Assembly Automation - Selecting a Systems Integrator

Once upon a time, most plants had in-house machine design departments to develop new automated equipment. Alas, this is no longer usually the case as current manufacturing doctrine is driven by a strategy of outsourcing non-core and costly competencies, such as automation or machine design.

This “back to basics” approach means that in-house efforts are geared to product and process design & development and this has created a manufacturing equipment and process knowledge gap as in-house engineers are focused on production. ??However, a renewed emphasis on increased productivity requirements due to changing supply chains and driven by reported skilled worker shortages has once again brought assembly automation to the forefront of company discussions.?One consequence, is the proliferation of many third party Systems Integrators (SI) that have emerged to fill this gap and in-house manufacturing engineers generally specify equipment while maintenance has assumed some of the “hands on” deployment and ongoing support tasks.

Automation Systems Integrators are generally a fragmented group of companies that specialize by industry, geography, technology or may be generalists that integrate various technologies based on client specifications. ?In addition, many hardware distributors have increasingly ventured into higher level integration activities, notably using the recent proliferation of robotic systems from many manufacturers as well as other platforms. Blurring the line between integrators and distributors while further complicating the SI selection process as they may lack the manufacturing process or Industrial Engineering skills required to properly size and develop an optimum solution.??Keeping in mind that manufacturing automation is an economic transfer function which should increase process flexibility, reduce labor content, increase quality and generally increase profitability, with minimized offsetting burdens of higher skills requirements or complexity.

Further, by using SIs, we tend to lose the continuity that we once enjoyed with in-house equipment groups and equipment development inefficiencies are created, as process knowledge has to often be “re-learned". ?So, is there a way to have our cake and eat it too? Or, can we outsource machine design/build/integration and still keep some of the process continuity benefits of an in-house group?

The answer to both questions is YES!

Selecting the right SI is more critical to successful manufacturing automation than the decision to automate itself. ??Unfortunately, sourcing this strategic resource is too often performed using the same criteria with which we buy other commodities. The criteria used varies by company, but the primary objective is to identify a supplier for the project at hand while minimizing the development risks while meeting the ROI. ??However, since new equipment development has a direct impact on product launch, profitability and manufacturing improvement success, we might consider selecting an SI as a strategic decision and one that our company might leverage as a competitive advantage with some additional effort and due diligence.

?After all, automation is an investment not a purchase!

The first round of the selection process may include assessing:

-??????the SI’s experience in our industry,

-??????financial stability,

-??????facilities,

-??????proximity,

-??????personnel,

-??????references,

-??????price,

-??????delivery,

-??????after-deployment support,

-??????familiarity with a particular technology and

-??????other metrics with weighted values.

Totaling the results yields a list of the prospective candidates in numerical order, but too often this is as far as we evaluate, and No.1 is typically automatically awarded the project.

However, we can go a bit further and leverage this “obvious” choice into a “strategic” choice if we can identify a decisive and important but not always obvious attribute that doesn’t reveal itself in the spreadsheet analysis.

That attribute seeks to answer the question, “Who is the best candidate to become our long term systems integrator partner?”. ??Much like an HR interview, our goal here is to identify someone that can deliver the project at hand, but is also willing and capable to grow during that process into a strategic partner, an ongoing process improvement resource and a competitive advantage for our future and ongoing requirements by using this particular project as an opportunity to learn our process even beyond the application at hand so that he can become in essence, “our outsourced in-house equipment development resource”. Those future requirements will call for increasing levels of process knowledge and the SI will increasingly become a source of new improvement ideas and innovative possibilities for our process.

Invariably, new equipment development leads to innovative knowledge that is part of the equipment, but while we have paid for it, we can’t take it with us. ??The reason for this is simple. ?That new knowledge, apart from any intellectual property, designs or other “hard” deliverables, is an accumulation of “soft” knowledge about our product and process that the systems integrator develops and simply keeps. ??In effect, we are "leaving value on the table” if we never work with this systems integrator again. ?

And that’s a lost opportunity for both our company and the SI! ?

For smaller manufacturers, (SME), who are looking for the systems integrator to not only configure a solution to the automation problem at hand but also to present a longer term vision of how this particular automation will impact and disrupt their manufacturing process, dealing with a suitably matched systems integrator in terms of relative size and complementary industrial engineering skills, is often a good indicator of a good match.??While the responsibility for ultimate success lies with the end user of the automation; owing to exposure with multiple clients in various industries, the systems integrator is often in a position to “cut and paste”, (without compromising proprietary commitments of-course), best practice modules for many parts of our ?process in ways that we may not have considered with our internal resources and experience.

Therefore, our "ideal" Systems Integration partner is one that does well in the “hard” spreadsheet matrix - not necessarily No. 1 - AND ?also offers longer term potential for mutual growth while bringing extensive experience that can expose further automation opportunities for improvement in our existing process.

Identifying this SI often comes down to good due diligence and even some “gut-feel chemistry” but a good match is found when we are convinced that this particular SI can become a predictable source of solutions for us in exchange for our commitment to become a predictable source of business for them.

Since the SI is usually relatively small, you are usually dealing with an owner or a senior manager and you will need to reciprocate by having a suitably senior person from your in-house team have this strategic conversation with him/her. In most cases, you'll find that the SI is not only receptive but willing to invest in and build such a longer term relationship based on transparency, mutually defined goals and an understanding that this relationship will be profitable for both parties.

While there are no guarantees, if both parties can approach the first project with this goal in mind, both short term and long-term success is a probable outcome.

Your thoughts are appreciated and please share this post if you think your connections will find it of interest.

Connect or DM to discuss further.

#manufacturing #training #development #reskilling #upskilling #apprenticeships #workforcedevelopment #capitalequipment #scientificmanagement #factoryofthefuture #assembyfixtures #robotics #processautomation #automationsolutions #automation #strategicmanagement #roboticautomation #lean #manufacturing #cobots #assembly #packagingautomation #leanmanufacturing #industry4 #ai #rpa #artificialintelligence #innovation #assembly #industry40 #efficiency #digitaltransformation #industrialengineering #work #strategy