Over the past 20 years that I have been involved in this industry I have seen and been involved in endless debates on Workflow, Critical Path and the associated Tasks, Notifications, Maturity and Control that people seem to think are a necessity in order to manage the ‘Product Development Process’.

People seem to be obsessed with the need to see everything, control everything and to notify everybody else of what is happening – in truth what is needed is the ability to see what is NOT happening, so actions can be taken BEFORE they become an issue and to be able to analyse what happened so that process changes can be implemented to improve the efficiency and quality of the developed products.

Having designed Workflow systems, seen them develop, tested them as well as configured and implemented them, I have more than a passing interest in seeing that people understand what they are getting themselves into and what the benefits and pitfalls are of introducing a system within a business.

So lets start with the basics – What is Critical Path, What is Workflow, What is Maturity, how are they linked and do you need them all?

These are my definitions, the ones I tell clients, the ones that so far I have found make sense to people.

Critical Path

Basically this is a calendar of key dates that a product or range of products goes through in its development from the initial planning and concepts through to a finished specification or even through production and into the distribution centre or store. A Critical Path for a particular process – say the creation and development of a new product, may have a number of key dates or milestones that people want to track but some of those milestones may be dependent on completely separate processes – fabric development for example. Additionally not everything is done in a serial method, one step after another, but multiple processes or tasks may be running concurrently which means that the system should be able to identify which items on the Critical Path are truly ‘critical’ to the overall delivery of the finished product.

Workflow

A workflow is a description of a set of tasks that need to be completed in order to carry out a particular process. These tasks may be manual instructions to a user – Create a Concept Sketch, Check Sample Measurements for example or they may be automatic tasks that carry out email notification if something is overdue or rejected, they may start or end other processes and tasks such as Lab-Dips, Fit Samples or they may control the sending or receiving of data from and to other systems. The key point to remember here is that a Workflow should be used to Manage a process not Control it and definitely not to Micro-Manage it!! In other words the KISS principle applies – Keep It Simple Stupid.

Maturity

Also called Status or Lifecycle, basically it is the different stages that an item (product, fabric, sample etc) goes through during its creation, development, testing etc. For example a new product may start with a maturity of Concept, then once it has been reviewed and accepted for further development it may change to Adopted or In Development, later on it may change again to Pre-Production, In Sampling or Approved to show just where that item is in its development. It can also be used to manage items that are Rejected, Dropped or Cancelled – information that can give a real insight into a companies ‘Hit Rate’ i.e. the number of items designed and developed that make it all the way through the process and are delivered to store.

So now that the key elements have been defined – do we really need them all? Or can a system use 1 or 2 of them and still get the results they need. The answer is Yes you can, but you need to be aware of the different interactions between them and also remember that a system that manages a particular process does not take away from the user, manager or business the need to have personal responsibility. Some of the leading retailers and manufacturers empower their users to make decisions rather than relying on systems to control and restrict what they are able to do. They do this with a work ethic built around a team with responsibility for the whole product, if you see a problem you help to get it fixed not ignore it because it is someone else’s responsibility. They also use systems that enable them to track what is happening so that problem issues can be seen early and action taken to rectify the problem – This is called Working by Exception – There is no need to go though a list of 200-300 styles every Monday morning to find out where each is if the systems in place allow you to see the 10, 20 or even 50 styles that are NOT where they should be.

So What’s the Never Ending Task (see title), just as your life, your job or your business is always changing and evolving so do the processes and methods used to manage that business. It is a continuous evolution and sometimes revolution in order to keep on Track, on Budget and on Trend.

In part 2 of this blog, I will try and address how I think companies should go about considering, defining and implementing a process management system and whether it is using 1, 2 or all 3 of the above elements.

In an industry already littered with acronyms, I’ve taken the liberty of inventing another – “UA”, or in its unabbreviated form, User Acceptance.

As with any other software implementation, one of the key contributing factors to a successful PLM project, and subsequent level of ROI, is the ease of which the new technology is adopted into the user community. The new technology should be perceived by the day-to-day users to enhance their productivity, and specifically in our industry, be seen to lessen their administrative responsibilities, thus freeing up more time for creativity.

Without this “user acceptance” the project runs the risk of being seen as an ‘inhibiter’ rather than an ‘enhancer’. If the user community do not fully embrace PLM as a necessity to their day-to-day responsibilities it becomes shunned for more traditional means of collaboration and product management, thus making it redundant and ROI is significantly reduced.

This is arguably even more important to the European market where the designer/buyer is the lifeblood of the business and therefore has a greater say in the choice of PLM selected, as opposed to other regions in world that tend take a more top – down approach at a more strategic level with less input from the end users.

There are many ways to increase user acceptance levels, ranging from inclusion in the selection process to dedicated in-house project management. However, most of these solutions fall to the company investing rather the company providing. Should not a portion of this responsibility be placed on the shoulders of the provider? If nothing else, a solution to this problem surely gives them a competitive advantage.

One of the simplest ways to ensure user acceptance is the “user-friendliness” of the application. But unfortunately this seems to be the one area that is often overlooked by suppliers. It is my feeling that they get so caught up in the race to provide more and more, in-depth functionality and business process coverage than their competitors that they often forget the fact that someone eventually has to be able to intuitively use the system. Of course the system is ‘useable’ and fulfils its purpose, but this is by dedicated employees of the provider whose full time job is to know it and use it. They forget that the end users of the company investing, well, their full time job is to keep ahead of trends, design products, produce collections and get their produce to market on time – NOT spend hours learning and keeping up to date with PLM software.

There is arguably the notion that most users only use a small portion of the full application in their job role and modular based systems with limited access rights combat this problem, but with “defined” roles often differing across organisations this is not always as clear cut as it is intended. Add to the equation “joining the dots of the supply chain” – one of the key differentiators and benefits of the next generation of PLM systems, as opposed to PDM system. Foreign suppliers whose first language is not that of the master company, and who will no doubt be faced with multiple PLM’s from different clients, will be faced with a steeper learning curve still with systems that are not at the optimum level of intuitiveness.

So what’s the answer?

Well, I’ll give you a clue – it’s a very similar acronym to my newly invented ‘UA’.

‘UI’, or User Interface if you please. Sounds simple? That’s the beauty of it.

In terms of PLM, we as an industry are used to looking to other industries for inspiration. After all PDM/PLM started in the aerospace sector. We have looked to fellow manufacturing industries for the concept but seem to have overlooked the industry that supplies the platform of PLM – the Internet.

In the early days of the Internet there were many search engines ready to help you in your quest for information. Now there is one that dominates the market place thanks to its impossibly simple yet functional interface – Google. A simple white screen with a single search box. It is the epitome of intuitive functionality. The rise of Facebook and other Web 2.0 applications, prove that the intuitiveness of a clean, simple UI, appeals to the widest audience and almost guarantees its use.

Having said that, some players in the retail PLM market seem to have embraced the concept of intuitive and consistent UI better than others. As a general rule, these tend to be those with origins in the fashion/retail industry – after all, they understand that we are people that are drawn to the fashion industry because we “get off” on things looking good (not to mention the fact that some of us creative types can also be prone to “technophobia”). Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but as a whole, suppliers seem to underestimate the importance of applications that, to put it bluntly, look sexy and are a joy rather than a hindrance to use.

To illustrate my point, I recently spent time with an organisation that were evaluating a new system, deliberating between a choice of two that had made it to the final of their selection process. On the one hand they had a system that was extremely powerful and more “future proof”, but unfortunately had been developed by “techies” with little regard for the UI. On the other was a system that relied on an antiquated platform and method of use that limited the functionality and scope. However the UI was vastly superior to that of its competitor. So too, was the price. At over 50% more cost, it was not only the most expensive but also the most limited of the choices. But who do you think the customer selected? That’s right, they choose the system with the most intuitive and best looking UI. It gave the illusion of being more modern and therefore superior – a system that would be easily adopted by their user community. And do you know what the argument was, coming from the mouth of the project leader? – “I can’t possibly present the other solution to the board as the next generation and be taken seriously”

Not only does an enhanced UI improve the user acceptance within the investing company, but PLM providers (and other enterprise level software providers for that matter) need to recognise it as a crucial factor in gaining a competitive advantage, rather than a secondary that is swept under the proverbial rug in favour of a blinkered focus on functionality.

RFID defined

There are many definitions of the components of RFID but at its simplest it’s a method of automatic identification of an item or a container with many items within it. There are two parts: an RFID “tag” or transponder which contains a small piece of data (typically a SKU code) and a device which reads that data to identify the item or container.

As an item with a tag attached to it comes within range of a reader, its data can be captured and with a link to a product database further information about the item can be displayed.

Applications range from logging inbound containers from countries of origin, to receipt in a DC and dispatch to stores. Interestingly, only relatively recently have more applications been considered before and after the logistics element of a retailer’s processes. See below.


Background

The potential benefits of radio-frequency identification (RFID) in the latter stages of the supply chain have been well-proven for some time now. Technical glitches apart, RFID has delivered a level of automation in transport and DC operations that wouldn’t have been possible 20 or even 5 years ago.

If you read industry predictions, you may have seen estimates ranging from millions to trillions of whatever currency units you’re dealing with where you’re reading this. It doesn’t actually matter because the basis for those estimates is at best semi-scientific – with no references made to the effects of chaos theory or the butterfly effect therein.

What matters is that there is little doubt in my mind that RFID will become a driving influence in speeding further the agile supply chain. It has already delivered very significant benefits to the apparel industry but what has held it back from further adoption, especially down to item level, has been one or more of these factors:

• Cost of RFID tags at item level
• Accuracy of some of the readers
• Conflicting standards
• Not high up enough on the average retailer’s agenda to think beyond the logistics applications
• Security concerns
• Unclear ROIs

What’s changing?

In the past year or so retailers’ ideas are meeting lower costs, especially at item level, and agreements on RFID standards: the landscape is definitely becoming more interesting. At the PDP we’ve been looking at how RFID technology and opportunities can be blended with the processes affected by product development and PLM – we have some interesting ideas of our own as a result.

In the ideas that are being generated, changes are also happening to the direction of data flow.  is also being questioned.

Security is still a concern – an increasing one in some parts of the world. The 13-page report from the Department of Homeland Security in the US suggests that while there are number of benefits to using RFID technology, such as the quality, speed and ease of information transfer, these don’t outweigh the potential dangers that RFID poses to the American public. In addition to the widely-known issues of skimming and eavesdropping, in which unauthorized third-parties can illegally gain access to private information, the report stipulates that RFID may bring unwarranted surveillance by the government itself.

Ironically, RFID could also play a part in improving national security through enhancing identification of workers in key areas such as airlines and other modes of transport. It could also play a part in monitoring security of goods being transported to help prevent tampering.

There are also concerns over the perception of privacy invasion for the individual. These can be addressed by the retailer being completely transparent about what they’re doing with tags and what data is contained – I wouldn’t belittle these concerns at all because if people are concerned, well they’re concerned. Retailers need to address those worries in a sensitive way.

But back to those ideas….


How could RFID be used in new areas?

In a store:

• When goods are received from the DC, an immediate (and quick) reconciliation of what was sent against what was received
• Low stock levels
• In the fitting room, information displayed (on a mirror?) about alternative colourways and sizes or fits of the product being tried by the customer, cross-sells and up-sells
• The store management will have an idea of what products have been tried most (or least)
• Estimate shrinkage through theft, sweethearting, etc by comparing received goods with actual goods less what has been legitimately sold – with the stock-count, this will give the store management team a true picture of what needs to be replenished, thereby maximising sales and minimizing out-of-stocks
• Fast location of products (for customers and staff alike)
• Quicker access to extended product data
• Reduced waiting times at tills because of mass reading of tags (and therefore prices), as well as other initiatives
• Reduced time to process returns because of the speed with which checks can be made – on the original purchase, on the authenticity of the product, etc
• Quick identification of products whose safety has been questioned

Other areas:

• Reducing the incidence of out-of-date food products being offered for sale
• An increase in the number of handheld and/or mobile devices which feature RFID readers, such as PDAs which also contain a cut-down version of the product database
• Integration of RFID signals with SMS, IM and other communications channels, as well as other wireless technologies
• RFID has been a long time gestating but it looks like the time is approaching when it’s embraced end-to-end in the apparel industry’s extended supply chain. We’ll wonder how we lived without it…..