From Ingredients to Platforms
Showcase:
Planning for Platform Supply Chain Quality
Mary Doyle
Director, Corporate Platform Office, Intel Corporation
Ann-Marie Lamb
CPLG Quality & Reliability Researcher,
Six Sigma Blackbelt Quality Engineer, Intel Corporation
1
China
new markets, new challenges?
– More than 350M subscribers
–Rate of growth
–Number of SMS sent
– Cultural affordances & practices
give rise to unique applications,
services & anxieties
–The lunar almanac every day
–A novella subscription service, Chinese
opera-like mobisodes
–Chinese govt. bans
– New work-arounds to unexpected
problems
–Charging stations, pagers, codes
2
Korea
new models of connectivity?
– Korea is often held up as
model of technology uptake
–Record broadband uptake
–80% of wired homes use high
speed data connections
– Korea also continues to have
the fastest growing cyber-café
market in world
–20,000 PC-Bangs in Seoul alone,
up from 13,000 4 years ago
– Korean homes are very private
–A long history of gaming &
socializing in public.
3
Evolving User Needs
User value
Price /
Capability
Usage Oriented Computing
“One Size Fits All” Computing
Price /
Performance
Performance
Mainframe
Standard
Microprocessor
(MHz)
Custom
Technology
80’s – 90’s
60’s – 70’s
4
Platforms
Holistic approach
through
coordinated
technology
00’s +
User Oriented Computing
Increasing Productivity
Analyze and
comprehend what
end users will
desire, then
lead the industry
in developing
capabilities and
solutions to deliver
these experiences
Reducing Total Cost of Ownership
Reaching the Next Billion Users
Creating New Industries
Improved Access & Connectivity
Decreased Power
From what we make to what we make possible
The World Ahead Program
May 2, 2006
Intel Commits $1 Billion To Further Emerging Markets Strategy
 5-year objectives
– Extend broadband PC access to the world’s next billion users while training
10 million more teachers on the use of technology in education and with the
possibility of reaching another 1 billion students.
 Accessibility
– Development of fully featured, affordable PCs tailored to regional needs.
 Connectivity
– Expanding wireless broadband Internet access
 Education
– Preparing students for success in the global economy through education
programs and resources
Reorganized Around Platforms
Platforms for :
Platforms for:
• Client
• Servers
• Comms
Infrastructure
• Notebook PCs
Platforms for:
• Digital Home
Platforms for:
• Productivity
• PDAs & Phones
• Living Room
• Research
• Consumer
Electronics
• Homecare
• End-to-end biz
solutions
7
Platforms for:
• Unique needs of
local markets
Worldwide
User Concerns in Healthcare
Access
Quality
Cost
8
Healthcare Tablet
Concept Platform
 Healthcare rugged, ergonomic design, shift long usage
 Secure wireless access, connectivity to measurement devices
 Pen-enabled interface, “soft” keys, voice recognition, camera
 Built on Intel® architecture
9 for commercial distribution
Investigational device, not presently available
Our homes … share 6 core human values
escape
togetherness
control
access
advancement
love & spirituality
10
INTEL® VIIV™ TECHNOLOGY
User Concerns for Mobility
Performance
Weight
Battery Life
Wireless
12
The Next Step in PC Mobility
Thin and Light
Notebook
Launched
Q1’06
Entertainment/
Productivity
Notebook
Sub-Notebook
Ultra Mobile PC
User Concerns in the Channel
Low Cost
Localized
Connectivity
Geo Specific
Characteristics
Ruggedized “Community PC” Platform for India
“Jaagruti” (“Awakening”) Initiative
 Developed exclusively to meet the needs of rural villages and
communities in India
 Used in Internet “kiosks” run by local entrepreneurs to provide
access to online services such as e-Government forms,
education and medical advice
 Brings technology access where weather and unreliable power
compromise typical PCs
– Ruggedized chassis
– CPSU
– Low power consumption
– Access Control
Exploration Phase Stages
16
Showcase:
SUPPLY CHAIN QUALITY METRICS
FOR PLATFORM DRIVEN BUSINESSES
ME 317 – Design for Manufacturability 2006
Stanford University
Prof. Kos Ishii
STUDENT TEAM:
INTEL LIAISON:
COACH:
Alvin Arman
Ann-Marie Lamb
Sun Koo Kim
Karthik Manohar
Jonathan Paisley
17
FMEA for General Supply Chain
Planning
Faulty
estimation of
forecast
Inadequate
understanding of
existing market
Inadequate
understanding of
new market
1
Local Effects
End Effects on
Product, User,
Other Systems
Inventory
imbalance
Cost and
possibly delay
Inventory
imbalance
Cost and
possibly delay
6
Sudden
unforseeable
changes in
market
5
Faulty Simulation
Model
1
Lack of alternate
production plans
Simulation Error
Inadequate
Human
Resources
Allocation
Erroneous
Selection of
employees
Poor judgement
of capacity
requirements
Lack of skilled
worker
availability
3
1
1
Inventory turns
Inventory turns
3
Cost and
possibly delay
Inventory
imbalance
Cost and
possibly delay
4
Inadequate
Capacity
Planning
3
Cost and
possibly delay
Inventory
imbalance
Inventory turns
3
Cost and
possibly delay
Inventory
Cost and
imbalance
possibly delay
Manufacturing Cost and delay
delay
10
30
Actions
Recommended to
Reduce RPN
Relevant SC Indicators
Hire independent
third party
consultants
Accuracy of forecasting techniques
Supply chain cost as percent of
sales
10 180
Inventory turns
Cash to cash cycle time
Order lead time
Hire independent Accuracy of forecasting
third party
techniques; Responsiveness to
consultants.
urgent deliveries; Inventory Turns
10 150 Additional customer Cash to cash cycle time
surveys
Supply chain cost as percent of
sales
Order lead time
10
10 120
Inventory turns
3
3
3
1
Manufacturing Cost and delay
delay
3
1
Manufacturing Cost and delay
delay
3
Inventory turns
Inventory turns and
Manufacturing
Delay
Inventory turns and
Manufacturing
Delay
Inventory turns and
Manufacturing
Delay
 Failure Mode
Effects Analysis
 Intel Q & R
employees…
“we’ve done
1000s of FMEAs,
we never thought
to adapt tool for
whole SC view”
30
Inventory turns
3
Inventory
imbalance
R
P
N
Inventory turns
3
Inventory
imbalance
Judgement Error
Detection Method/
Current Controls
Detection
Function or
Potential
Potential Causes
Requirement Failure Modes
of Failure
FMEA Number:
Page:
Date:
Severity
System Name: Intel Supply Chain
Major Function: Deliver parts to customers
Prepared By: Team INTEL
Occurrence
Failure Modes &
Effects Analysis
10
90
10
30
6
18
6
18
4
12
18
Hire independent
third party
consultants
Accuracy of forecasting techniques
Worker standards
Worker quality
Cash to cash cycle time
Order lead time
 What supply chain
quality metrics
could be used to
track causes of
failure
Platform/Product:
Functional or Innovative?
Major Supply
Chain
Functions
Functional S.C. Features
Innovative S.C. Features
Planning
(demand &
supply)
Simulation & modeling based on past sales data is effective
due to predictable demand.
Less automation and more direct personnel involvement is
required to keep up with changing dynamics. Market surveys
and third party focus groups are utilized.
Design
Oversight
Little design oversight is necessary due to established
product success & longer life cycles.
More design oversight is necessary to ensure product flexibility is
maintained. Late point differentiation/postponement is
emphasized to increase downstream flexibility.
Manufacturing
Oversight
Automated insight into capacity utilization, statistical
process control (SPC), and defect rates is important to
maximize physical efficiency of supply chain.
Less emphasis is placed on manufacturing oversight as compared
to functional supply chain, however automated SPC tracking
may still be utilized.
Logistics
(packaging,
shipping,
warehouse
management)
Use of Third Party Logistics (3PL) company to ensure
maximum efficiency of getting products into customer’s
hands. 3PL represents a lower cost alternative to 4PL.
Use of Fourth Party Logistics (4PL) company to ensure an
optimized delivery/logistics solution is developed for each
product’s unique needs.
Order Mgmt
Automated order collection and evaluation with Enterprise
Resource Planning (ERP) software. Minimal personnel
involvement is required.
Automated order collection, however more direct personnel
involvement is required for order evaluation to ensure
responsiveness & flexibility needs are met.
Customer
Service
3PL provider handles return/repair requests with minimal
direct Intel involvement. Refund/replace may be more
attractive than repair for functional products.
4PL coordinates returns/repairs, with some Intel involvement.
Decision to replace/repair/refund will vary depending on
specific product characteristics.
[1] Fisher, Marshall L., “What Is the Right Supply19
Chain for Your Product?”, The Harvard Business Review, March-April, 1997.
Cost Worth Diagram - Supply Chain Metrics
Innovative Platform/Products
Functional Platform/Products
QFD Cost - Worth Diagram
(for Innovative Products Supply Chain)
QFD Cost - Worth Diagram
(for Functional Products Supply Chain)
20%
20%
SC cost as % sales
Relative Cost
30%
Relative Cost
30%
Order lead time
POM
Responsiveness to demand
changes
Level of info sharing Responsiveness to
schedule changes
Accuracy of demand
10%
SC cost as % sales
POM
Level of Info Sharing
10%
prediction
Request to ans timeInventory turns Delivery to requested dock
date
Time respond to repair Capacity Utilization
request
Time from plant to
DPMO
0%
customer
customer
DPMO
0%
10%
20%
30%
0%
Relative Worth
 Delivery to requested dock date is seen to have
high worth but very low cost. It is therefore one
that should be furthered explored in order to gain
its full benefits.
Order lead time
Responsiveness to
schedule changes
Accuracy of demand
predictions
Request to ans time
Delivery to requested dock
Inventory turns
date
Time to respond to repair
Capacity utilization
request
Time from plant to
0%
Responsiveness to demand
changes
10%
20%
30%
Relative Worth
 Order lead time is seen to have high worth but
reasonably low cost, it is therefore one that should
be further investigated & explored.
 On the other hand, SC cost as percent of sales has
relatively high cost but low worth - aligns with nature
of innovative products & how supply chain should not
focus too much on the cost side, but rather on the
agility, flexibility & service level to the customers.
20
Project QFD - Intel Digital Health Platform
 Quality Function Deployment
1
9
1
21
0.7
0.0
0.0
3%
0%
0%
10% 2.1
9
3
1
1.2
3
3
5%
3
1
0.7
3
9
3
3
Robust design/FMEA/QFD
Efficient manufacturing/ QA process
Understanding FDA regulations
 These three activities scored
significantly higher than the others
in the QFD Phase II scoring
1
1
9
1
9
3
–
–
–
Operations Planning/Research
Market Demand Research
3
9
9
Efficient Service
Marketing Campaign/lobby doctors/TV ads
Efficient logistics
Efficient Manufacturing/QA Process
Robust Design/FMEA/QFD
 From this QFD phase II, three
critical actions/tasks in the project
implementation were identified.
These top three tasks are:
3
9
13% 2.8
4%
0.8
1
9
9
3
3
3%
Raw score
Relative
Weight
9
3
1
1
3
21% 4.6
9
3
22% 4.9
15%
18%
4%
6%
6%
14%
19%
18%
Engaging FDA
Understanding FDA Regulations
Project QFD
19% 4.2
r Engineering Metrics
Preliminary Design Duration
# of features
Manufacturing Duration
Clinical Trials Duration
% failures during trials
# recorded user failures per year
Industry Product Ranking
# of insurance company approvals
Phase I Relative Weights
PHASE II QFD
 For the Digital Health platform in
particular, activities associated
with creating robust design,
developing efficient manufacturing
& understanding FDA regulations
are critical phases to a successful
program & must be looked at for
monitoring with supply chain
quality indicators
Cost – Worth for Potential Digital Health
Platform Project Tasks
 Understanding FDA
Regulations is one of
the most critical steps
while the cost is
relatively low, so
QFD Cost - Worth Diagram
50%
Relative Cost
40%
30%
 Resources should be
more focused on this
area
Robust
Design/FMEA/QFD
Efficient
Manufacturing/QA
20%
Marketing/Lobbying
Customers
Efficient Service
10%
Engaging FDA
Efficient Logistics
Market Demand
Operations Planning
Research
0%
0%
10%
Understanding FDA
Regulations
20%
30%
40%
Relative Worth
22
 The other important
tasks are very much
aligned with the cost
or time input
Wrap Up: Intel Corporation Key Challenges
– Collaboration
• Internal cross-functional collaboration is critical to success
• External cross-industry collaboration: new influence points, new insights
– Cross-Platform and Disruptive Opportunities
•
•
•
•
Cross-platform impact is critical and challenging
Valuation must be concrete to impact platform decisions (e.g. units)
Good opportunities can still fall through the cracks: challenge existing businesses
Determine by product/platform if it is functional or innovative for planning purposes
– Adoption Challenges
• Metrics drive behavior
• Change is ‘sticky’ when implemented through near term deliverables
• The level of adoption can vary wildly
– Resourcing
• Demand on usage modeling is very high, user centered resources are critical path
23
24