Process Engineering MYTHS

I have been doing industry-centered Process Engineering for about 70,000 hours. I have seen a lot over that time, and the work has been challenging, interesting and rewarding.

The financial impact of the projects I have worked on (with others, certainly) has been in excess of $70 million USD. The overall ROI on these projects has been fantastic, in excess of 50X. These projects have been great financially for the businesses the projects were done at.

It is important that people responsible for innovation understand what expert-level process engineering can do, because it is a vital step in commercializing and profiting from (atom-based) technologies.

However, I have heard many thoughts and opinions, and some myths, about Process Engineering from folks over the years. These are real-world examples and not red-herrings. I cover some of these myths below, with brief comments and discussion about the validity of each myth.

Myth #1

Anyone can do process engineering.

People who have this attitude have usually been spectators, and not serious process engineers. I have discussed the idea of a Process Excellence Toolkit in previous newsletters. The toolkit includes: data analysis expertise, design thinking, evaluating manufacturability early & often, first-hand experience, highly interested in high-volume production, production experience, R&D experience, stubbornness & tenacity, systematic approach, and a technical foundation. Only folks who were really interested in the craft of process engineering have developed this toolkit. Is not developed casually or haphazardly by anyone.

Myth #2

Outsourcing takes care of these concerns.

Your customers are depending on the quality of your processes, whether you own the equipment or it is outsourced and someone else owns the equipment. Regardless of the owner, shabby processes disappoint customers, which is problematic for your business.

Myth #3

Process engineering is boring.

Process engineering involves solving many problems, and the best solutions are creative and clever. Clues must be assembled and followed where the evidence leads, like Sherlock Holmes. Although difficult and annoying at times, the building of great processes is not boring.

Myth #4

Process engineering is the same as statistics.

Statistics is one of the tools available to the process engineer. The APEX (Applied Process Excellence) methodology considers, in addition to statistics: insights from physics and calculations; current state-of-the-art; IP considerations; metrics development; data visualization and presentation; documentation and sharing of results; axiomatic analysis; innovation-stage models; project planning rigor; team collaboration; stakeholder support; meeting effectiveness, and, “big picture” considerations.

Myth #5

Research is the hard part.

Research can be thought of as the conversion of money to ideas. Process engineering can be thought of as the conversion of ideas to profits. Neither of these activities is easy, and both are necessary, as seasoned professionals in the field know.

Myth #6

The equipment is the hard part.

Apple wasted $500 million USD on the equipment (mostly furnaces) to make sapphire iPhone screens. The equipment did not work and was not used for its intended purpose. Apple found out that their process was not ready for prime-time, despite how shiny their equipment was. Apple did not rigorously employ the “Process Stewardship” approach, at great cost to them in time, effort, and money. For more details please refer to my May 17, 2018 Process Perspective newsletter.

---

YOUR CHALLENGE THIS WEEK

Please think about you and your organizations’ perspective on Process Engineering…

• Do any of these myths ring true for your organization?

• Would some internal discussion about what Best Practices have been used in your most successful process projects generate a useful perspective for all the players?

I’d like to hear your thoughts about these Process Engineering Myths. Please give us a call to see how we can help.

If you email me I’ll get back to you promptly, thanks.

All the Best,

Marty

---