I’d like to talk about systems thinking in the context of your overall product development operation.

At EAC we’ve developed a framework that we use to analyze the operation of product development at our customers and clients. Our Product Development Operating System, this framework, is broken down into three subsystems. The first is an Information Flow subsystem. The second is a Workflow subsystem. The third is a Continuous Improvement subsystem. The Information Flow subsystem is analyzed as a whole, but the other two are broken down into subsystems of their own.

Within the Workflow subsystem we have an Innovation subsystem, a Leadership subsystem, and an Investment decision subsystem. In the all-important, critically important but often missing, Continuous improvement subsystem — we break that into Expertise, Learning, and Strategy. All of the elements of this system are critically important for your system to operate optimally. If you have a missing or sub-optimal subsystem, the effectiveness and productivity of your overall product development system will diminish.

So let me challenge you. Look at your product development system. Look at it through this framework — through Information Flow, through Innovation, through Leadership, through Investment Decisions, through Development of Expertise, through learning, and through strategy. Are any of these elements in your operation either ineffective or missing? If they are missing, or ineffective, don’t be too concerned. Moving to a product development operating system is an evolution. Your evolution simply may not be complete.

In fact, look to other materials in this series called the Product Development Operating System Evolution. That will give you both a mental model to reinforce your knowledge of the system and some insights into how to evolve your system to one that is more effective and productive.

Contact EAC to learn more about how Systems Thinking and the application of our Product Development Operating System can help your organization become more efficient, productive, innovative, and competitive.

Follow Bill at http://www.twitter.com/systhinking

Here at EAC we view Product Development as a system. This stands in counterpoint to the traditional western way of looking at product development as a process. In fact when we promote product development as a system, and that thinking as being more important than looking at it as a process, we often get head scratching in return.

Western traditional management likes to break work down into small pieces and delegate them as tasks. It reduces work into a set of repeatable steps. In some parts of the business that’s wonderful. Think of manufacturing or any area where the process is transactional and non-variable. In those instances process thinking is terrifically beneficial. We can take repeatable steps and proceduralize them because we know if we follow steps exactly we will get consistent output results. Think again of the manufacturing line or something mundane like washing the dishes. You clear the table, scrape the scraps into the wastebasket, rinse the plates to see if anything is baked on or caked on, and then you load the dishwasher and push the button. Then you return later and you get the desirable, repeatable, results of clean dishes.

When we moved to this mental model of product development as a process or process thinking, at first it was advantageous. We brought in patterns of behavior. We broke product development down to milestone phases. It was advantageous to provide guidance to project managers as they trek through milestone phases. But, as issues arose additional management responsibilities and details were added to the process. The focus of product development / project management shifted from the creation of market based value to an administrative checklist — checking the steps you’ve actually accomplished in your product development process.

The way we now implement stage-gate process in product development has made it almost impossible to have a successful project. The antidote to that is to start applying systems thinking. Systems thinking is based upon, not a collection of elements in a system but, the interaction of the elements of the system — the dynamic. We see people, processes, teams, technology, and tools all as elements in the product development system. The operational dynamic between these elements is what determines the quality of your workflow, your information flow, and if you’ve embraced it, your continuous improvement operation inside of product development.

If your product development environment is characterized by conflict and hostility, then you’re probably locked into a restrictive and constrictive process thinking approach to product development. Shift your thinking from that linear process thinking — Task, Complete, Task, Complete — to the closed loop ideas of systems thinking where you have feedback loops and mutual cause and effect of the elements within your operation.

Process thinking was a meaningful advance in the 20th century. It brought improvement to product development, but it’s time to move on to Systems thinking. As you take what ever your washing machine is and redesign it, don’t do it with process thinking, do it with systems thinking. We’re 15% of the way through the 21st century. It’s time you joined the 21st century revolution in systems thinking.

Contact EAC to learn more about how Systems Thinking and the application of our Product Development Operating System can help your organization become more efficient, productive, innovative, and competitive.

At EAC, we’ve developed a framework that looks at product development as a system. We call this framework the Product Development Operating System — the PDOS. (Shown above.) To understand how the PDOS framework functions, you must first understand the elements of a competitive system.

The first element of a competitive system is information. Competitive systems have both generalized and specific information. Generalized information covers the full suite of potential strategies and tactics — a playbook. Specialized information is general information that is selected to appropriately address the specific competition — the game plan.

The second element in a competitive system is preparation. Like any sport, practice tends to be a primary contributing factor in who wins the game. In the system sense, behaviors used in competition are rehearsed to develop deeper skills. As learning occurs during practice, ideas, strategies, and tactics are then added to the playbook.

Naturally, the competition itself is the final piece in a competitive system. All skills and knowledge developed through the first two parts of the system are then applied during the competition.

Looking at the framework, you notice that the three components of a competitive system comprise the rows of the PDOS framework. The columns represent the three tiers of the organization. Each tier of the organization has responsibilities that impact the systematic operation of Product Development.

The PDOS thrives on the flow of information. Knowledge is the value medium of product development and information is what flows through the system. A knowledge base that includes Product Development specific information technology tools like PLM systems, design tools, and simulation tools serves as the foundation supporting the other layers of the PDOS.

The preparation layer is where the “important” work happens. This is a sanctuary for continuous improvement. This layer is a core part of the Japanese system. In Stephen Covey’s book, 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, he talks about the division of the urgent work and the important work. He notes avoid letting the urgent work overwhelm the important work because, if that happens, the important work never gets done.

The preparation layer is what is missing from the western approach to product development. We have made an orphan out of feedback, which is the learning element that is critical to continuous improvement.

In Product Development, the competition layer represents the “urgent” part of our charter, the execution of product development or projects.  Process thinking organizations see the upper right hand box as “Product Development”.  Organizations that shift to a Systems Thinking perspective of Product Development put themselves in a stronger competitive position.

When contemplating the idea of writing a blog, I challenged myself to justify why it would be both worth my time to write, and worth yours to read. The hope is that working through self-justification will result in a blog of greater interest and value.

Sharing the motives behind this blog through self-introduction seems the right place to start.  By self-introduction, I don’t mean telling you about myself — you can find all that on LinkedIn — but rather about EAC and our shared view of product development. EAC was founded and operates on a fundamental belief that the way we (you) execute product development is fundamentally flawed.  We further believe that this deteriorates America’s competitive position and unnecessarily, unacceptably demotivates the expert knowledge workers who operate within the functions critical to product success.

As an achievement-focused organization, EAC seeks first to understand the drivers and root causes of the positive and negative behaviors typical of product development environments. We then engage in the competition of ideas to produce an array of countermeasures to bring to common product development problems. One output of this internal collaboration is the Product Development Operating System (PDOS), a framework for the conduct of successful product development published on the EAC website.

An element of the PDOS gets to the heart of justifying this blog. In the PDOS, we use a maturity model to articulate an important aspect of improvement efforts within product development. Limited by flawed management habits many companies become trapped at what we call Level 2 operation, “Silo’ed”. During the maturation of a product development system, the gap from Level 2 to Level 3, “Systematic”, is the most difficult to bridge. It is EAC’s mission to help product development organizations, to borrow a phrase, cross this chasm.

Siloes are interesting. In companies, they are at first a sign of progress. The generalist of entrepreneurship reforms into specialized functional areas, enabling further growth and maturation.  But they eventually become a barrier to further organizational progress. That’s not surprising; Peter Senge tells us in the first law of systems thinking that “today’s problems come from yesterday’s solutions”. For these maturing companies, getting beyond the silo mentality is one important key to progress.

Earlier in my career, I spent several years working in Japan at a global manufacturing company.   Japan during the course of its history had periodically shut itself off from the rest of the world. The Japanese talked about their resulting global naivety — knowing and caring about only what happened within their limited domain – as ‘ii no kaeru’, a ‘frog in a well’. A well is just an upside down silo. For functional groups, understanding their own bigger picture – the landscape in which the well or silo exists – is the first step in the work of connecting the silos and fostering systematic operation.

EAC conducts Voice-of-Customer interviews, performs Product Development System Assessments, and provides consulting services. During these events, when we visit prospects and customers, it is startling to see how hungry each company’s product development thought leaders are for stimulating and informative ideas and discussions about what can be done to improve product development operation. And that is how we justify this blog. To all of you who from time to time feel like a frog, this blog is aimed at letting you know what’s going on outside of your well.