20160307 - Transitioning Manual Operations to Automation

Running head: TRANSITIONING MANUAL OPERATIONS TO AUTOMATION 1

Transitioning Manual Operations to Automation

William C. B. Harding

Grand Canyon University

March 9, 2016

TRANSITIONING MANUAL OPERATIONS TO AUTOMATION 2

Transitioning Manual Operations to Automation

Moving from a theorized technological proposal to a realized solution requires less skill

with technology and a greater understanding of human factors. Moreover, skilled technology

integrators (i.e., project managers [PMs]) need to be able to translate customer needs and

facilitate interorganizational collaboration, while acting as the interface between

leadership/stakeholders and technologist, within an environment that is not forgiving of

mistakes. That being considered, it is posited that the most effective PMs are those who possess

knowledge of psychological theories (i.e., cognition, collaboration, motivation, and learning),

where an aggregated foundation of theories can be created, which encourages prosocial behavior

among peer collaborators towards a shared common goal of success and professional satisfaction

(Damon, 1984).

Correspondingly, before a PM considers taking the first steps in developing a project's

strategic roadmap/plan, a thorough understanding of organizational structure, stakeholder

motivation, and cultural influences will enable the PM to promote an environment of innovation

that is inspired and sustainable through the duration of the project. Accordingly, Perkins (1986)

proposes that the execution of a successful project cannot be realized without a well-constructed

strategic plan of action that melds the skills and collaborative alliance of individuals with a

company’s project goals. With that said, this paper will construct and examine a hypothetical

company, where various psychological theories will be considered with relationship to a

proposed problem statement, the organizational culture, and stakeholder/customer needs.

Organization, Leadership, and Cultural Environments

This paper examines a purely hypothetical company that is a composite of a number of

manufacturing constructs, folded into an environment that is transitioning from a manual process


to an automated solution. The Logistical Interpretive Pseudo Human (LIPH) device

manufacturing company, founded in 1992, is a 500 million dollar business made up of 200+

fulltime employees, who manufacture mechanical heart values and deployment systems for

patients with valvular cardiac disease. LIPH is the market leader in mechanical heart valves,

where the company desires moving into the newly emerging markets of Brazil, Russia, India,

and China (BRIC), but realizes that they must transition their class 10,000 manufacturing

cleanroom from manual processes to automated solutions in order to remain competitive and

grow into those new markets. That said, the first step in fully automating LIPH’s manufacturing

environment is to shift their current paper based tracking solution to a computer controlled

product tracking system that uses vision sensor decoded symbolic serialized IDs (i.e., 1D and 2D

symbology).

Located in Minneapolis Minnesota, LIPH is not a typical business of Midwestern

Americans, such that the company’s highly educated employee base is a composition of

individuals from China, India, USA, Europe, and Africa. Similarly, LIPH’s leadership is a

structure of diverse cultural backgrounds, where the CEO is from India (educated in the United

States) and all members of Engineering, who have been with the company more than five years,

hold a master degree (or greater) in their respective disciplines. The remaining 75% of LIPH’s

employee structure is made up of Production Associates (PAs) and Floor Supervisors, who have

a minimum of a high school degree, with some PAs possessing undergraduate degrees.

Furthermore, all employees are required to have completed training in statistical analysis and

have all participated in at least one multi-day Design Thinking (DT) session that has focused on

process improvement and collaborative ideation (Lindberg, Noweski, & Meinel, 2010).


Additionally, the company purposely migrated from a flat reporting structure (versus

matrix organization) to a transformational style of leadership, which embraces open

communication, encourages mutual trust, and positive/professional behavior through the

conveyance of confidence and a clear corporate vision (Taylor, 2008; Grant, 2012).

Accordingly, LIPH has realized a number of benefits associated with using a transformational

leadership style, such as increased employee retention (27% with 15+ years at LIPH),

collaborative behavior, and an open exchange of ideas (Taylor, 2008). Those positive points

being considered, LIPH has selected three individuals (i.e., subject matter experts [SMEs]) to

lead the company’s transition to automation, where each of the SMEs are experienced in

integrating technology and have a proven record of success at the individual process level.

Project Theory and Strategic Plan Definition

Recognizing that LIPH will dedicate considerable funds and resources in order to achieve

the desired goals of increasing manufacturing quality and yields, decreasing human error, and

validating the new automated manufacturing line within 6 months, the SMEs know that to fail in

their effort is unacceptable. For that reason and before initiating the project kick-off the SMEs

have reexamined LIPH’s organizational structure (to be assured of alignment with project goals)

and surveyed the employees regarding change (i.e., using new technology).

Following examination of the survey results the SMEs have determined that there exists

some resistance to change at the PA level and knowing that the PAs are the end users/customers,

the SMEs will use the cognitive flexibility theory as a principle method for eliminating that

resistance. As proposed by Spiro and Jehng (1990), cognitive flexibility theory combines

methods and tools that enable individuals to recognize the benefits allied with intuitively using

technology, specifically within environments associated with healthcare.


Building off cognitive awareness that change may result in PA discomfort and embracing

a transformational style of leadership/learning related to shared goals (Merriam, 2004), the SMEs

postponed the official project start, so that they can involve key PAs within a week long Design

Thinking (DT) collaborative session, which focuses on the construction of a clear problem

statement and the creation of strategic plan of mutual accountability (i.e., between all

stakeholders). That being considered, DT is recognized by the SMEs as the best approach for

encouraging stakeholder engagement, sharing ideas, openly communicating, and promoting

mutual accountability, within a five step process of empathy building (with the customer needs),

problem definition, ideation, rapid prototyping, and concept testing (Lindberg, Noweski, &

Meinel, 2010; Taylor, 2008). Additionally, the SMEs are will organize the collaborative DT

session within a large empty warehouse, where cardboard material has been collected, such that

it can be used to construct a mockup of the new automated line. Along with providing numerous

other low-tech prototyping materials, the SMEs will encourage the DT participants to construct a

simulation that enables the visualization of automated process flow, while identifying any

concept flaws.

Lastly, the SMEs will use the results of the DT collaboration event, which embraces

cognitive flexibility theory, to construct a thorough and mutually agreed upon strategic plan

Perkins (1986). The strategic plan will enable all stakeholders to approve a method of execution,

where the project timeline, milestones, and deliverables are clearly defined. Specifically, the

strategic plan will clarify what is within project scope, requirements, schedule, barriers to

success (i.e., risks), testing/validation/deployment steps, and ongoing solution support. Within

the strategic plan, the stakeholders will be able to identify those elements that are critical to the

project’s success and plan their respective actions such that the project schedule is not affected.


Cognition, Collaboration, and Strategic Alignment

Consideration of LIPH’s movement from manual tracking to an automated solution

requires the creation of a heterogeneous solution that aggregates cognitive flexibility theory, DT

collaboration, and strategic plan development. That said, the positive attributes of using

cognitive flexibility theory would be realized through the theory’s ability to align individual

stakeholder and organizational goals, expressed during project discovery. Similarly and building

on the use of cognitive flexibility theory, the process of using DT collaboration enables

stakeholders to negotiated mutual commitments and agreements towards a common goal that

embraces creative innovation. Consequently, the use of both cognitive and collaboration

methods of individual reflection and stakeholder collaboration establishes the foundation from

which a clear and succinct strategic framework is developed. With that in mind, an effective

strategic framework, built off applicable psychological theories (i.e., cognition, collaboration),

incorporates stakeholder motivation and adult learning methods that recognize organizational

requirements and customer needs (Perkins, 1986).

Conclusion

Proposed within this paper is the creation of heterogeneous solution that aggregates

cognitive and collaboration methods for developing a hypothetical company’s (i.e., LIPH)

strategic plan, which enables the successful development and deployment of an automated

tracking solution within the exemplified mechanical heart valve manufacturing environment.

That strategic plan or technology roadmap, as inferred by Phaal, Farrukh, and Probert (2004),

will enable a company to intuitively navigate along a defined critical path, through individual

and organization roadblocks, towards a successful goal.


All things considered, the development of a project’s strategic framework/plan may

seemingly represent the most critical component for creating a successful solution, but without a

cognitive focus on stakeholder needs and the use of collaborative tools, the risk of project failure

will be increased (i.e., cost overruns, stakeholder disagreements, and goal misalignment).

Accordingly, the proposed heterogeneous solution establishes a clear methodology of

harmonious collaboration and removes the errors that will be realized when companies are

tempted to seek a tactical or immediate solution.


References

Damon, W. (1984). Peer education: The untapped potential. Journal of applied developmental

psychology, 5(4), 331-343. http://doi.org/10.1016/0193-3973(84)90006-6

Grant, A. M. (2012). Leading with meaning: Beneficiary contact, prosocial impact, and the

performance effects of transformational leadership. Academy of Management

Journal, 55(2), 458-476. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0588

Lindberg, T., Noweski, C., & Meinel, C. (2010). Evolving discourses on design thinking: how

design cognition inspires meta-disciplinary creative collaboration. Technoetic Arts, 8(1),

31-37. https://edit801fall10.pbworks.com/f/lindberg,+noweski+and+meinel.pdf

Merriam, S. B. (2004). The role of cognitive development in Mezirow’s transformational

learning theory. Adult education quarterly, 55(1), 60-68.

http://doi.org/10.1177/0741713604268891

Perkins, D. N. (1986). Thinking frames. Educational leadership, 43(8), 4-10. Retrieved from

http://www.ascd.com/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_198605_perkins.pdf

Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J., & Probert, D. R. (2004). Technology roadmapping—a planning

framework for evolution and revolution. Technological forecasting and social

change, 71(1), 5-26. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1625(03)00072-6

Spiro, R. J., & Jehng, J. C. (1990). Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology

for the nonlinear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter. Cognition,

education, and multimedia: Exploring ideas in high technology, 205.

Taylor, E. W. (2008). Transformative learning theory. New directions for adult and continuing

education, 2008(119), 5-15. http://doi.org/10.1002/ace.301

20160307 - Transitioning Manual Operations to Automation

Documents

Transcript of 20160307 - Transitioning Manual Operations to Automation