Only a handful of jobs now, but more to come.   Send a job description or a link to your jobs and they’ll get posted.  No fee.

Since most folks that visit the website do engineering, product development, and innovation, the Jobs Page is limited to Engineering/Product Development/Innovation  jobs.

Please forward the free Job Page to those you think may be interested.

Best,

Mike

A constraint is when something cannot be done. It’s not when something is difficult, complex, or unknown. And, it’s not when the options are costly, big, or ugly. There are no options with a true constraint. Nothing you can do.

The Physical Constraint
If your new product requires one of its moving parts to go faster than the speed of light, that’s a physical constraint (and not a good idea). If your new technology requires a material that’s stronger than the strongest on record, that’s a constraint (and, also, not a good idea). If your new manufacturing process consumes more water than your continent can spare, that’s a constraint. (This may not be a true constraint in the physics sense, but it’s damn close.) Don’t try to overpower the physical constraint – you can’t beat Mother Nature. The best you can do is wrestle her to a tie, then, when you tire, she pins you.

The Legal Constraint
If your approach violates a law, that’s a legal constraint. Not a true constraint in a physical sense, as there are options. You can change your approach so the law is not violated (maybe to a more costly approach), you can lobby for a law change (may take a while, but it’s an option), or you can break the law and roll the dice. To be clear, I don’t recommend this, just wanted to point out that there are options. Options exist when something is not a constraint, though the consequences can be most undesirable, severe, and may not fit with who we are.

The Emotional Constraint
If a person in power self-declares something as a constraint, decides there are no options, that’s an emotional constraint. Not a true constraint in a physical sense, but the most dangerous of the triad. When there is no balance in the balance of power, or the consequences of pushing are severe, the self-declared emotional constraint stands – there are no options. Like with the speed of light, where adding energy cannot overcome the speed constraint, adding reasoning energy cannot overcome the emotional constraint. I argue that most constraints are emotional.

Physical and legal constraints are relatively easy to see and navigate, but the emotional constraint is something different altogether. Difficult to see, difficult to predict, and difficult to overcome. Person-based rather than physics or law-based.

Strategies to overcome emotional constraints must be based on the particulars of the person declaring the constraint. However, there is one truism to all successful strategies: Just as the person in power is the only one who can convince himself something is a constraint, he is also the only one who can convince himself otherwise.

Procedures are good for documenting a repetitive activity:

1. Pick up that part.
2. Grab that wrench.
3. Tighten that nut.
4. Repeat, as required.

This type of procedure has value – do the activity in the prescribed way and the outcome is a high quality product.  But what if the activity is new? What if judgment and thinking govern the major steps?  What if you don’t know the steps?  What if there is no right answer? What does that procedure look like?

Try to modify an existing procedure to fit an activity your company has not yet done.  Better yet, try to write a new one.  It’s easy to write a procedure after-the-fact.  Just look back at what you did and make a flow chart.  But what about a procedure for an activity that does not exist? For an old activity done in a future new way?  Does the old procedure tell you the new way? Just the opposite. The old procedure tells you cannot do anything differently. (That’s why it’s called a procedure). Do what you did last time, or fail the audit.  Be compliant.  Standardize on the old way, but expect new and better results.

Here is a draft of a procedure for new activities:

1. Call a meeting with your best people.
2. Ask them to figure out a new way.
3. Give them what they ask for.
4. Get out of the way, as required.

When they succeed, lather on the praise and positivity. It will feel good to everyone. Create a procedure after-the-fact if you wish.  But, no worries, your best people won’t limit themselves by the procedure.  In fact, the best ones won’t even read it.

This one’s worth the read.

Link to complete article

Please pass this one around.

We dissect people, identify areas for improvement, and put together plans to  improve weaknesses. How depressing. How demoralizing. How de-energizing. We demand folks become more of what they aren’t at the expense of what they are. And, to top it off, it takes a lot of our energy to manage this systematized negativity. We spend all our time on the folks who didn’t, can’t, or won’t. This is crazy.

Now, imagine a parallel universe of positivity. All positive, all day. Say nothing negative is the mantra. Ignore the negative and let it wither. Strengthen strengths. Help folks be more of what they are. Focus on the best performers. Ignore the can’ts, don’ts, and won’ts. This is a respectful universe, a supportive universe, a happy universe, but also a highly profitable and productive one. A good place to work and a great place to make money. Is this crazy?

It may be crazy. But do an experiment and see for yourself. Next time you feel the urge to snuff out bad behavior, ignore it. And instead, stoke the blaze of fabulous behavior. Throw diesel on it, throw gas on it, do all you can to make it spread. Send the fire trucks to draw a crowd. Roast marshmallows. You’ll have fun and it’ll feel good. I guarantee you’ll get more fabulous behavior. And the bad behavior? Who cares.  Let it wither.

Gates wants contracts scrutinized more closely for inefficiencies and unneeded overhead. He said the savings could be shifted to support U.S. troops around the globe. Pentagon officials said they’re looking for annual savings in the $400 billion spent on goods and services. They’re looking to save $20B, or 5%.

Gates has it right. The government must stop overpaying. But how? Gates suggests improved contract scrutiny to eliminate inefficiencies and unneeded overhead. He’s on the right track, but that’s not where the money is. Gates’ real target should be material cost – that’s where the money is. But, can material cost bring $20B savings? Yes.

Assume the Pentagon spends $100B on services and $300B on goods. The cost of those of goods falls into three buckets: labor, material, and overhead, where material cost makes up the lion’s share at 70%, or $210B. A 10% reduction in material cost brings $21B in savings, and gets Gates to his target. But how?

To get the savings, the Pentagon must drive the right behavior.  They must must make suppliers submit a “should cost” with all proposals. The should cost is an estimated cost based on part geometries, materials, manufacturing processes used to create the parts, prevailing wage rates and machine rates, and profit. From these parameters, a should cost can be created in the design phase, without actually making the parts. So, the Pentagon will know what they should pay before the product is made. This cost analysis is based on real data, real machines, and real material costs.  There is no escape for defense contractors.  The cash cow is no longer.

Should costing will drive the design engineers to create designs that work better and cost less, something the defense industry thinks is impossible. They’re wrong. Given the tools, time, and training, the defense industry’s design engineering community can design out at least 25% of material cost, resulting in $50B+ in savings, more than twice Gates’ goal. Someone just has to teach them how.

Mr. Secretary, the non-defense world is ready to help.  Just ask us. (But we’ll go after a 50% cost reduction.)

The first step in the redesign program was determining what needed to change. A steering committee with representation from engineering, manufacturing, marketing, and business leadership spent weeks trying to determine what was required from a product standpoint to deliver radical improvements in both product performance and product economics. As a result of that collaboration, the team established aggressive new targets around robustness and reliability in addition to the goal of cutting the parts count and labor costs nearly in half.

See link for entire article

I argue it’s best to be authentic at all costs – tell them what you think and why. This approach does not minimize stress in the short term, like the next several days after the meeting. But it’s the least stressful over the long haul. First, once the kahuna calms herself and thinks about what you said, she’ll be happy you gave her the truth. You educated her. Even if she does not end up agreeing with your thinking, you gave her a broader perspective, a more complete view of the situation. She’s smart. She’ll see what you did for her. She’ll come around. Second, and more importantly, you’ve been true to yourself – no internal stress whatsoever. You’ve been authentic. You’ve been you.

You’re most effective when you’re you. You’re comfortable, you’re genuine, and you’re believable. And you’re stressed as hell when you pretend. Not believable. Faking doesn’t feel good, and it’s hard. It’s like wearing shoes that are two sizes too small – they’re not yours, and they hurt. You’re hobbled by them. People see the wincing as you shuffle through your day. They see the tension in your body. They know something is not right and they judge your words accordingly. Bad.

It takes big balls to be authentic. There are negative consequences. Some get pissed when you tell it like it is. So be it. And clear, focused thinking can be threatening. So be it. But the positives outweigh the negatives. Your organization is better for your thinking, and, most importantly you get to be you. Priceless.

You’ve seen the rodeo clown. A strange looking thing – funny clothes that don’t fit, a silly hat that doesn’t stay on, and bright red suspenders meant for bulls not pants. He’s all fun and games on the surface, but serious as a heart attack when seen at depth.  Underneath the clownness he does serious, meaningful work, work for the benefit of others.

Surely the cowboy needs gumption to sit atop a big, angry bull, a bull whose sole purpose is to use his raging bullness to enthusiastically eject his unwelcomed rider. Certainly the cowboy has courage.  But is it Level 5 Courage?  Maybe.

What’s the first thing the cowboy does after being pitched to the dirt? He gets up and runs like hell away from the bull. And the clown?  He runs like hell toward the bull. When everything natural says run away, the unnatural rodeo clown runs toward. And he runs with purpose, with precision, with intent. He runs at the pointy parts, and he runs to re-aim them.  Level 5 Courage – guaranteed.

a

This cannot be taught – rodeo clowns are born, not made.

a

When the crowd sits in the grandstand they want to see the cowboy.  But when the cowboy sits on the bull he wants to see the clown.  Sitting atop an angry, frothing bull, knowing the fury to follow, the cowboy finds comfort in the funny clothes hiding behind the barrel. With the briefest eye-to-eye connection the pact is made.  The cowboy knows it will be all right.  No mater what, the clown will be there – guaranteed.  Even at the expense personal safety. The clown gets meaning from this work.  This is why he is a clown.

There is a powerful bond between clown and cowboy. And cowboys always buy the beer.  Always.  Cowboys understand clowns are special and clowns like to be appreciated for what they really are.  It works for both.

Cowboys are right – rodeo clowns are special, but they’re hard to recognize; you must look deeply to see them.  So keep an eye out.  Once you recognize them, don’t make them turn in their funny clothes and suspenders. Appreciate them for what they are and they will make things all right.  Level 5 Courage – guaranteed.

When it’s game time, when it’s time to perform, when the shit hits the fan (or lettuce), grapes must make nice with olives and vice versa. But who makes the first move? How can an old grape reach out to a squished olive and still stay true to the Balsamic cause? How can they be mixed, shaken, and poured for the common cause? It’s all about the mixer/shaker/pourer.

Here is a little inside information about grapes and olives: Grapes don’t take direction from the chief of clan EVOO and olives don’t listen to the boss Balsamic. What’s needed is a mixer/shaker/pourer that is BOTH a trusted old grape who has lived through a good foot stomping AND a trusted old olive who has experienced the pain of a first pressing. Trust is essential. Look what we’re asking them to do: parachute from their bottle, hit the battle front together, and fight as one. That’s scary. Trust is needed.

The best mixer/shaker/pourers are an enigma – part olive, part grape, yet neither; sometimes misunderstood but always trusted; supportive of team members while pushing them out of their comfort zone. They earn their salt – they get it done. They bring people together and make it happen. They amplify strengths and shore up weaknesses to achieve the multiplicative effect where team output is greater than the sum of the parts.

These folks have an important and difficult job. And it can be a bit lonely, as they are never wholly part of any one community. So when you see them in the hall, give them a smile. They like to be understood.