CAD Camp Seattle Was Total Success!

For those of you that follow along you know I normally do new postings on Mondays and Thursdays, but last Thursday was CAD Camp Seattle and I had the privilege of instructing.

There is something to be said for speaking to a room full of more than 150 die-hard CAD geeks. 

If you ever have the opportunity to do so, I suggest that you take it.  Nothing is quite as humbling as having someone ask a question that you cannot answer in a room full of experts and aspiring gurus.

My class was titled, "The Power of Sheet Sets Made So Simple, Even a Caveman Could Do It!" The title was cooked up by Matt "Wicked Cool" Murphy and most of the handout content came directly from Heidi Hewett's "Sheets Happen!" series.

If you have been following my blog then you know that I am a huge fan of the sheet set manager.  And judging by the reaction of the crowd there are some new fans out there now.

To catch up.  Check out my posting "Some Good Tools for Instant Productivity" Part 1 & Part 2.

Here is a link to some of the photos of the days event http://www.flickr.com/photos/dscohn/sets/72157603961603995/. 

I will be back in full force this Thursday with a new topic and hopefully some new fun.

Good and Great - Technology Accelerators

Welcome back everyone! I can't wait to talk about today's topic, Technology! That is right, the word that all geeks love and hold dear is the last segment of our current discussion.

Though we love this topic often we must convince someone higher in the pay scale that money and resources should be expended. To do that we must think about how to best apply the technology rather than relying on the, "This is so cool!" effect. Many managers and employers can only see the money and manpower expended when they hear those words.

Before we talk about upgrading or implementing we have to think about the question posed by the author of "Good to Great" on his web site JimCollins.com.

"Why is there so much hype and fear about new technologies, and what can you do to view new technologies with objective equanimity?" - JimCollins.com

Objective, that is the key word here. Discipline demands objectivity when the goal is greatness.

The lessons learned from the study were clear. Technology cannot catapult a company to greatness, it can only accelerate the rise or fall.

The companies from the "Good to Great" study that made the transition mastered the process of determining which technology would benefit them most and mesh with their hedgehog concept. If a technology does not mesh then there is no need to pursue it.

Lets look at the example of Walgreens Pharmacy and their application of technology.

Walgreens

In the late 1990's the technology boom was in full swing and Walgreens appeared to be behind the technology curve.

The Wallgreens approach to technology is all about adherence the hedgehog concept. The most convenient pharmacy experience possible.

• Fill your order online and pick it up at your local Wallgreens along with a gallon of milk and some toothpaste.
• Don't get out much? Then have it shipped to your house.
• Travel a lot? Not a problem. All Walgreens Pharmacies are linked together so you can get your prescriptions filled almost anywhere in the country.

Walgreens operates on a simple metric of profit per customer served. Which means efficiency, quality, and convenience all have to mesh. The right technologies not only make this possible but make it highly profitable. The wrong technology is the death by a thousand cuts from poor customer satisfaction.

Instead of leaping in to the fray Walgreens methodically built and tested the web technology and the interaction with the network of stores. Enhancing their already efficient system and adding to the performance based on profit per customer visit.

That is all well and good for Walgreens, but what does it mean for those of us in CAD, design, and engineering? It is an example of the judicious application of technology to the Hedgehog concept and the discipline to only introduce what helps our processes as a whole.

My company charges for time on a cost per hour basis, so the economic driver is productivity per man-hour expended.

In the company I work for, we have many clients from many industries, but all of them have some things in common.

So the tools that are most valuable to my company are the ones that ease the difficulty of working for multiple clients, with multiple standards, in multiple disciplines and capitalize on the common ground.

• All clients have drawing sets that need to be managed, so we implemented Sheet Set Manager by developing a master format that met our needs and then adapting it to each client as they come in. This adds approximately 2 hours to the initial client setup but saves us nearly ten hours in the actual lifecycle of the project, varying by project size.
• All clients have a CTB and specific Fonts that they use. A central location was created on our server for storage of these files and all machines are mapped to this location and given read access. Rarely do we have an issue where fonts do not load properly or the right CTB file is not present.
• All clients require that files be sent back to them at project completion. We use eTransmit on all client submittals to make sure that external reference files are gathered and pathed appropriately.
• Plotting takes a significant amount of time when the drawing sets become large. So we made sure each of our employees knows how and when to use the publish tools for plotting. Allowing more time for production and quality control.

In each case the technology tool was introduced for a specific purpose, in line with the idea of productivity per man-hour expended. If a technology is "cool" but does not enhance the overall productivity of the drafter, it is left behind.

I know for a fact that there are many companies out there that operate in a, "This is how we have always done it." mind set. In my opinion few thing are more dangerous than that.

I talk with clients every day who cannot seem to understand how the introduction of an efficiency, that will save them 10% or more on their time expended per project, is worth the few hours it might take myself or one of their team to implement it for everyone.

Like the principle of First Who which says, "The right people are a companies greatest asset." The principle of Technology Accelerators says, "The right technology is a companies most useful tool."

The wrong technology, or technology implemented for the wrong reason, is equivalent to a big whole that resources and money are shoveled into.

Good and Great - Culture of Discipline

Thanks to you all for checking out the next installment in our look at how to apply principles of greatness to the world of CAD and Design.  For anyone just joining the conversation you may want to review the previous "Good and Great" postings available in the archive.

As many of you know this is a look at the principals discussed in the book "Good to Great" by Jim Collins.  We have already discussed the first two main points

Disciplined People - Level 5 Leadership and First Who Then What

Disciplined Thought - Confront the Brutal Facts and The Hedgehog Concept

The next discipline is that of Disciplined Action.  And, the first principle is that of a Culture of Discipline.

Think of two employees, Jim and Sarah. 

Jim

Jim is  a 9-5 employee.  He shows up everyday on time and sees his job as a job.  He performs his duties well enough to maintain his current employment but has little ambition for himself or his team.  Jim isn't really interested in learning new software features or increasing efficiencies because the way he does his job has always been good enough.  That is exactly the problem..."good enough".

Sarah

Sarah is a 24 hour employee.  She shows up to work everyday on time and probably goes home at the same as Jim.  Not a workaholic but a person who cares about her craft, her skills, and her team.  The term "good enough" only passes her lips when the deadline has arrived and the client makes a last minute change, with no chance to postpone. 

When she goes home at night her mind thinks about what she could have done different or more efficient during the day.  Sarah knows that she has a responsibility as part of the team to be excellent.  Not, good enough.

I know what you are thinking.  That is not a culture of discipline, it is an example of a disciplined person using disciplined thoughts.  That is true to a point.  But the culture of your work environment is, at least in part, determined by the people that fill it.  Some practices that can only be regulated through tyrannical standards and policies would  simply handle themselves in a disciplined culture.

Here is a personal example.  In my current job I am responsible for training new employees.  One of the things that I always try to impress on them is a drawing shut down procedure.  It goes like this.

When the markups are finished and the printing is done they are to switch back over to paper space, if the are in a file with a title block, then zoom to the extents of boarder before saving.

That is it, and the reason is this.  The next time they have to go back into the drawing may be six hours or six months later.  If for some reason all  they have to go on is what the sheet looks like, then they will be able to see the sheet in the preview thumbnail that is created when a file is saved. 

Not to mention the fact that the next edit to be done will probably not be in the same location within the drawing as whatever they just changed.  The next time, when I open the drawing after them, I can simply zoom in on the area of interest and go to work without having to do several additional steps.  This can save anywhere from several seconds per time a drawing is opened to several minutes if you happen to have big files and a slower computer.  Even if it is only few seconds per drawing.  How many times do you open drawings in a day?  10?  15? 100?  Lets say I open 15 drawings per day, (An unrealistically small number but then we are just talking here.)  and it saves me 5 seconds per occurrence, or 1 minute 15 seconds a day.  That adds up to nearly 5 hours over the course of a year.  More than a half a days production time gained by simply being disciplined in habits.

My number is probably a lot closer to the 100 files per day than 15.  If 15 files a day gains nearly 5 hours 100 will gain nearly 35 hours in a year.  That is almost one week of production gained through disciplined action and I didn't even have to actually work any harder or longer.

This is a very CAD oriented example, but I hope that everyone can grasp my meaning.

A culture of discipline encourages everyone to work in a disciplined way because they see the benefit of their actions to themselves and the team around them, not because of a dictate from an executive on high.  If you are an executive reading this; you can rest assured that the CAD Technician in your company does not care one little bit about wether you want him to close down the drawings he is working on in a certain way because it will increase the overall productivity by up to 2%.

However if the principle of First Who is applied rigorously then he will care about how it effects his ability to do a great job and achieve great things.

A culture of discipline is about thinking ahead and practicing the things that will increase not only the productivity and quality of the product, but also the overall quality in our work experience. 

Good and Great - The Hedgehog Concept

Welcome back everyone!  Sorry for the delay in getting to the next topic, but lets get started without any further delays.

The Hedgehog Concept

In his famous essay “The Hedgehog and the Fox,” Isaiah Berlin divided the world into hedgehogs and foxes, based upon an ancient Greek parable: “The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.” (www.JimCollins.com)

So here is how it goes. 

The fox is sleek, fast, intelligent, plotting and scheming to catch the hedgehog.

The hedgehog is slow and steady with it's mind always on the goal at hand.

When the fox roles out a brand new plan for catching and eating the hedgehog, what happens?  The hedgehog curls up, out come the spikes, and the fox is thwarted once again.

The Hedgehog Concept boils down to this.  What is the one thing that you, your department or your company can do better than anyone else in the world?  A lofty goal I know.  But then again we are talking about attaining greatness not simply average or above average.

It is the intersection of three things that determines the best hedgehog concept.  In the book these are referred to as the Three Circles and they go like this.

1. What you can be the best in the world at.

2. What drives your economic engine.

3. What you are deeply passionate about.

A hedgehog concept relies on the intersection of these three items.  If I am the best in the world at (insert ridiculous talent here).  I may be deeply passionate about it, but if it annoys everyone else on the planet, I probably will not be able to turn it into a marketable enterprise.  Therefore it does not fit into the three circles and cannot be the core of a hedgehog concept. 

If the passion is not present then I will not be committed and follow through.

If I cannot truly be the best in the world then I can only be good or average and it will not meet the standard for greatness.

All three traits must be in alignment for greatness.  Greatness lies at the intersection of these three circles.

In the case of Kimberly Clark, as discussed in the Level 5 Leadership section, the company found that their hedgehog concept did not even lie within the industry in which they were currently engaged.  So they sold the paper mills and embraced the hedgehog concept.

Here is one of the other examples from the book.

The Boeing Company

When we travel by air in the U.S., most would assume that they are flying in a Boeing built aircraft.  However that was not always the case.  For many years Boeing only built military planes.  But, as the company grew more experienced with large aircraft, and the market for long distance travel by air grew, it became clear to Boeing that they could  make the transition into the private sector and be successful. 

1. They had already mastered big planes with jet engines and large cargo loads. 
2. The market was ripe for growth and expansion.
3. They had a passion for aircraft.

The three circles aligned and a giant was born.  Now, commercial flights all over the world are flown in Boeing aircraft.

What is your Hedgehog Concept?

I can't tell you what your concept should be, so I will not even try.  However, if you have been reading the previous posts then I think you might have an idea of how to figure it out.  Let me just give you these pointers.

• Be the Level 5 Leader who asks the hard questions.
• Talk to the Highly Capable people that you know and work with.  Remember that what highly capable people really want is to be part of something great.
• Face the brutal facts of what they have to say.  Finding the right hedgehog concept must be addressed with honesty and an open mind.

Keep in mind that most of the good to great companies averaged 5 years to fully develop their hedgehog concept.  The reality is that it will not happen overnight, or in a weekend corporate retreat.

A hedgehog concept will only develop if there is a commitment to greatness by those involved.  If someone is not committed to greatness it is time for them to get off the bus completely or change seats to become a follower and not a leader.

Busy, Busy, BUSY!

Sorry for the delay everyone!  I have been very busy at work these last few days and didn't have a chance to write the next installment. 

Let me just say that I am engaging in my own pursuit  of professional excellence right at the moment.  (Otherwise known as, "Trying to meet my deadlines.")

Bare with me and I promise to post the next section on Monday.

Thanks again everyone.

Good and Great - Confront the Brutal Facts

Thanks to you all for checking out the next installment in our look at how to apply principles of greatness to the world of CAD and Design.  For anyone just joining the conversation you may want to review the previous "Good and Great" postings available in the archive.

As many of you know this is a look at the principals discussed in the book "Good to Great" by Jim Collins.  We have already discussed the first main point of Disciplined People broken down into two parts; Level 5 Leadership and First Who Then What.

Pages upon pages could be written about this information alone. (Indeed many pages have been written already.  Just read the book.) However I think it is time to move our discussion along to the next discipline.

Disciplined Thought is about approaching the issues and difficulties that we face from day to day with the most logical and clear mind that we can manage, and recognizing that things may not be as we want to see them. 

I know the old saying, "Hope springs eternal." But why do I as business man  hold on to the idea that what has worked for me in the past will continue to work indefinitely. 

As I was reading, the story of A&P vs. Kroger stuck me as a remarkable contrast in perspectives.  So I will try and share the meat of the story without taking too much time or leaving too much out.

A&P vs. Kroger

It would be hard to find a more drastic example of fortune reversals than this pair.  At the beginning of the comparison period A&P was the largest retail organization in the United States and second only to General Motors in total sales.

Kroger was a little know grocery chain, that was hardly a competing company for A&P.

Where are they both now?  Not many of my generation even know what an A&P store is, while Kroger is now a major grocery chain in the nation reaching from coast to coast.

How can such a reversal be explained?  Lets take a look at the facts of the matter. 

In a country that had just been through two World Wars and a recession where rationing and thrift became a way of life, it is natural that people would gravitate to a spartan store with limited selections but low prices.  Thus A&P had the best business model for the time.  Many small neighborhood stores, with low overheads and razor thin profit margins. Kroger at this time had the same business model but within a much smaller region.

Then in the latter half of the 20th century the culture changed.  Americans became much more affluent and started to look for a store where they could have more choices, get a flu shot, then rent a movie, or choose between 100 flavors of coffee.  They wanted a super store with high quality items and they didn't mind paying for it.

Both A&P and Kroger performed the research and testing to see this change coming.  However only one chose to embrace the brutal fact that times had changed and the customers wanted something other than what they had to offer.

Kroger recognized the change for what it was.  A paradigm shift in the way their patrons shopped and what they were looking for.  A&P having the exact same information embarked on a crusade to convince the public that what it already had in place was what they REALLY wanted.  The same facts two different reactions.

Kroger embarked on a mission to build new stores and revise fully 100% of their market presence.  Building new super stores wherever their research told them that they could attain either 1st or 2nd place in sales.  If they could not beat the rest of the competition,  they pulled out and conserved their resources,  to secure or establish new locations.

A&P lowered prices to try and draw the business in.  Lower prices led to lower margins.  Lower margins led to cost cutting across the board which led to the stores being even more spartan, less clean, having fewer selections, and thus becoming less appealing to the populace that was changing around them.  A tragic downward spiral began.  The stores eventually became so unclean that one of the A&P executives interviewed by the "Good to Great" research team made this comment.

"We didn't just have dirt.  We had dirty dirt!"

A&P, Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc. is still around, but I have lived, worked, and traveled all over the U.S.. and have never been into one of their stores nor have I even seen one.  I can name several Kroger stores in nearly every place that I have lived and visited.  In fact, I shop regularly at the one just down the street from my house.

Do not get the idea that this is a case of one organization simply not seeing the trend and another one that did.  Neither luck nor a lack of information are factors here.  Both possessed the same information and recognized the same trends.  One made the decision to confront that information and change while the other closed it's eyes and trudged on.

We may not be in a position to set policy and choose strategic objectives for our companies.  However, that does not mean that we get to close our eyes and follow blindly.  Nor does it mean that we have the luxury to ignore facts about existing customers and the industries that we work in.  Quite the contrary actually. 

As a persons aspiring to be Level 5 Leaders within our spheres of influence, and the constant source of feedback for our companies, we must face the brutal fact of what our clients wants on a daily basis.  Then seek to fill that need within the framework of the existing organizations.  If that means developing new tools or techniques then the best attempt must be made.

If we are unable to achieve this goal by means available within the existing structure, then we must be vocal until we are heard.

To remain silent for our own convenience is to forsake discipline in the pursuit of excellence, denying the greatness that we seek.

So often we as drafters and engineers loose the perspective that we are the touch-point between client and employer.  If we are not telling our employers what the customer really wants, how can they know. 

If they will not listen to me, then perhaps I need to enlist a few other highly capable people in my cause.  Adding voices to the cry for change, until the fact can no longer be ignored.

Facing the brutal facts is about living in the real world and seeing it for what it is.  Then having the resolve to choosing the path that I must travel to attain the greatness I know is waiting.