Keeping an Eye on The Next Generation

Using Roadmaps to smooth the road to the future
(Post 11)

In this chapter we introduce Roadmaps and other techniques to minimize making design decisions now that will limit the next generation of your product. (If none of the Gen1 technology can be used in Gen 2, then you’re starting from ground zero!)

Early on I figured out that one might not want their startup to be a one trick pony, with one product, hopes and prayers.  Again, I’m being direct for a reason.  Not all hardware startups get bought, and you may have to run your company, manage operations, accommodate returns, deal with customers and continue to understand the evolution of their needs, and because of financial and market pressure, to ship a Gen 2 product sooner than you could ever imagine.

In general, considering your next product is never a bad idea.  Investors will want to understand your vision of how your product and technology will continue to generate revenue. Suitors who are looking to acquire will want to know the path to future versions as well.  So in summary: you may think you’re taking your on current product vision, but you’re taking on the future too.

The decisions you make during the design of your first product will have profound impact on the future iterations of the product. This is true whether it is the first generation [Gen 1], or a derivative of an existing product that you’re redefining or focusing on a new application or solution [Gen x].  I understand that there are many decisions, constraints, and boundaries just to get something out the door. But sometimes the most hastily made (and seemingly insignificant) decisions are the ones that come back to haunt you when planning a future version of the product.

So beware: the future is now, at least when it comes to making design decisions. Keeping fundamental design intent in clear view is critical to minimizing decisions that will have a limiting effect on future products. Why am I bugging you with future considerations, roadmaps, and platforms?  I could be cheeky and say, “someone has to”, but I won’t be a wise ass.  The first technology solution is not always the best choice required to stay ahead of the competition with confidence, from a scalability and future product variations point of view.      

 The fundamentals guiding you to future-proof decisions

While it is very difficult – I hesitate to say impossible, but it’s close – to understand the future implications of every design decision, there are a few concepts that pave the way to a clearer vision of the future of your product, and they are:

  • Design Intent

  • Families of Variations

  • Product Roadmaps

Design Intent is the basic understanding that the combination of the components should meet the performance expectations that a customer wants.  To dissect this definition, this means you need a rock solid understanding of two things: the customer’s expectations, or the exact functionality and performance to be delivered; and the capabilities of each of the components as configured, assembled, processed, and tested, in the context of this product. This is discussed further in Full Arc Blog Post 8, but the basics bear repeating:

Once the Design Intent fundamentals are determined, it is then possible to describe and understand the potential deviations of performance. The potential deviations can come in many shapes and sizes, and may require you creating a new parametric frame of reference or measuring system. This range of potential deviations are known as Families of Variations.

I believe strongly in managing risk by understanding Families of Variations.  The Families of Variations will depend greatly upon the nature of your product, the underlying technologies, the materials and components used, the assembly and other processing, and testing.  They could be measurable (e.g., size dimensions, electrical parameters) or rely on visual inspection; they could be testing of individual subcomponents, but also they can require testing of partial or fully assembled units; they could require external stressors in a testing configuration (like temperature or humidity). Some Families of Variation will be more subjective than others, but repeatability and clear tolerances will always lead to better decision making. Finally, Families of Variations follow two basic tenets of nature:

  1. The whole is the sum of its parts. That is, variation in a component means variation in the final product, so, risk in a component means risk in the final product.

  2. The “80-20” Rule: 20% of the Families of Variation have 80% of the effect on product performance.

Families of Variations can be used to describe processes and test plans as well as product components. The more fully Families of Variations are understood, the less likely unexpected defects will appear, particularly as volumes increase.

Fundamental to the evolution of the Families of Variations is understanding knowns, and how knowns are few in the beginning, and need to be captured and controlled.   Some knowns are relatively easy to capture and we can use calibrated test and measurement equipment, materials, and supplies with certificates of conformance, and well understood roadmaps.  See Full Arc blog Post 6 for more on Knowns and Unknowns in understanding risk.

 Understanding Roadmaps

Maybe you didn’t notice that we slipped Roadmaps into our list of Knowns. Wait, are Roadmaps a known?  Sure, because they are known if they are well researched, curated and kept fresh.  This work takes effort, networking, and vision.  But roadmaps can guide current and future Product Life Cycle (PLC) and Platform decisions, with the best consolidated and validated information available.  Like process mapping, developing these roadmaps can be part of team building and aligning communities within a company to the common goal, minimizing Time to Profit and shipping your first product or service.

Roadmaps General Definition:  A Roadmap is a graphical representation of Product Iterations [Generations] mapped to Available Technology Iterations, within a Product Platform.  The sample below shows the best estimate of technology development for a given roadmap.

The arrows on the right represent underlying behaviors and expectations associated with a platform’s PLC. Overtime, performance and perceived value must increase. Markets and competition require intrinsic cost reductions through supply chain management, yield improvement, and operations continuous improvement that can harvested generationally and retained. Profits and margins must overtime be maintained at acceptable levels.

Basic usage and interpretations: 

In product and process development, roadmaps are used a backdrop or basis to assess the inherent risks of various design and process decisions.  One cannot assess and quantify risk unless there is a basis from which to objectively measure risk against.  Roadmaps provide the best estimate for these areas of interest.

Development of roadmaps for new products and maintenance of roadmaps for existing products are a primary goal of a product team, even before your first early product build attempts.  A product team would include representation of research, development, marketing, operations, supply chain, quality, reliability or compliance, and sales.

Roadmaps are a consensus of best estimates and guesses of what is needed (Marketing) and what can be used to fulfill the need (Product Design/Process/Supply Chain/Test).

If the world was a perfect place, the Available Technology (Tech A, B, C, D) would map to the Generations (Gen x, x+1…).  In practice, rarely does this happen.  Hence, decisions must be made based on performance required and risk.

For example, let us look at Gen x+1 and Gen x+2.  Tech C may actually be available for Gen x+1.  A risk decision must be made whether to pull it in to Gen x+1, with the subsequent refocusing of resources, or let the potential gains pass onto Gen x+2.  Customer requirements, cost, and lead-times to production fulfillment are a subset of the driver factors.

Another example is whether Tech D will be mature enough for the Gen x+3 product, or will Tech C have to be extended into Gen x+3?

Lastly, what if you find out from your customer that Tech E is the only enabling technology to achieve performance in Gen x+3?   What if Tech E does not fit in the current technology or process platform?  Is this the time to abandon the “Gen” Platform, and start a new platform?   The only good news according to this diagram, is that Tech E will be available; but who can trust suppliers that far out?

Actual Usage by Generations (Shown with Hatches)

From the usage diagram, one can see the Tech D was abandoned and the team jump to a new platform with Tech E.  Again, this decision could be driven by performance, cost, or supply chain production capacity constraints.  It’s best to understand these changes early to have appropriate research and development resources applied to ensure the intersection happens on time.

Types of Roadmaps: 

Often roadmaps are thought of as Product Roadmaps.  But in reality, high production volume industries use roadmaps for manufacturing, automation, test development, data system integration, and supply chain development.   There should be multiple roadmaps for each area of interest, having one for each function or component.

In modern, outsourced products, all these factors are considered and sequenced in PLC (Product Life Cycle) and PLM (Product Line Management) decisions.  Basically, in high volume commodity-like markets, there is no use in committing to a price at volume target if it’s not supported by the reality of these roadmaps.  The market will choose someone else.

Often test technologies are ahead of the product technologies because of the requirement to capture an event at a sufficient resolution to determine pass or fail.  This is the case with integrated circuits and smart devices like sensors.  Data roadmaps determine the total cycle times on automated test, as much as the actual test cycle time.  Data latency in configuration management and final test can cripple high volume production, particularly during a self-test’s result download and post process analysis.

I hope you’re enjoying the increased vision and risk reduction that advanced process mapping deliverers.  I figure your mapping discovery and creation work is still digging up critical content, and some GAP analysis has started.  Technical and Process professionals usually can’t help themselves.  Roadmaps are another tool to capture possible ways of improving performance, increasing features, while reducing product cost to maintain profit margins.   You can use your process maps to model new possible generations, and assess cost and risk.

How do these roadmaps relate to the original normalized cost and profit margin curves introduced in Chapter 3?   We’re going to chat about that in the next chapter.