EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
When new information
and manufacturing technologies appear they are often perceived
as a means of improving upon current practices, for example,
by saving time or reducing costs etc. However, many of the new
technologies that have appeared since the early 1980s have often
provided the opportunity to radically modify accepted practices
or offered the potential to enable entirely new approaches. Commonly,
these innovative aspects of new technology have not been fully
exploited or only slowly understood by firms. Rapid prototyping
processes are an example of new manufacturing technologies that
present industry with the potential to create a discontinuity
with the past, and hence an opportunity for firms to innovate
and through this to gain a competitive advantage over their rivals.
Rapid prototyping
technologies are a means of manufacturing that involves building
components, layer by layer, using materials such as paper, wax,
thermopolymere, etc. This is in contrast to older technologies
that cut a component from a block of material (metal, foam, wax,
etc). These layered models can then be used by designers for
analysis. They can also be further processed to rapidly create
prototype tooling which can then be used to manufacture prototype
components. The technologies can also be used to create production
tooling, and even to rapidly manufacture production components
in low volumes. So rapid prototyping technologies are in fact
a set of processes for the rapid production of models, prototypes,
tooling and final components.
Typical reported
benefits are often significant. On the production of prototype
components, time reductions as high as 90% in comparison with
existing standard prototyping methods have been reported. The
exact time saving that can be achieved on the production of prototype
components seems to depend on the complexity of the parts. Large
cost savings have also been reported, ranging from 40% to 70%,
but many companies do not have accurate information on the costs
of new product development, so these figures should be treated
with some caution. Nevertheless, even if cost saving have been
overestimated by a factor of two, the likely savings will still
probably be significant. The potential time and cost savings
mean that the technologies are the worth considering as part
of a larger effort focused on reducing new product development
costs and time to market.
Market turbulence
is becoming an increasingly important issue. This turbulence
is caused by many factors, including the pace of technological
developments, more diverse and ever changing niche markets, increased
competition, and demanding customer expectations. The rapidly
changing, uncertain and unpredictable nature of the business
environment has exacerbated the prevailing high-risk nature of
business activities. Rapid prototyping technologies must therefore
be addressed within the context of market turbulence. The key
question to consider is how rapid prototyping technologies can
help firms deal with this type of environment, for example, by
improving operational change competencies and helping to improve
knowledge of customers requirements.
The real value
of these new technologies therefore has to be assessed strategically.
The technology has to be viewed from two perspectives. The first
is attainment of business objectives like reducing time to market.
The second is the potential to enable new business strategies
and providing capabilities to respond to unexpected changes in
the marketplace. There are several dimensions to this. For example
can the technologies be used to:
- help enter
new markets, for example by lowering entry barriers?
- increase market
share, for example by using the time saving to explore more design
options to create more innovative products that customers will
value?
- change the
rules of competition, for example by offering customers individually
customised products with no time or cost penalty?
Only through
considering the strategic potential can the full range of benefits
be accurately determined. This also implies that a strategic
decision needs to be taken about whether to develop in-house
capabilities or to outsource rapid prototyping by using bureau
services, or some combination. Development of supply chain partnerships
are also relevant should some degree of outsourcing be adopted.
As there are
hidden benefit, so there are hidden costs. These stem from two
sources. The first source of hidden cost stems largely from:
the need to possibly modify existing computer-aided design systems;
additional secondary technologies required to transform models
into tooling and components; further equipment required to reduce
and eliminate health and safety risks; and so on.
The second
source of hidden costs stem from organisational and human resource
issues. These amount to more than just the obvious training costs
associated with learning how to operate the new equipment. The
main additional cost is that associated with organisational changes
which are likely to be needed for several reasons.
Firstly, technical
features of the technologies will create new demands upon the
organisation for coordination, communications etc. Moreover,
because of the wide range of potential applications, the technologies
could be located in several places: in new product development
units, in prototyping shops, or in production, or even some combination.
Whatever decisions are taken about location, this will add further
requirements for coordination etc.
Organisational
changes are considered an important factor for the successful
application of rapid prototyping technologies. Such changes should
be designed to promote culture change, team working, more open
communications, and so on. These will bring benefits such as
improved cross-functional understandings, shorter lead times
and lower costs.
These types
organisational changes will also enable the full achievement
of the potential benefits of rapid prototyping technologies.
For example, these technologies offer the potential to significantly
reduce the lead time on the production of prototype components.
This can allow issues such as design for manufacture to be assessed
early on in the design process. However, if an adversarial relationship
or lack of mutual respect and trust exists between designers
and manufacturing experts, then it is unlikely that design for
manufacture issues are going to be properly addressed. This is
because to properly deal with these issues, designers need to
take account of the preliminary results of manufacturing engineering
problem solving to make products easier and less expensive to
manufacture. On the other hand, manufacturing engineers must
focus their problem solving efforts to deliver capabilities required
by the designers. Both groups need to jointly engage in a process
of mutual adjustment. Rapid prototyping technologies, on their
own, are unlikely to enable this process.
Given complexity
of the business and organisational issues involved, a comprehensive
analysis involving strategic, technical and organisational assessments
is recommended. At the end of these assessments an accurate cost/benefit
analysis can be undertaken and decision taken on the basis of
strategic analysis and return on investment calculations. If
the benefits are not significant enough to justify captial investments
in the technologies then an appropriate way forward may be to
make use of rapid prototyping bureaux. However, if the services
of bureaux are used then it is important to regularly review
this decision. Rapid changes in the technologies may quickly
render invalid, assumptions used in the business case justification.
Supply chain management issues such as alignment of vision, development
of open and effective communications, development of commitment
to generating long-term mutual benefits, etc also need to be
considered. The costs associated with these issues must therefore
be factored into the cost/benefit analysis. |