Due to the above issues, many companies have experienced…

– Limited design reuse

– Poor quality from bad designs

– Scrap due to lack of coordination around engineering changes

– Ordering wrong materials

– High number of warranty claims due to poor component and sub-system integration

Example Fortune 500 Engineering Application

Architecture

- 1 -

Preliminary and Confidential

Product Innovation and Lifecycle Management

QuickSpec

OMNI

Voyager

WorkBench

TECH INFOWeb

SAP R37b

DSPS

APPIX

RAFT

PRIME

BAT

MDA

PCAT

GPG

PIANO

RAS

CES

Contract

YMM3

MAXCIM

CIMbridgeSHOP Floor

PM

PM/RASADM

SAP (s)

MRPManMan

SHOP Floor

CIMS

GEO OMARS

OMAR WWP

MPDS

EDB

FedEx/Email CAD/CAE

Files

CAD/CAECAD/CAE

Aspect

ECN’s

EPI

PricingSpreadsheets

AsAs--Is Engineering ArchitectureIs Engineering Architecture

Fulfillment

Legacy Quote/Order, Fulfillment

Legacy Product Reference

Services Reference

6-3 Aliasor

6-3

6-3 alias #

MM

EBOM

Eng Change

MM, BOM

Part Number

Doc. NumberPH

PRICING

MM

Eng Change

Doc’s/Files

Data/Doc’s/Files

MM Purch. Components

MM PurchComponents

PIRS

Insync

NPG

Prod. Doc’s

DescriptiveData

DescriptiveAttributes

Supplier A

Supplier B

Seibol

IA Cat

Configurator

(Trilogy) Active Answers

BOM

Prod.Bulletin

Q bASE

Cicvcat

KE’s

ConfigRules

Explorer1/2/3/4, FP

RAS Outbounds50+ feeds

KMATS

KMATS

Change #

Views

Spec’s

PPP Table

ECODoc

Bom_Edit

CN TrackerBom_ Merge

Bom_Compare/Print

Easel

Doc_EDT

Mfg.

Outsourced Engineering

- Manual Intervention Required

JAZ


Typical approach is to:

1. Map out the process flow via a process flow diagram

2. Conduct value stream analysis to identify and eliminate wait time, approval time, and other non-value added activities

• Traditional process mapping masks the actual behavior of the process

• Even traditional value stream mapping doesn’t uncover the true process behavior

Lean Approach # 3 – Lean out the Process

15Proprietary and Confidential

Enterprise Operations Excellence

To-Be Logical Process Map: ECR/ECO Process

Cha

nge

Boa

rdE

ngin

eer

EC

O Im

plem

ente

rS

uppl

ier/P

lant

the

mak

e ch

ange

d pa

rtP

lant

(rai

sing

EC

Ran

d im

plem

entin

gch

ange

) ECR is written bythe manufacturingengineer/quality

technician

Drawings areadjusted, changesare prototyped, inPRO-E and ECRis submitted toChange Board

Request to changemodel is made

ECR is reviewed,approved andcategorized

Engineer checksdrawings and

takes categorizedECRs to make a

single ECO

Handoff to theresponsible ECO

Implementer beginthe implementation

process

Begin determiningrequirements and

potential effectivitydates for

implement theECO

Reply with datenew part/change

to part can bemade by

Set effectivity dateand distribute ECO

Get appropriateapprovals Release ECO



• Case studies







Lean Product DevelopmentProduct development efficiency is strategic and valuable – it enhances overall competitiveness as well as product economics

A paradigm shift is required for an accurate assessment of product design and development process efficiency

• Product development efficiency fundamentals– Improved product development efficiency can shorten

vehicle development cycle time and reduce development costs…

– … which enables increases in the vehicle development rate and reduces the unit volumes necessary for vehicle level profitability

– … which further enables market share gains without additional engineering resources

Vehi

cle

Dev

elop

men

t Eve

nts

Years91 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12

Major Model

Major Model

Major Model

Major Model

Major Model

Major Model

Minor

Minor Model

Minor Model

Minor Model

Minor Model

Annual Annual

Annual

Annual

Annual

Minor

Major Model

Major Model

Major Model

Minor Minor

Minor

Major Model

Major Model

AnnualMinor

Vehicle Intro Rate

Efficient Engineering Vehicle Intro

Rate

Corporate vehicle development plan

(Notional)

• Traditional measures of Lean Product Development do not provide sufficient insight, focusing mostly on

– Identification of activities performed by the engineers

– Categorization of tasks into core and non-core activities

– Breakdown of the time spent by engineering for various tasks

(Notional)


9Copyright © 2008 Deloitte Development LLC. All rights reserved.

Searching for

Information

Rework

Approval Wait Time

Meetings & Conference

CallsProject Work ~35%

Other

Lean Approach #1 – Eliminate Non-Productive Time

In our experience, 50% to 60% of development time on a project can be non-productive:

– Inadequate access to the correct data

– Too many versions of the save data and no master record or owner

– Poor communication of information within the development process

– Engineers waiting for approval to start work on the next series of activities

– Endless unstructured standing meetings where no decisions are made and/or work progress made

“Employees believe only two days per week is value-added time on projects”

Source: Various DC client projects

Lean Product Development

Administrative burden

• Excessive administrative burden to due to awkward organizational arrangements, mis-aligned priorities and metrics, and communication difficulties.

• These are often referred to as “non-core” activities

Rework and change

• Excessive rework and change caused by design and test process execution failures, including failure to ensure cross-functional integration in the design process.

• While rework and change often are considered “core” activity, they represents “slippage” in core processes which can be minimized

(Notional)Typical Design & Development Progress

Cum

ulat

ive

Rel

ease

s an

d R

evis

ions

SOP

Changes(actual)

Contract

Initial Releases(planned

and actual)

Changesto complete

and integrate design 2X to 3X

initial releases

Post-SOP changes to support production

Year 1 Year 2

Product development inefficiency is typically caused by two broad categories of process failure

- 1 -



QuickSpec

OMNI

Voyager

WorkBench

TECH INFOWeb

SAP R37b

DSPS

APPIX

RAFT

PRIME

BAT

MDA

PCAT

GPG

PIANO

RAS

CES

Contract

YMM3

MAXCIM

CIMbridgeSHOP Floor

PM

PM/RASADM

SAP (s)

MRPManMan

SHOP Floor

CIMS

GEO OMARS

OMARWWP

MPDS

EDB

FedEx/Email CAD/CAE

Files

CAD/CAECAD/CAE

Aspect

ECN’s

EPI

PricingSpreadsheets


Fulfillment



Services Reference

6-3 Aliasor

6-3

6-3 alias #

MM

EBOM

Eng Change

MM, BOM

Part Number

Doc. NumberPH

PRICING

MM

Eng Change

Doc’s/Files

Data/Doc’s/Files


MM PurchComponents

PIRS

Insync

NPG

Prod. Doc’s

DescriptiveData


Supplier A

Supplier B

Seibol

IA Cat

Configurator


BOM

Prod.Bulletin

Q bASE

Cicvcat

KE’s

ConfigRules

Explorer1/2/3/4, FP


KMATS

KMATS

Change #

Views

Spec’s

PPP Table

ECODoc

Bom_Edit


Bom_Compare/Print

Easel

Doc_EDT

Mfg.



JAZ

- 1 -



QuickSpec

OMNI

Voyager

WorkBench

TECH INFOWeb

SAP R37b

DSPS

APPIX

RAFT

PRIME

BAT

MDA

PCAT

GPG

PIANO

RAS

CES

Contract

YMM3

MAXCIM

CIMbridgeSHOP Floor

PM

PM/RASADM

SAP (s)

MRPManMan

SHOP Floor

CIMS

GEO OMARS

OMARWWP

MPDS

EDB

FedEx/Email CAD/CAE

Files

CAD/CAECAD/CAE

Aspect

ECN’s

EPI

PricingSpreadsheets


Fulfillment



Services Reference

6-3 Aliasor

6-3

6-3 alias #

MM

EBOM

Eng Change

MM, BOM

Part Number

Doc. NumberPH

PRICING

MM

Eng Change

Doc’s/Files

Data/Doc’s/Files


MM PurchComponents

PIRS

Insync

NPG

Prod. Doc’s

DescriptiveData


Supplier A

Supplier B

Seibol

IA Cat

Configurator


BOM

Prod.Bulletin

Q bASE

Cicvcat

KE’s

ConfigRules

Explorer1/2/3/4, FP


KMATS

KMATS

Change #

Views

Spec’s

PPP Table

ECODoc

Bom_Edit


Bom_Compare/Print

Easel

Doc_EDT

Mfg.



JAZ

30-40%

60-70%

Total Improvement Opportunity


Lean Product DevelopmentSlippage can be understood, measured, and reduced through practical improvements to planning, design processes, and the appropriate use of engineering tools

Managing slippage

• Typically, slippage in core product development processes is caused by limitations in:

– Management and planning

– Design processes and disciplines

– Design tools and systems

• Chief among these causes are unexpected content growth and poorly coordinated or late design changes

• Slippage can often be managed via adjustments to existing processes and systems coupled with leadership recognition of it as a major competitive issue

Product development resources

• Design resource consumption patterns can also revealslippage (and quality risks) as designs are reworked to completion

(Notional)

(Notional)

Engi

neer

ing

Labo

r hou

rs

SOPContract

Year 1 Year 2

SOP+90

Cum

ulat

ive

Rel

ease

s an

d R

evis

ions

SOP

Changes(actual)

SOP+90Contract

Initial Releases(planned

and actual)

Year 1 Year 2

Manageable Slippage

Irreducible Change

Typical Design & Development Progress

Typical Engineering Staffing


Lean Product DevelopmentOur experience in measuring product development efficiency indicates that release and design resource level data conforms to the typical patterns

Managing slippage

• The number of initial releases is consistently dwarfed by subsequent changes and re-releases

Product development resources

• Engineering resource level records often indicate that the majority of engineering effort is affiliated with re-work and change of initial releases and also often reappears as a concentration of effort just prior to start of production

Release Data – New Vehicle Release

Time - Development Cycle7/063/0611/057/053/0511/04 7/063/0611/057/053/0511/04

500

0

1000

1500

2000

2500

300035004000

4500

5000

500

0

1000

1500

2000

2500

300035004000

4500

5000

Initial ReleasesRe-releases

Cum

ulat

ive

Rel

ease

s

Re-releases are 5.1 times initial releases

Res

ourc

e Le

vels

20

0

40

60

80

100

120

140160

180

200

20

0

40

60

80

100

120

140160

180

200

Time - Development Cycle

Development Resources

7/063/0611/057/053/0511/04 7/063/0611/057/053/0511/04

“Double-hump” conforms to expected pattern

Client Example

Client Example


Data Analysis – Change History Analysis

Actual hours beyond Gate 5

70,047

Hours spent on changes

28,019

Transfer rate $/Hr $95/Hour

Potential opportunity by reducing churn beyond Gate 5

$2.66 M

Additional opportunity by reducing churn to acceptable threshold limits

$2.45 M

Estimated total potential benefits

$5.11 M

The value per program of eliminating rework and change can be staggering

30% Changes (Best In Class)

48-50% Changes (Average)

Gate3 Gate4 Gate5 Gate6

Change History

Cum

. Num

ber o

f Cha

nges

$2.66 M

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

$2.45 MClient Example


EngineTeam

Core Software PlatformLead

Requirements Design Team

CoreHardware

Technical Lead

CoreHardwareExpert1

CoreHardwareExpert2Core

Hardware Expert3

Technical Writer

Lead SoftwareArchitect

TechnicalSoftware Lead

PurchasingGroup

CoreHardware

CoreSoftwareExpert1

CoreSoftwareExpert2

CoreSoftwareExpert3 Delphi

VISIOWORD

EXCELReader

MentorHLynx

VISIO

WORD

EXCEL

Reader

Mentor

HLynx

VISIO

WORD

EXCEL

Reader

Mentor

HLynx

VISIO

WORD

project

CC

CW

FAST

TPU

DIAB

project

CCCW

FAST

TPUDIAB

CC

CW

FAST

TPU

DIAB

CCCW

FASTTPU

DIAB

CCCW

FASTTPU

DIAB

VISIOWORDEXCEL

ReaderMentor

HLynx

VISIOWORDReader

VISIO

WORDReader

VISIO

WORD

Reader

VISIOWORD

Reader

VISIOWORD

Reader

VISIO

WORD

Reader

project

VISIO WORDReaderproject

PVA

ePROJPPT

EXCEL

SystemCoordinator

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

EMAIL

Cycle TimeEffort Time

Days200400 01000 600800

Paper Information FlowIntra-site Physical Part FlowInter-site Physical Part FlowDenotes site changeDenotes building change

Electronic Information FlowPaper Information FlowIntra-site Physical Part FlowInter-site Physical Part FlowDenotes site changeDenotes building change

Electronic Information Flow

PeoriaBldg. AC

SupplierLocation

Value Stream Analysis is also useful when applied to identify the complexity and inefficiencies of processes. In this example we revealed the complexities experienced in a requirements management process

Value Stream Analysis: Sample - Requirements Development

Scope• Receive requirements from Core Engines; Create

“build to spec” documentation and work with supplier to deliver hardware.

• Flexibility is built into the hardware design to accommodate uncertain design changes. Once in production, flexibility is removed through cost-cutting exercises requiring added engineering time

• Initial requirements were provided 6 months behind schedule, leaving approximately 95% of all activities to be performed after the planned requirements freeze date

• Time constraints prevent late changes from being incorporated into component design; forcing alternate design changes to other components or in core engine designs

• Core Engineers were unable to provide detailed requirements upfront because immediate needs and issues demanded attention – “firefighting mentality”

Findings

Total Systems Employed:Total Information Hand-offs:Effort Time:Cycle Time:

16379

165 days414 days

Statistics


Days200400 01000 600800

Paper Information FlowIntra-site Physical Part FlowInter-site Physical Part FlowDenotes site changeDenotes building change

Electronic Information Flow

L2 After Treatment



Days200400 01000 600800

EngineTeam

Core SW

PlatformLead

Requirements Design Team

Core HWTechnical Lead

Core HW Expert1

Core HW Expert2

Core HW Expert3

Technical Writer

Lead SoftwareArchitect

TechnicalSoftware Lead

PurchasingGroup

CoreHardware

Core SWExpert1

Core SW Expert2

Core SWExpert3

OEM

SystemCoordinator

Impact to Process Complexity – After Treatment ExampleReductions to operational complexity and cost are easily visualized and quantified

As-Is Requirements Mgt. Process To-Be Engineering Change Request Process

Reconfiguration Impacts: Organizational hand-offs reduced by 80% 379 to 79 Cycle time reduction of approximately 55% from 414 days to 185 days Total effort time is reduced by 32% from 165 days to 112 days

Reconfiguration Design Involved: Workflow changes Policy changes Organizational alignment Physical work location

Core HWTech Lead

Rqmt DesignTeam

ECM Design Team

Tech Writer

Core HWExpert 1

Core HW Expert 2

Core HW Expert 3

Core SW Expert 1Core

SW Expert 2

Core SWExpert 3

ECM Tech Lead

SystemCoord.

Lead Architect

Core Engine Team

ECM PlatformLead

Purchasing Group

Core HW Group

Core SW Group

OEMSupplier


Pull Based Customer Features /

Requirements

Lean Product Roadmaps

Co-Located Cross

Functional Cells

Integrated and Synchronized

Scheduling

Error-Proofing“Templates to reduce errors”

Lean Fundamentals

Deloitte Maturity Model based on client engagements

We utilized a capability maturity model to convey and assess the lean attributes present in new product introduction processes and the gaps that must be addressed to improve Lean performance

Standardized templates and best-in-class examplesare electronically available to reduce time spent on search, learning, definition and error correction

Lead customers are regular team members who help define, prioritize, and freeze requirements. Changes require business case justification

Product roadmaps sequenced for maximum re-use, strict deadlines, strategic priorities, capacity planning needs

Collocation of team resources are arranged to improve the information flow and execution of work

Integrated project plan to synchronize process flow and execution. Utilize regular critical path re-planning to prioritize capacity

Some standardized templates defined for critical deliverables. Accessed via static intranet. Limited capture and sharing of best practices

Sales/Marketing conduct focused groups to gather / prioritize features and requirements. Engineering responsible for freezing requirements

Product roadmaps are defined as a planning mechanism to jump-start technical development and set basis for future program direction

Cross functional teams (business, engineering and technical) are co-located

Integrated project plans across all functions that is regularly updatedbut no critical path analysis or re-planning

Clear definition of roles but limited standard templates. Tribal knowledge is typical

Internal engineering defines features and requirements. Lack of clarity/priority drives “over” engineering of requirements

Product roadmaps not linked to business strategy. No linkage between technology and product roadmaps

Engineering functions reside in different locationsbut collaborate via cross functional team meetings

Many non-integrated functional project plans. No single project manager driving the execution of the program

Basic

Intermediate

Best-in-Class

Lean Product Development Assessment

Current State Desired State



• Case studies







Lean Attributes Applied to Large Electronics Manufacturer

The framework illustrates that each element is part of an integrated solution that can be deployed in logical groupings.

Establish a Governance Structure

Establish a Requirements Management Process for Definition and Prioritization of Activities

Establish Common Processes and Controls

Req

uire

men

ts

Def

initi

on

Teamcenter Systems Engineering

Common Processes & Engineering Change Control in Teamcenter Engineering

Req

uire

men

t D

ecom

posi

tion

&

Trac

eabi

lity

Req

uire

men

ts

Prio

ritiz

atio

n

Product & Technology Roadmap

Integrated Portfolio ManagementStage-Gate Process

Project Management (including planning and control)



• Case studies







Selected Case Studies

– Cycle time to approve a schedule change decreased from up to 60 days to less than 3 days

– Number of people required to make a schedule change decision is reduced from at least 18 to 4-6 resources

– Reduction in headcount by 106, translating to a reduction of $10.6 million in labor costs during the first year

Designed work re-configuration at the process execution level of design and development. This optimized performance across the critical value stream activities of the design and development process

CASE STUDY 3 -

Aerospace Company

– Additional capacity gain of 144 FTE’s or $27.7M annually across top tier programs

– Improved visibility into issue identification, escalation, and resolution process

– Reduction of non-value added time through implementation of standard processes, templates, common repositories and communication plans

Developed solutions for reduction of non-value added activities with regard to requirement management and engineering change control that consume engineering time and increase cost and cycle time. Identified improvement opportunities related to process, policy, organizational alignment, and information flow

CASE STUDY 4 -

Construction Equipment Manufacturer

– $2.5M or 298 man-months per full vehicle program from reduction in slippage

– 3.5% or $500K reduction of manpower cost towards a new vehicle program through improved release and change management process

Develop the metrics, processes and tools that provide visibility into engineering efficiency and identify root causes of engineering efficiency. The focus was on reduction of non-core activities which consumed engineering time and resulted in higher product development costs

CASE STUDY 1 -

Global Automotive OEM

– Reduction of 30,000 labor hours that could be redirected to value creating activities

– Reduced effort time for engineering change notice through elimination of duplicate data entry and routing steps

Deployed lean business solutions for product design and development concurrent with enabling technology to reduce work complexity, improve information flow and management and increase process integration

CASE STUDY 2 -

Construction Equipment Manufacturer

Company Objectives Benefits

About Deloitte

Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, a Swiss Verein, its member firms and their respective subsidiaries and affiliates. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu is an organization of member firms around the world devoted to excellence in providing professional services and advice, focused on client service through a global strategy executed locally in nearly 150 countries. With access to the deep intellectual capital of approximately 135,000 people worldwide, Deloitte delivers services in four professional areas, audit, tax, consulting and financial advisory services, and serves more than one-half of the world’s largest companies, as well as large national enterprises, public institutions, locally important clients, and successful, fast-growing global growth companies. Services are not provided by the Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Verein and, for regulatory and other reasons, certain member firms do not provide services in all four professional areas.

As a Swiss Verein (association), neither Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu nor any of its member firms has any liability for each other’s acts or omissions. Each of the member firms is a separate and independent legal entity operating under the names “Deloitte”, “Deloitte & Touche”, “Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu” or other related names.

In the United States, Deloitte & Touche USA LLP is the U.S. member firm of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu and services are provided by the subsidiaries of Deloitte & Touche USA LLP (Deloitte & Touche LLP, Deloitte Consulting LLP, Deloitte Financial Advisory Services LLP, Deloitte Tax LLP, and their subsidiaries), and not by Deloitte & Touche USA LLP. The subsidiaries of the U.S. member firm are among the nation’s leading professional services firms, providing audit, tax, consulting, and financial advisory services through nearly 40,000 people in more than 90 cities. Known as employers of choice for innovative human resources programs, they are dedicated to helping their clients and their people excel. For more information, please visit the U.S. member firm’s Web site at www.deloitte.com

Copyright © 2006 Deloitte Development LLC. All rights reserved.

www.deloitte.com

lean product development...lean product development product development efficiency is strategic and...

Documents