Solid American Brass
Summary: My first reaction to the IT challenge is going to be based on finding the right ERP/SCM software to run this business on Solaris with Sun Rays and Mac laptops.
This is the second imaginary company I want to use to frame IT infrastructure issues. The goal today is to lay out its core business plan and set up the question: what computer systems technology makes sense for them and how should IT be structured?
In brief, a guy named Frank Solid has put together a group whose collective goal is to make high quality brass products for the home construction and renovation markets. They're committed to manufacturing in the United States, plan on developing their domestic markets first, and expect that growing credibility with the American design community will later drive expansion into world wide export marketing.
Their plan is aggressive, with a third year revenue target of $500 million, $80 million to burn getting there, and product plans ranging from exterior door knobs to kitchen faucets and specialist lighting fixtures.
From an IT perspective some of the things that count include:
(1) the commitment to American manufacturing implies a commitment to highly automated production and quality control processes driving production labour costs down to an almost insignificant component of plant gate pricing. Figure eight parallel manufacturing lines, six of them geared to sub one thousand production runs, on-site custom packaging (including printing), and extensive logistics support.
Note that the nature of the market means that the company can expect a lot of customer anxiety about product design, delivery, and quality issues - meaning that the designers on the company's front line need to be protected from customer calls on where something is in the production process, on how to expedite shipping, or whether a twisted brass screw can be replaced at Home Depot. As a result the plant gate logistics operation has to be planned as part call center, part service center, and part shipping center.
(2) because they see quality as the most important differentiator for their products they want to offer both custom design services and lifetime product warranties. As a result marketing and design functions are to be integrated, with manufacturing acting as a combined quality control and production resource to the designers;
(3) because they're the new guys in this market, they expect to spend a lot of money on face to face selling - at trade shows, to contractor suppliers, and among people who work in home and materials design; and,
(4) Most of the group have deep roots in the Minneapolis/St Paul area and they expect to set up their headquarters and initial production plant on the outskirts of Minneapolis a few miles from Frank's home in Wayzeta.
Now, as you can imagine, my first reaction to the IT challenge is going to be based on finding the right ERP/SCM software to run this business on Solaris with Sun Rays and Mac laptops - but that's the real challenge: given these start-up parameters (and any others we need to invent along the way) what's the right thing to do here? - and what other conditions do we need to establish to discuss it?
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Finding the right software
Of course, since this is a brand new business with no established infrastructure, you should determine the business processes that will realize their goals, and finding the right software in which to implement those processes. Then find out what hardware you need to run it. Of course these things are to a degree interdependent, and some iterations and adjustments are necessary, but those are the priorities.
Before any of this legwork, you've already decided to sell them Sun Rays and Macs. You're not working for the customer, you're working for the vendors. If I were the manager I'd fire you and take on another consultant who was better at sublimating his biases in favor of my requirements.
He might [i]also[/i] suggest Sun Rays and Macs, but I'd have confidence that it was to my benefit.
I see it differently..
Second: bias is often indistinguishable from experience. If you hire a consultant who claims to be unbiased, he's either lying or incompetent -and either way you don't want him. Why? because it's impossible to work with two technologies and not form opinions about which is better. Thus the guy you want is one who says .. my first reaction is X, but now lets discuss options... because that combines experience with openness.
Biases aren't for public consumption.
Note that it doesn't matter whether their needs are actually unique. They might be just like the last ten clients I had, but [i]I don't know that until I've asked the right questions.[/i] At the most I may say, "Yeah, I've got a few ideas, but let me ask you a few things about your situation first." Then at least I know whether I'm likely to be giving them solid advice or whether I'll have to backtrack and undermine my own credibility. He may not have even given thought to these prerequisites yet. In which case he needed me to bring them to his attention.
And though "my own credibility" sounds self-serving, it's only a fallout of doing your best to make the right recommendations to your customers. I say this so often it may as well be my values statement: "It is [i]always[/i] in your best interest to work in the customer's best interest."
I happen to think that being good consultant requires me to sublimate my biases early so that I can -- as objectively as possible -- evaluate my customer's situation. THEN I can put my experience into play. Hell, I might conclude at that point that I'm not the guy for the job! If so, I'll recommend the right guy if I can and move on to another gig that doesn't waste the customer's time and money and ruin my cred.
If you can't cultivate a "shrewd naivete" (by which I mean an open-mindedness tempered with practical intelligence) in the requirements gathering stage of a project, you're almost as big a risk as the guy with no experience at all. I say "almost" because you might actually get something to work after a fashion, though it may be over-budget and late.
Good consultants are like scouts or guides in the Old West. Their customers look to them to recommend the right path. But you need to know something about the wagon train and their destination before you can do that, and you need to be aware of changes since the last time you passed through this neck o' the woods.
Sure they are - it's full disclosure, right?
Think in terms of your guide analogy: the client wants you to pick a safe way across the mountains.. shouldn't he know that you've crossed via several different ones and assume you'll take the one that's been proven safest/fastest/easiest in the past unless he has reasons not use it.
Say WHAT?
Not in the slightest! I said "Not at that stage of the game." In the early stages you set aside your bias to gather facts about the case. This isn't lying in the slightest. For one thing, your biases have not one thing to do with the customer's situation. Their situation doesn't change an iota simply because you happen to like some vendor's product. That's not the time to talk about you. And that's the point: it's not about YOU, Murph.
[b]When[/b] you've got the info you need, THEN you can say, "I've seen many situations like yours, and I've found that Stupendo-Tech servers running WowERP is just the thing." There might be 10 ways to do that job, and you can honestly say, y'know, there are a number of ways to do this, but I happen to like this one the best." Push your favorite all you like and say why. But you can't do even [i]that[/i] if they've got a hard requirement that's the one thing "WowERP" just doesn't do.
So why bother wasting effort on some sales job for Stupendo-Tech and WowERP during requirements gathering? At the very best it buys you exactly nothing. At the worst you wind up having to backtrack and contradict yourself and look foolish instead of knowledgeable. It doesn't do the customer or you a bit of good, and it highlights the fact that you're the sort of guy that jumps to conclusions before you have the facts upon which to base a conclusion. It's great if you want to earn a "fly-by-night" reputation; and that's the only thing I see to recommend it.
So keep your biases to yourself until there is some real basis for saying "I've been here before, let me tell you how we solved it." And if it turns out that your pet system [i]isn't[/i] appropriate, you put the thought of using it aside and concentrate on what WILL work. IOW, you can have your biases, but a true professional doesn't let them affect his work.
Do you really and truly think that's lying? I don't think it's lying any more than keeping to yourself the fact that some female exec has a great pair of legs. Think it all you like, but you never, ever let it affect your demeanor or work ethic. It's called professionalism, not dishonesty.
[i][b]Think in terms of your guide analogy: the client wants you to pick a safe way across the mountains.. shouldn't he know that you've crossed via several different ones and assume you'll take the one that's been proven safest/fastest/easiest in the past unless he has reasons not use it.[/b][/i]
What's the party composed of? Hardy, adventurous explorers, or children and elders? How quickly do they need to get to their destination? Can they accept the risk and hardship of a fast, high-altitude pass, or do we need to detour to a safer mountain pass that adds two months to the journey? Do they have foraging skills, or will they need to buy all their supplies? You don't know, [i]because you didn't ask.[/i]
Stupendo Tech.
But is "I've seen situations..." going to work for you? Given that most people consider themselves unique and their circumstances even more rare, you could appear to be chasing them with a cookie cutter.
What about past experience as a provider of data, not solutions?
"I've seen places doing something similar to that generating as few as 10 and as many as 10,000 scaly goblins a minute..."
That brings the subject to the means of exorcism, and only then to Stupendo Tech.
Bottom up, rather than top down?
You're still confusing bias with decision
If you go back and re-read the blog and the comments here you'll see that. I'm not saying: hire me and you'll get sun rays; I commenting that my software search will tilt toward Solaris - just as most consultants tilt toward what they think the client will accept.
So suppose I walked into your business and pretended not to have tech biases. I'd be lying, right?
And here's the zinger: you may not know it, think it, or agree with me on this: but your reaction shows a much stronger bias to making the sale by quietly going along with client perceptions - meaning that it's much more likely that given a brand X committed client you'll recommend brand X than that I'd recommend Sun Ray and Macs without adequate reasons grounded in the client's needs.
As you say, that's professionalism -and a big part of the reason I'm not working for a professional firm like Accenture or IBM consulting.
Re: confusion.
I realize that. I just think you're latching onto Solaris before you've got the requirements, and I think that's a mistake, even if you didn't broadcast it.
[i][b]So suppose I walked into your business and pretended not to have tech biases. I'd be lying, right?[/b][/i]
I'm not talking about pretending not to have them; I'm talking about bringing them into the conversation at an inappropriate time (and for some projects the appropriate time to indulge in them may never come). I'm saying that my preferences are irrelevant in requirements gathering. But let's find out what YOU think, using my previous analogy... if you walked into a conference room filled with female execs and didn't express your taste in women, are you lying?
[b][i]And here's the zinger: you may not know it, think it, or agree with me on this: but your reaction shows a much stronger bias to making the sale by quietly going along with client perceptions - meaning that it's much more likely that given a brand X committed client you'll recommend brand X than that I'd recommend Sun Ray and Macs without adequate reasons grounded in the client's needs.[/i][/b]
[i](First, keep in mind that we've been talking about your hypothetical situation, in which there is no established infrastructure, so you're letting your focus drift a bit here.)[/i]
That said, that's no zinger. I'm not there to make a sale, I'm there to make a recommendation. I get paid the same regardless of the decision, so I need to make the recommendation that's best for the customer. That means that if the customer is truly committed to brand X, and all things considered, a brand X solution will do the job, then I will consider the company's existing skillsets and comfort level when making the recommendation. That's not my bias, it's theirs. And keeping skillsets in mind when developing a solution is called "making sense." That might be another reason you're not with Accenture or IBM consulting. ;)
But keep in mind I'm not with them, either. I can, have, and will recommend solutions outside of the customer's comfort zone if it makes sense to do that (I'm doing that to an extent in a current project). I don't do it gratuitously: there has to be a very good reason. So yes, I disagree with you. Having read your blog for a long while, it's a slam-dunk sure bet that you'd recommend Sun Ray for what I would consider less than adequate reasons. (Hell, even before I opened the RSS feed I was [i]dead certain[/i] you'd be facing Sun-ward in the post. Try to find a regular reader that [i]didn't[/i] know it!) Sure, you'd think your reasons were adequate and grounded, but that's because of your well-publicized bias. And THAT'S the zinger.
[i]All that having been said,[/i] remember the closing questions of your post: [b][i]given these start-up parameters (and any others we need to invent along the way) what?s the right thing to do here? - and what other conditions do we need to establish to discuss it?[/i][/b] My answer has been and still is that you need to throw some cold water on your bias and and engage the customer before you start searching for a Sun-shaped hole for your Sun-shaped solutions. That's the right thing to do. And I think Erik's on the right track for question 2, but that's another post.
Some questions...
What applications do their customers use?
Do the founders prefer Lean, Six Sigma, or some other model?
Lean needs simple, Six Sigma needs lots of easily accessible numbers. So with Lean, you're question would be "where can I avoid introducing information technology?" where with Six Sigma it would be more geared towards providing comprehensive operational data.
What about formed pieces of brass makes them require extensive logistics support?
Some answers
2) lean vs 6sigs - make any assumption you want - but remember both the size of the company, the complexity of parts like lock sets (critical for warranty issues) and the company's quality focus.
3) customers are mostly design people and the occassional home owner with too much exposure to glossy magazines. As a result you can expect some part of the customer base to care deeply about their own supply chains - including supplier logistics - and others to want to pay extra to get it yesterday.
some responses
Not good enough. I know, you're not a brass manufacturer and this is hypothetical so if I want I good answer I should probably write it myself. And, honestly, even if you were a brass manufacturer and this wasn't hypothetical I probably would have to write (and rewrite) the answer myself until the owners' eyes got big and they got all excited because someone finally articulated what they are thinking. But then if they are starting a new, capital intensive business and gave me an inarticulate answer on how they would compete I might avoid having a pending failure for an employer. (No, I'm not saying an all-American brass manufacturer can't compete. They can very effectively. I'm saying they have to know very precisely and articulately how the will compete.)
Why is this important? As you know, I'm a firm believer that IT can create competitive advantage. But in order for it to create competitive advantage, you need to know where the business can actually gain an advantage so you don't waste time on places where it won't. So once you know that, you can figure out what can be outsourced, served by SaaS providers, etc; and what absolutely must be done in-house.
re: Lean vs 6s
What's important here is whether the owners are mostly qualitative, hand-on, or quantitative managers. Are they going to get a feel for how things are on the factory floor by looking at sheets of metrics or my wandering around, observing, and chatting with the foreman and workers? Or are they really good and will do both.
But the bottom line is there's no point in providing information that will never be used. There's no point in automating decisions that will be made with the gut. IT must serve the fundamental character for the business.
#3 - Sounds like they need a long session for classifying their customers, figuring out how to best serve them; and which ones are more trouble than they are worth.
Also, what about distributors and retailers? I guess those are the ones who care deeply about their supply chains.
So please go ahead and do so
My blog is your blog.. anytime you're ready.
See? Look, a Professional!
Bravo!
Actually Yes and No
There are questions and Questions.
Each question he asked isn't simply a query for a pat answer. It's a gateway to a conversation with the customer. The dialog produced by those particular questions will tell him loads about the customer, where they are, their market, and particularly their executive mindset and where they see themselves in relation to those factors.
For lean vs. six sigma, you say make any assumption you want, but Erik's doing the right thing by [i]not[/i] making those assumptions. It's not covered in the blog, and it's not a throw-away question. It goes to the core of what you're trying to design.
In particular, I like the last question because it it tells you (in part) whether the client is "needing it or reading it". Erik didn't rehash "why do you need logistics support?" He asked what is it about the product that requires it. It's a whole different question that leads him into a conversation that will tell him a lot about the corporate environment and the kinds of solutions he [i]really[/i] needs to consider.
So I don't think he failed to pay attention at all, and from my reading of it he's thinking way, way ahead.
Addendum
If I were you I [i]really[/i] wouldn't be so quick to point out somebody else's failure to think.
I'll be out tomorrow, so have at it.
Still very general.
When considering solutions, are you going to meet a changeable goal? Yes, as you say, it's about personal acceptance, the way the business should work, but aren't there better cues?
And when you're forming an acceptance of you, I think you're already arguing that initially you're showing what you know rather than an answer. Might be well to be more definite.
It's a joke right?
Unless you are talking about a brand new comapny that has no bricks and mortar and no staff (back to the old spherical chicken), the first thing I'd be doing is looking at their existing infrastructure, software and IT experience rather than at the narrow requirements you've specified. If they're already using Windows and Office and Photoshop and a number of other Windows based apps ( and let's face it the odds are they will be) then there's no way I'd be looking at setting up a different platform just to fulfill my prejudices. If they are one of the small group of companies which have had *nix installed due to some rogue ABMers, then I'd be looking at a *nix solution.
You keep forgetting that computers are used for a variety of purposes in a company from email and word processing, through project planning, accounting, marketing, graphic design, CAD/CAM etc, etc. What's important here is not to provide your ideal of a data processing environment, but to cause minimal interruption to management and production while you put in your new systems.
You also need to look at what you'll be offering - internal apps, commercial apps, customised apps, external web-base apps. If your using Windows you obviously have a vast cornucopia to choose from, whereas a *nix solution is going to give you a limited choice and probably extensive customisation. The apps are what matter - not the OS or even the hardware. As long as you start every conversation with Solaris and SunRay, you are talking about what's important to you rather than the client.
The easy solution
So there were are, Oracle Applications running under Solaris on Sun.
A lot of trouble saved (at least for now).
* Why not SAP? Because then you have to decide which DBMS you want SAP to run on. So there you are, more of this troublesome thinking and understanding business avoided.