Christopher Haller Development/Commercialization Program and Portfolio Management

1. Lean Product Development Practices – Applying Lean Principals and Project Management Tools to New Product Commercialization Christopher Haller • Development/Commercialization Program and Portfolio Management

2. Agenda • A. Goal of Presentation • B. Presenter Background • C. Traditional Product Development – Guild Method or “All Hands on Deck” Style • D. Lean Product Development • E. Knowledge Based Set Design in Action (Examples) • F. Conclusions / Recommendations

3. A. Goal of Presentation • Discuss the general concept and benefits of Lean Product Development (LPD) focusing on four areas: • Principals of Design • System Thinking • Knowledge Sharing • Cross functional teams • Discuss how Project Management Techniques and Lean Product Development can be used together • Provide examples in multiple industries around lean product development • Show how LPD can be applied to defining long term product development roadmaps/product portfolios

4. B. Presenter Background • Joined Kodak in 1985 in the Process Development area • Worked in Thin Film Coating group in both process development and the Film Design for Manufacturability areas • Sat on initial teams that assembled the stage/gate processes for both research & development and product commercialization in the early ‘90’s • Ran several pilot programs for stage/gate R&D in the mid ‘90’s • Moved into Film R&D in the late 90’s –formulation and technical project leader • Became a primary Program/Project Manager in the mid 00’s • Portfolio Manager assembling Technology Roadmaps for film product line since mid 00’s • Six Sigma Black Belt and PMP certified

5. C. Classic Product Development/Commercialization • Point based design – single solution focused • Loop backs (rework) very prevalent • Resources and budget typically grows as project progresses and moves to large (manufacturing) scale • Teams become cross functional as development process matures • Technology introduction and selection often driven by schedule – not driven by data/knowledge • Often programs are large in scale – time to marketlong, cost is high and much DIP (Design in Process) • Knowledge is not shared or reused effectively

6. C. Classic Product Development/CommercializationGuild Method • Old Time Inventor Style – single individual or group focused • Focused on functional style management • Product segments developed in silos and thrown over the fence: • Development time long, much waste during the process due to poor communication between product development chain, customer doesn’t always get what they want…. • Most common style at small companies, success very dependent on having right people at each juncture of the process

7. C. Classic Product Development/Commercialization“All Hands on Deck” NPD Style • “All hands on deck approach” – ala the program to land a man on the Moon by the end of the 1960s – either a crisis stopgap or “the BIG named program” • Larger companies -> assign the majority of the technical and business resources to a key program • Focused on a Projectized Organizational structure but usually without a strong PMO focus (many times co-run by technical or business leaders) • Technical leader and technologist often minimize importance of PM and often PM relegated to schedules and action item lists • Development time is short, development cost and waste is high in order to meet a short timeline • Many times these projects get out of control if not well managed (scope and budget creep)…

8. D. Lean Product Development Origins of Lean Product Development • Much of Lean Product Development born out of the US Air Force fighter/bomber development process used in World War 2 (this methodology allowed us to play catch-up to a technologically superior enemy) • Toyota and other Japanese manufacturers given the “manual” during the rebuilding of Japan in the late 40’s and 50’s • Japanese companies realized that they couldn’t compete with huge assembly line manufacturers using the classic guild style methodologies for either manufacturing or product development • Japanese borrowed many ideas that were part of the US Air Force process and honed them to bring us to where “lean product development” is today

9. D. Lean Product Development Lean Manufacturing: • Inventory reduction • Increased productivity • Reduction in scrap and rework • Reduce lead time from order entry to delivery of product from weeks to days • Reduce changeover from hours to minutes • Build to Order vs. Build Forecast Lean Product Development: • Reduced DIP (Development in Progress) • Increased productivity & leveraging of knowledge • Reduced loops backs and false starts • Reduced development cycle time • Increase flexibility to navigate changing marketplace • Products that meet customer expectations at maximum valueto company

10. D. Lean Product Development – Tangible Benefits Market Research: • Development Cycle Times reduced by 30% 1 • Resource utilization improved by 70% 1 • New product performance measures improved by 33% 1 • Product Quality improved by testing early in development cycle by 38% 2 • Market share increased from 6% to 25% in one year 2 • Toyota Prius – development cycle time reduced by 38% 3 Kodak Film Development example: • Reduced development cycle time by 50% • Improved physical properties over 10x in a 3 year time period • Maintained a payback of 4x development cost over life of development (>100 M$ over a 10 year period) • Reduced variability in multiple areas over the life of the product 1 Shooting the Rapids: Managing Product Devleopment in Turbulent Environments, Marco Iansiti, California Management Review Fall 1995 2 Product Development Practices that Work: How Internet Companies Build Software, Alan MacCormack, MIT Sloan Management Review Winter 2001 3 “The Toyota Way,” Jeffrey K Liker [Tata McGraw Hill, 2004]

11. D. Lean Product Development • Lean Manufacturing:1Going Lean Stephen A. Ruffa (AMACOM 2008)2 http://leanmanufacturingtools.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/house-of-lean1.jpg

12. D. Lean Product Development • Lean Product Development: • Set Based Flexible Design • Integration Focused Leadership • Dynamic Cross Functional Teams • Knowledge Sharing/ Continuous Learning Process Traditional Product Development – back end loaded Lean Product Development – Load Level Flow Essentially equivalent to flow -> fewer projects at a time but load leveled R&D (work is not back end loaded) – also projects have reduced cycle time & DIP

13. D. Lean Product Development – Target Examples • Automotive – Toyota Prius10 • Automotive – Harley Davidson 8 • Pharmaceutical – Ely Lilly Chorus unit 1 • Software – Microsoft Internet Explorer 3.0 6 • Computer Hardware – NEC SX-2 Project 7 • Computer Hardware – SGI Challenge Project 7 • Photographic Materials – EK Abrasion Improvement Project • Photographic Materials – EK Technical Roadmap Development

14. D. Lean Product Development – Set Based Flexible Design • Use of multiple options throughout the research/development process to arrive at the optimum answer or series of answers • Options are arrived at through brainstorming and “try-storming” • Options are assessed and eliminated based on data/observations • Attempt to drive options to fast failure to define tradeoff curves • Options are not only assessed in a controlled experimentation mode but also in integrating or benchmark experiments/events • Multiple options may even be carried through part of commercialization • Set based design should avoid loop backs late in the design process or during costly parts of commercialization

15. D. Lean Product Development – Set Based Design Examples • [NEC] Many concept possibilities discussed and modeled, most promising were investigated at the bench scale. Close to the project end, one technical option was chosen and the design was “frozen” at this point • [NEC] & [SGI] Use a flexible model of product development where many options are explored and carried through process – this fluid design process allows to react to changing specifications and “surprises” throughout the development process • [Toyota] Design groups develop sets of solutions in parallel and gradually narrow these sets based on additional information and experiments. By focusing on convergence of the options rather than tweaking one solution – Toyota reduces back tracking in the process. • [Toyota] In order to maintain flexibility, design groups converge to a final solution as close to market introduction as possible. • [Microsoft] Uses an evolutionary approach to design that is flexible and has an architecture that is modular and scale-able. • [Eli Lilly] Chorus uses experiments to drive to fast failure to reduce the field of options and also vet other options efficiently

16. D. Lean Product Development – Integration/System Design Leadership • Team leadership is driven from a system viewpoint – not at an individual technology viewpoint • Flexible development requires joint evolution of the system (concept & requirements) and technology/detailed design • Use of periodic integration or convergence events to examine both individual and system performance • Team leader must facilitate integration approach along with monitoring customer/sponsor requirements, marketplace conditions and schedule • Integration events are key for the technology selection process and moving the project forward. Management reviews (gates) will usually follow successful integration events • Phase/Gate system can still be used but gate reviews are more informational in nature (schedule is driven by integration events) • Leadership style is dynamic and focused on knowledge based approach

17. D. Lean Product Development – Integration/Convergence The Lean Machine, Dantar P. Oosterwal (AMACOM 2010)

18. D. Lean Product Development – Integration/System Design Examples • [NEC/SGI] Shows a strong focus on exploring interactions between concept decisions and design details. The interactions are explored through prototype cycles (integration events). • [NEC] The integration group was formed with a responsibility to lead both concept development and implementation over several project generations • [SGI] Simulations and early prototypes help uncover problems before committing to expensive complete and representative prototypes • [Toyota] Chief engineers perform vital systems integration activities by controlling the narrowing process, insisting on broad exploration and resolving disagreements across functions. • [Toyota] Emphasis on nemawashi – finding the best solutions for the entire system – locates a solution at the intersection of the feasible regions for the individual technologies • [Microsoft] Attempts to get a low-functionality version of the product (i.e. integrated prototype) into customer’s hands at the earliest opportunity

19. D. Lean Product Development – Dynamic Cross Functional Teams • Project teams need to be cross functional at the start of a project • Sponsors and project leader should examine team membership and define appropriate members – representatives should range from research & development, manufacturing, supply chain, engineering, finance, quality and especially customers (internal/external) • Cross functional teams at the start of a project will lead to better option generation, diverse thinking, concurrent engineering and better team atmosphere • Resource loading should be somewhat level during the life of a project – not going up exponentially at the end to address loop backs late in process • Resource commitments will be dynamic – all functions will have different time commitments depending on the stage of the project

20. D. Lean Product Development – Dynamic Cross Functional Teams Examples • [NEC] Early research done in laboratory and then customers brought in to help with specifications. Members of research and the technology integration were then brought in with knowledge of manufacturing, system design and past technical approaches. Substantial resources are dedicated before the concept is frozen. • [SGI] Critical decisions are made by a “core” Business Team representing wide variety of expertise from research, engineering, manufacturing, marketing, quality etc… • [SGI] Relies on lead customers to test products and partners with universities and research institutions for sampling the latest trends • [Toyota] The review committee makes final technology decisions based on engineering, marketing, manufacturing and other feedback • [Microsoft] Teams have broad-based experience of shipping multiple projects. Also an architecture was used where separate component teams fed into the product development • [Microsoft] Customers have a chance to influence the design at a time that the development team had the flexibility to respond. • [Eli Lilly] Chorus taps into a network of external experts and vendors for both information and evaluations the team cannot perform

21. D. Lean Product Development – Knowledge Sharing/ Continuous Learning Process "The essence of knowledge is, having it, to apply it (use and share it); not having it, to confess your ignorance." Confucius • Ineffective sharing or loss of knowledge is the key driver of having to rediscover knowledge (waste), loop backs (more waste), design shortfalls etc… • Knowledge sharing both within the team and outside of the team is key to reducing cycle time for new products • Documentation and sharing of knowledge enables reuse of knowledge effectively in both current and future projects • Documentation can be as simple as using a quick A3 with trade off curves, or documenting and collaborating with Google Drive and Dropbox or more elaborate tools like Asana, Sharepoint and Yammer. Regular exchange of learnings between teams is also a key output. • Team leaders must make knowledge sharing and transfer a priority • Essentially projects should be viewed as a continual learning and improvement process

22. D. Lean Product Development – Knowledge Based Development Product Development in the Lean Enterprise, Michael N. Kennedy (Oakley Press 2003)

23. D. Lean Product Development – Knowledge Sharing/ Continuous Learning Process • [NEC] Emphasis on discovering and capturing knowledge about interactions between technical possibilities and the concept before committing to a concept • [NEC] By keeping integration groups involved with several product generations, group members were able to effectively utilize the knowledge base to direct future products • [SGI] As a project progresses, the source code (specification) is shared by all members of the team facilitating communication and integrating individual efforts. • [Toyota] Uses trade off curves and design matrices (Pugh analysis) to communicate feasible regions of design space and criteria around concept selection • [Microsoft] Use of “daily builds” of software to check in new code providing rapid feedback and knowledge transfer to the team. • [Eli Lilly] As data flows from the experiments, the team modifies the experimental plans constantly to drive the experimentation as efficiently as possible

24. E. Lean Product Development – Product Design Examples • Film Development Program Example • Program was focused to address an issue in the trade (premature failure of product) • Creatively adapted stage/gate process to drive towards a set based design with a series of product introductions to improve issue • Used brainstorming sessions early in the development phase to identify many technology approaches that covered film design, customer processes and end use projectors. Used six sigma design principals to optimize technologies • Utilized benchmarking events to assemble technologies and send samples for aggressive testing and customer evaluations • Effectively used a consistent cross functional team containing R&D, product development, manufacturing, customer reps, systems over the life of the project • Held several workshops, weekly team meeting w/extensive online notes, multiple gate reviews, several patents/reports to facilitate communication • Through a series of commercialization programs introduced 3 products silently over a three year period that dramatically improved issue (improvedperformance over 10x) and silenced all customer complaints

25. E. Knowledge Based Set Design in Action • Development Programs – Pugh Analysis Program 3 Program 2 Program 1

26. E. Lean Product Development – Product Design Examples • Development Programs

27. E. Lean Product Development – Product Design Examples • Development Technical Roadmap/Portfolio Definition • Used lean development approach to generate and execute technical roadmaps for cost reduction programs since 2004 • Assembled a large cross functional group comprising of R&D, product development, manufacturing, supply chain, purchasing, customer reps and systems to annually brainstorm and define sets of technical options and programs. The team planned work to drive towards development and commercialization of these technical options. This team continued to work on the projects through development & commercialization • Utilized benchmarking events regularly to assemble technologies and verify technical roadmap directions and schedule. Drove to fast failure with early production scale coatings and customer assessments. Maintained a flexible development/concept approach to maintain a steady stream of cost reduction projects • Held regular workshops, weekly team meetings and many gate reviews, communicated with notes, patents/TRs – roadmaps and direction regularly reviewed/updated with team • Through a series of programs and smaller projects introduced over 10 products changes silently over a eight year period that saved the company 3 M$ on a yearly basis but over the lifetime of the product line is around 100 M$ -> payback of 4X versus development cost.

28. E. Knowledge Based Set Design in Action • Film Technical Roadmap Definition – Roadmap 2007

29. E. Knowledge Based Set Design in Action • Technical Portfolio Analysis

30. E. Knowledge Based Set Design in Action • Film Technical Roadmap Definition – Roadmap 2011

31. E. Lean Product Development – Product Design Examples • Film Technical Roadmap Definition – cost savings over time

32. F. Conclusions • Using lean product development methods does lead to reduced cycle times, minimized rework (loop backs), higher returns for development dollars and a more engaged product development team atmosphere • Lean tools are being applied in many different product development areas ranging from automotive to computer to drug/chemical products • Use of set based design and integration/system leadership lead to a flexible product development cycle that is responsive to rapidly changing customer expectations and marketplace conditions • LPD is scalable for the product/technology scope • The Kodak film development area has adopted many of the lean development concepts and set based design. The use of integrating events at both bench scale and at full production scale as early as possible has been critical for technology selection. Much of the success is an outcome of maintaining a solid cross functional team with strong communications and a high degree of knowledge sharing.

33. F. Recommendations • Lean product development concepts can be implemented at any time in the product development cycle • Possible first steps: • Encourage set based solutions and utilizing integration events early in programs • Implement system based leadership on project teams and drive towards a flexible product development process • Drive towards cross functional teams and involvement of customers early in development • Foster knowledge sharing through simple A3 style reports and usage of team knowledge sharing and collaboration tools • Both teams and leadership need to support the lean initiatives in product development to be successful.

34. Discussion / Question and Answer

35. For More Information • Chris Haller, haller88@rochester.rr.comWebsite: cjhaller.com LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/cjhaller/ • Resources list: • A More Rational Approach to New-Product Development, E. Bonabeau, N. Bodick & N. Armstrong (Havard Business Review March 2008) • Developing Products in the Half the Time, Preston Smith and Donald Reinertsen (Van Nostrand Reinhold 1991) • Going Lean, Stephen A. Ruffa (AMACOM 2008) • Managing the Design Factory, Donald Reinertsen (Free Press 1997) • Product Development in the Lean Enterprise, Michael N. Kennedy (Oakley Press 2003) • Product-Development Practices that Work: How Internet Companies Build Software, Alan MacCormack (MIT Sloan Management Review, Winter 2001) • Shooting the Rapids: Managing Product Development in Turbulent Environments, Marco Iansiti (California Management Review, Fall 1995) • The Lean Machine, Dantar P. Oosterwal (AMACOM 2010) • The Machine That Changed the World, James Womack, Daniel Jones and Daniel Roos (Free Press 2007) • Toyota’s Principles of Set-Based Concurrent Engineering, Durward K. Sobek II, Allen C. Ward and Jeffrey K. Liker (MIT Sloan Management Review, Jan 1999)