STIMS Strategy for life long learning for intrepreneurship

Professionals in every field must constantly equip themselves with the latest skills to achieve new solutions for process problems.

Being adept at ‘Transformational skills’ and ‘system thinking’ constitutes a lifelong learning strategy required to develop a stream of New Solutions, a must to survive and succeed in the 21st century economy

MMI Cover story image

Who exactly are ‘intrepreneurs’?
We hear a constant drum beat for professionals to be entrepreneurial, capable of handling a variety of jobs and problems. This is in total contrast to the standardized
and de-skilled task-oriented replication activities. There are many opportunities to integrate knowledge from various sources – from other workers, knowledge available across departments, with the suppliers as well as with the customers or end-users. The advent of smart phones, Facebook, Google and other search engines also augment this ability to aggregate information from across the globe and convert them into new knowledge. The result is a “new solution” of high added value. They are heralded as “entrepreneurial”. The new term used for such entrepreneur working inside a company – as opposed to a startup operation – is “Intrepreneur”.

Life Long Learning Strategy:

Modern Manufacturing India, a Publication of the Indian Machine Tool Manufactusers  Association (IMTMA) carries the cover page article authored by STIMS Institute. This article provides a strategy for life long learning for entrepreneurs and intrepreneurs.

STIMS Cover story MMI Jan. 2018 issue

Slide22

The MMI magazine January issue can be accessed at: http://www.mmindia.co.in/flipbook/jan2018/

Advertisements

Developing a frame work for Effective Collaboration between Academic Research and Industrial Outcome.

We were invited to present a Key Note lecture on August 5, 2017 at the Chinese Conference on Abrasives Technology at Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China. Inserted below are main points, some images and a link to the full presentation.

Key Note lecture final

IMG_4028

IMG_4038

Acknowledgements

  • Thanks to Prof. Zhang at HIT, to the organizers of CCAT and Harbin Institute of Technology
  • Thanks to Dr. Jinsheng Wang, GM, Intelligent Grinding   Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., my friend and host for this visit
  • Thanks to many friends and colleagues across the globe in the industry as well as in the academia.
  • This talk is a summary of many years of experience  and successful collaboration between Academic researchers and Professionals in the industry across the globe.

Outline

  • 21st Century economy requires New Solutions with deliberate focus on Academic Research; That Integrates knowledge from all sources
  • New Solutions require three types of Knowledge:
    • Academic learning
    • Hands on Experience
    • Transformational Skills.
  • New Solutions in Grinding Processes are the result of collaboration between Academic Research and Industrial Applications enabled by Transformational Skills.
  • Transformational Skills are necessary for industry /   university collaboration
  • Examples and Case Studies.

Slide22

SUMMARY

  • 21st Century Research has to be targeted to deliver New Solutions
  • This requires integrating knowledge from all sources.
  • Knowledge Integration is enabled by System Thinking:
  • Every solution is integration of Science, Engg. And Mgt.
  • Focus on the big picture, not merely the dots.
  • Three sources of Knowledge are simultaneously required today:
    • Academic Education
    • Hands on Training
    • Transformational Skills.
  • During this talk we have described the “System Thinking” and “TS”.
  • We have also shown examples of how these are useful for promoting effective industry/university collaboration.

 

STIMS Institute offers Industry focused training for fifth year in a row, this time at Shenzen, China.

Student Feedback:

 “I conclude this course with 3 observations: Very important, Very timely and Very valuable”.

“I’m not an engineer. I feel this course in not only for technical person, but for system thinking and much more”.

0815_30

Education, Process Innovation and End to End Innovation are the focus areas of STIMS Institute. Each of these three focus areas are interconnected. education that is merely academic is less valuable today in the world where more than 80% of what is needed can be obtained through Google. Today education has to be holistic (i.e.) system oriented. That implies scientific fundamentals together with an emphasis on application of the science and the strategic reasoning required to make such education relevant and useful in the real world. Such Education was offered for the fourth year in a row . This leads to over 120 senior engineers, managers and teachers trained to meet the high end professional needs in the manufacturing sector.

The two day course was offered at Shenzen, China on August 9 and 10, 2017  in collaboration with Intelligent Grinding Technology (IGT) Ltd. http://www.grindoctor.com

0815_25

The System Approach for Precision Manufacturing – Grinding Processes.

  2 Day Course – Outline.

Day 1 – AM:

Introduction.

  1. Why should we grind?
  • Critical and enduring role of physical processes like grinding in manufacturing and especially in Precision Components Manufacturing as well as surface generation requirements.
  • Examples of grinding processes used in a wide variety of: Work materials, machines, components and applications
  • Role of grinding processes in traditional applications as well as emerging needs like high efficiency IC engines, computer parts, LED, PV and wind energy components manufacturing.
  1. The System Approach to Grinding Processes:
  • Every process is an Input / Transformation / Output system
  • “Transformation” represents the Science of the Process
  • System Approach requires integration of Science, Engineering and Strategy
  • Grinding Processes are Input /Transformation / Output systems for surface generation to meet critical functional needs and process economics.

BREAK

IMG_4155

  1. The Science of grinding: The microscopic interactions that occur at the grinding zone and their quantification
  2. Inputs to the grinding process and how they impact the microscopic interactions:
  • Work Materials and components
  • Abrasive and dressing tools, coolants and other consumables
  • Machine Tools (key element of investment and process design)
  • Process parameters (that are selected as part of process design and can be changed at the shop floor)

LUNCH

Day 1 – PM:

  1. Measurement and Analysis of grinding processes
  2. Case Studies Demonstrating the use of the above for shop floor problem solving

 BREAK for Dinner

After Dinner Session:

  1. Tutorials and data driven problem solving

DAY 2 – AM:

Recap of day 1 lessons.

  1. Technical Outputs – What are the requirements to be met when using grinding processes

BREAK

  1. System Outputs – the Why? strategic and economic considerations pertaining to grinding processes

LUNCH

IMG_4242

PM:

  1. Application of the System Approach – Case Studies
  • Truing & Dressing of CBN grinding wheels
  • Optimal use of CBN grinding solutions
  • Simple Solid Shape (S3) grinding – High MRR low WIP, short lead time and flexible processes
  • Processes for micro – chip, magnetic head and LED substrate fabrication.
  • Machining to Grinding Processes

BREAK

  1. Student Feed back
  2. Certificate Presentation.

The students in this course consisted of Senior Engineers, Business Head and V.P. of manufacturing companies.

Student feed back:

  • This course is worthy. My customer want to use CBN wheel, but machine tool can’t satisfy requirement. I still have not good method. From this course, I get some enlightenment on how to make the best use of the available machine and other resources.
  • Our parent company is from Belgium. Sometimes we want to change the grinding process, but it’s not permitted. After this course, I can use data to evaluate grinding process. If we have data support, Belgium can agree to that. I will use system approach to evaluate present method when I go back.

IMG_4203

  • This course gives a lot of help in supervising new product development.
  • In the past, I work with experience. I learned a lot of basic knowledge in this course, which is very helpful for designing machine tool. I learned in this course how to use knowledge to analyze and solve problem. We plan to develop single crystal silicon grinding machine tool with system approach.
  • It is the first time to learn grinding theory, which is helpful for my next work. In this course, I connect knowledge I learned in college with present work. In past, I always feel the knowledge I learned is not useful. Today I understand I didn’t connect them with my work. In future, I will promote my product with the knowledge, scientific method and data analysis.
  • I’m very impressed by the lessons on economic output. In the past, we deal with price with very simple and rough method. Now I know I can evaluate the value from variety of aspects. I can give customer a list, which makes customer understand the value we bring and accept our price. We should promote the product’s quality, but not just low price.

0815_28

  • System approach concerns input, interaction and output. It also can be categorized by the work of engineer, science and management. Before the course, I know the first three interactions, but I know there are 6 interactions. I feel it is more reasonable. I also learn how to connect all interactions with input and output by using power monitoring. When I go back, I plan to use knowledge I learn from this course to solve 2 to 3 problems. If it works, I want to spread system approach and do continuously improvement.
  • I feel this course is very worthy. Thanks for IGT for co- organizing this course.
IMG_4207
Dr. Subbu with STIMS Institute Alumni Dr. Xuefong Bi and Dr. Jinsheng Wang, start up entrepreneurs of Intelligent Manufacturing Co, in China.  They helped to co-organize this course.
  • We are now focusing on hard and brittle grinding. This course helps me to open the black box of grinding, and let me to see interactions and how to solve problem. I have more significant understanding to grinding process.
    • System approach will help me in work and life. Knowledge in this course is very deep, I need to learn more after this
    • After I go back, I will transmit system approach with my leader and colleagues. Now we are doing a project about ceramic material grinding, so I want to apply system approach on this project.
  • I conclude this course with 3 words: Very important, Very timely and very valuable. Dr. Subbu, is very professional. He has very clear logic. If Dr. Subbu have more opportunities to contact the market in China and spread system approach, the effects will be better.
  • I’m not an engineer. I feel this course in not only for technical person, but for system thinking and much more.

Meaningful work

Recently I came across the essay titled: “Meaningful work should not be a privilege of the elite” published in the HBR.  The essay starts with the idea of inclusive prosperity (i.e.) wealth generated by the society and / or the economy should be for all to enjoy. Thought leaders and eminent economists are pursuing these three avenues according to the authors:

  • Re-distribute the rewards of the capitalism thus making the 1% pay for the needs of the 99%
  • Emphasis on over all wellbeing rather than merely in terms of economic well being
  • Prosperity in a society is the accumulation of solutions to human problems.

The authors then branch off to state that prosperity should also include engagement in the act of solving problems (i.e.) in the meaningful nature of work.

In all these discussions the macro and micro aspects of work get mixed up leading to perennial confusion and untold challenges to the society at large. For example: “What is the job that society needs to get done that it turns to competent managers to do”? In this sentence “work” has two distinct meanings: The job that the society needs to get done vs. the job that the manager needs to get done.

  • The job that the society needs to get done:

The job of the society – the work to be done – is to understand the need (i.e.) growing economic disparity as well as the cause for it. Developments in Digital Technology (DT) leads to “smart machines with the potential to marginalize human contributions, automating cognitive work and leaving society with hordes of citizens of zero economic value”. Human being can contribute as workers through their cognitive skills, their ability to process information as well as through their physical labor. All these three pathways for human dignity through work are being challenged today. Society needs to innovate as required with new solutions to address this crisis. The society with meaningful employment and broad economic prosperity is the employer as well as the customer.

Unfortunately customers do not hire anyone to address the economic disparity. The workers in this case are the investors in the society whose single minded goal is to increase the return on their investment. As long as they find ways to achieve their better ROI by eliminating labor cost (I.e.) human centered work that already exists or needed in the future, that will be their first choice.  The net result is the “smart machines with the potential to marginalize human contributions, automating cognitive work and leaving society with hordes of citizens of zero economic value”.

The above situation will be reversed if and only if the society at large realizes that its job is not to favor Digital Technology (DT) as the only “Technology”. Developments in the field of Nuclear Science are called “Nuclear Technology”. Developments in polymers and plastics is called “Polymer Technology”; Innovation in space exploration is called “Space Technology”. Society obsessively refers to DT as the only technology. Then the society fails to recognize the preponderant developments in DT that favor a few workers and their efforts to “automate cognitive work and leaving society with hordes of citizens of zero economic value”.

Yet, when the economists and thought leaders discuss the societal needs they describe “innovations through Technology” as the savior of the future, but the implication here is technology as derived from all fields of sciences and not limited to DT. The ills in the abuse of the DT are brushed aside as they are not identified as such. As an analogy recognize the disdain society has for the use of Nuclear Technology because of the fear it instills in the mind of the many despite its many positive uses and potentials. But the abusive role of DT enabled smart machines with the potential to marginalize human contributions, automating all forms of work (i.e.) Physical, information and cognitive work and leaving society with hordes of citizens of zero economic value is not yet fully appreciated and baked into the thinking and planning of economists and other thought leaders.

The first job or work of the society has to be to recognize this dichotomy and restore due emphasis and value for developments and exploitation of all fields of sciences and their impact for a more prosperous society. This will lead to a point of view that world problems and their needs are our opportunities. Mr. Rob Jones makes the following point in his response to the above essay: Discussions of “meaningful work” seldom include examples of “meaningless work.” Which is more meaningful: a STEM educated Microsoft coder building responsive applications for video gaming, or a ditch-digger working to bring water to a drought-stricken region? Which should get paid more? Which will have the longer lasting positive effects? We would all too often identify the coder as privileged and elite, yet also assign that job the comparative “meaningfulness” that clouds our reasoning and judgment on the nature of given work and its value. That is why hunger, thirst and poverty abound, alongside obesity and gaming addictions. To solve the problem of hunger, thirst and poverty, eventually someone is going to have to pick up a shovel. That’s pretty much what university level work design should teach…and require

  • The job that the managers need to get done:

Not every manager is an economist or thought leader. Every manager is a hired hand to get the job done. They should certainly strive hard to deploy the “increasingly capable machines that enable and empower people to collaborate more effectively, and make learning from experience scalable.”

They should also remind innovators who work for them of the importance of remembering the essential “job to be done” by their offerings – what is it that customers “hire” your product or service to do for them? Their job is not only to produce better goods and services more efficiently, but to organize individuals to collaborate and create together in unprecedented ways.  The business leaders who get that job done will be those who make the most of human potential, and manage to make prosperity inclusive.

In the DT enabled world is there really a distinction between a manager and worker? Aren’t they merely part of a chain or continuum? May be both the manager and the worker need to start thinking that they are part of the same “system”. In fact in a DT dominated world where  the use and value of every worker is threatened, may be it is better for all workers and at all levels to start thinking of themselves as Technology workers, where “Technology” truly means integration of Science, application of Science (Engineering) and exploitation of Science (Management) in every field. For such workers and pool of workers, the opportunities for meaningful work are limitless. Such workers also become very competent in their Transformational Skills.

Developing a framework for Industry – Academia collaboration : A case study

Slide1

Education & Training NGPG EM Mar 2017

To address the limited capability among Indian machine tool manufacturers to produce high precision machines, a model on Next Generation Precision Grinder (NGPG) has been developed. This project also illustrates the development of a collaboration frame work to integrate the expertise available with the Indian machine tool manufacturers, academic resources, etc with the knowledge available from across the globe.

Key lessons learned:

  1. Cooperative R&D is entirely possible between industry and academic/R&D institutions in India as long as everyone is focused on the same common goal (i.e.) advancement of academic knowledge that supports commercially viable end results.
  2. Such an approach is most appropriate for medium to long term R&D projects (3-5 years), not those requiring immediate development.
  3. At higher reaches of technology, the scientific inputs can only be brought by academia, since industry – especially the SMEs – mostly does not have the needed resources.
  4. There are tools and resources available from Govt. funded agencies that could be deployed by students and industry professionals. Developing such eco-system enhances efficiency and reduces the total cost and investments needed in such projects.
  5. A structured project with system thinking leading to clearly laid down quantified objectives stands a good chance of success.
  6. There must be a driver each from industry and academia, who make it their personal mission to complete the project successfully.
  7. 7. It is essential for the industry and academic institution to continuously interact and jointly work on the project at every stage. Such collaboration also benefits from engagement of organizations, such as IMTMA and international experts in knowledge integration.
  8. A free exchange of information and data is essential, without being worried about Intellectual Property (IP) confidentiality at every stage. This can be secured through a mutual Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) at the start.
  9. If properly reviewed and managed periodically (as by the PRMC), it is possible to complete such projects within the time and budget allotted.

Restoring Manufacturing as a job creation engine.

slide1

President elect Donald Trump’s efforts to shine light on Carrier Co. and their limitation of jobs might have one silver lining, although it may not be what he seems to suggest (i.e.) he as the POTUS can retore US manufacturing jobs. It is reported that  Carrier Co. to ultimately cut some of jobs Trump saved

The company’s deal with President-elect Donald Trump to keep a furnace plant from moving to Mexico also calls for a $16 million investment in the facility. But that has a big down side for some of the workers in Indianapolis. Most of that money will be invested in automation said to Greg Hayes, CEO of United Technologies, Carrier’s corporate parent. And that automation will replace some of the jobs that were just saved. “We’re going to…automate to drive the cost down so that we can continue to be competitive,” he said on an interview on CNBC earlier this week. “Is it as cheap as moving to Mexico with lower cost labor? No. But we will make that plant competitive just because we’ll make the capital investments there. But what that ultimately means is there will be fewer jobs.”

We have described in detail this migration and transformation of the “Manufacturing work” in one of our earlier blog posts under the title “How to bring the manufacturing jobs that are never coming back”. It cannot be achieved merely by blaming Trade Agreements or past government policies. Certainly it cannot be achieved merely by blaming the CEOs of Carrier or Being Co. or the union leaders that Mr. Trump thinks of as his whipping boys for the day.

“You can’t just blame cheap labor [outside the U.S.],” said Dan Miklovic, principal analyst with LNS research. “Certainly many of the jobs that we’ve lost, especially in more sophisticated industries, it’s not so much that they’ve been offshored, but it has been automation that replaced them. We use a lot more robots to build cars.” Altogether, U.S. factories are actually producing more products today than they did in the post-World War II era, according to the Federal Reserve’s reading on manufacturing output. Output at U.S. factories is up 150% in last 40 years. But U.S. manufacturing jobs have plunged by more than 30% in that same period. And automation is a big reason why.

The above suggests that the US labor has been producing 50% more output with 30% less labor. A simple math would suggest that US labor has been doing such a good job that the manufacturing labor productivity has gone up by 114% (= 150% output put with only 70% of labor needed). But to gain even more employment at this higher level of productivity US will need to produce and sell 214% more than we did 40 years ago! Unless these products can be consumed inside of USA at the current prevailing prices the US will be required to sell them to other countries. How can this be achieved with the Trump administration’s position opposing Trade agreements? Senator Sanders has been equal contributor to this fallacy.

Let us be clear about something else. Not all of these productivity gains have come thanks only to better worker skills. If that were the case the workers can walk out of their jobs and the manufacturing plants will come to a screeching halt. That was the power of the labor 40 years ago and hence the strength of the unions. That is not the case today. We discuss this point in more detail in our essay: Do Americans really miss the unions? It is true that few workers are better skilled and contribute far better than their peers 40 years ago. These are also the among the college educated workers – with minimum of associate degree from Community colleges – working mostly in the two coasts and the few newly industrialized manufacturing centers in the South and the Midwest. These are not the voters in the industrial mid-west without higher education (or even H.S. Degree). These “higher skilled” workers are not large in number or concentrated in a few places to have the strength necessary to force higher wages through unions and their demands. The challenge is to train and educate more of these skilled workers so that they can acquire and maintain higher paying manufacturing jobs on their own. This is not more of the same education leading to the suggestion from a professor of Chemistry “It may be a mistake to get a degree in Chemistry, unless you have also figured out how to use your knowledge!”

There is no end in sight in this trend in automation and depletion of manufacturing jobs. Anyone who pushes the idea that they can reverse this trend and grow lots of manufacturing jobs in the US merely through trade barriers or building isolationist policies  is selling you another Trump University!

 And it’s not a trend that’s going to end with Carrier or even with manufacturers. A recent study by McKinsey & Co. said that 45% of the tasks that U.S. workers are currently paid to perform can be automated by existing technology. That represents about $2 trillion in annual wages.

If you take the above data and through simple math one can conclude that the US manufacturing has to reach 400% of our production output to maintain employment parity that existed 40 years ago. This does not take into account additional increase required to account for our modest population growth.  This also does not take into account additional developments through Digital Technology for further automation. Information technology, which will continue to deplete the need for manufacturing labor.

Where will this new production come from? It cannot come by simply producing more of the same. 400% of manufacturing production in US over 40 years ago would suggest that all manufactured goods are made in US and everyone else in the world will merely but what we make! This Utopian view of the world is foolish at best. Hence it implies US has to conceive and produce goods and services for the unmet needs that other countries can not produce today.

These unmet needs to be full filled can be for consumption in the US and better yet for all the unmet needs across the globe. This has to start with our redefining the commonly used term “Technology”. Everyone in the media, leadership, think tanks make the same mistake by addressing developments in IT (Broadly in the category of Digital Information Technology) as the Technology.  Look at the parent Co. of Carrier (i.e.) United Technologies. The word technology here refers to jet engines and air conditioners. It does not imply IT in isolation. For more details see: Managing the role of Digital Technology: Life before and after electricity.

Why is this important? There has been relentless effort to improve and enhance the efficiency and productivity of human centered activities in the past 40 years using IT / DT. Progress in automation and AI are merely focused for furtherance of the same. The resultant depletion of human center activities (jobs) are being lost at a far larger arte than any new jobs being created. For more details see: Understanding the voter resentment. The only way to reverse this trend is to emphasize as a nation – and across the globe – the need to focus on

  • Relentlessly foster all sciences and their technologies that can create NEW SOLUTIONS that meet the unmet needs across the globe.

This implies that products and services for alternative energy, high speed transport across the US, solutions to fight global warming, exploring the space. eliminating poverty, hunger and poor health, products and services for the growing old age population, etc. are not mere matters of policy and political debate. Instead these are real opportunities for new products and services not available from other countries. These are also new business opportunities for the investors. In combination these are the manufacturing activities that can create net new jobs in the US.

The need for such expansive role of new science based initiatives (the true meaning of the word “Technology”) is not fully recognized. For more details see: Dwindling gains in Science, medicine and technology in the WSJ article.

But the WSJ report suggests that we the US population is some how risk averse. This is far from the truth. When the new technology is an acceptable alternative US as nation is the first to accept the risk and embrace the change. But these businesses and services based on new science based technologies will not take off without substantial initial investments to foster them through Government initiatives.    We should be honest to admit that US auto industry would not have succeeded without the Highways and freeways built across the nation by the US Govt. The same auto industry would not be viable today without the Govt. intervention of the 2008 financial crisis. The same can be said of aerospace industry and the role of government funded defense contracts supporting many basic research projects.

  • Focus away from the use of IT and AI technologies  solely on eliminating human centered efforts and more towards creating new opportunities for human endeavor (work or jobs).

Our reliance on IT to reduce jobs and increase labor productivity has been the untold “Opioid crisis” in all our economic activities. It was prescribed as a solution to over the labor cost issues in the late 1970s. Now it has become the crutch and the only medicine consumed by CEOs across all companies and in all sectors to reduce labor cost year after year to keep their balance sheet look attractive to their investors.

The above two prescriptions for increasing the manufacturing employment have to become the corner stone of any policy advocates as well as the fundamentals for any administration that truly believes in restoring US manufacturing and increased jobs as a result.

Reagan, Clinton and Bush administrations complexly missed the boat in terms of the above two prescriptions. Republican ideologues who want to keep Government out of everything they see as  interfering with “free market economy”have thwarted most of President Obama’s efforts in this direction, every step of the way. Democrats who see the need are not clear in their vision or vocal to articulate the need for real growth in new jobs. Instead they offer platitudes in terms of free college education and more manufacturing jobs (without a clue on where they will come from).

The CEOs have also a role to play. After all they can not continue to cut  jobs and look good in their bottom line in the long run.  Recall the comment by the CEO of Carrier Co. quoted earlier? “We’re going to…automate to drive the cost down so that we can continue to be competitive”. He did not suggest investing in more new products and services that can increase employment and also improve his company’s performance bottom line in the long term!

If the policy planners and administration will come to such consensus is anybody’s guess. In the meantime individuals should take the matter of their jobs and careers in their own hands and develop strategies for the same on their own. Transformational Skills for success in the 21st Century Economy.

Comment on HBR Article: Think Strategically About Your Career Development

The HBR article on the above subject suggests the following as important steps for career development:

  • Get clear on your next steps.
  • Force yourself to set aside time.
  • Invest in deep work.
  • Build your external reputation.

Of these four suggestions it is very important to “Invest in Deep Work”. Before (and during) such focus one should be clear about Why/ What? and How? about the Deep Work.

Why Deep Work: As the author of the HBR article says you have to do something different from others. If you do the same work as others then there are more people competing for your career path. Chances are the co. will find a way to standardize your jobs and eliminate a few people or outsource them :-(

What is Deep Work? It is the ability to identify a need, convert it into a solution and make it useful (and be sure you get paid for that). We call this ability (Discover X Develop X Deploy) to implement a stream of new solutions as the TRANSFORMATIONAL SKILLS.
https://stimsinstitute.com/20151207books/ 

How to engage in Deep Work? Here are are seven path ways (Transformational Skills):
1. Develop a common language (What is the NEW SOLUTION? Why/ How?)
2. Focus on using all your core capabilities (Knowledge, Experience and People Skills; Science, Engineering and Management skills); Constantly add to these six skill buckets through life long learning as needed.
3. Practice a system view for all solutions (Task is what you do; System is what you develop). Every system is an Input / Transformation/Output scheme. Keep in mind that the whole is always larger than the mere sum of its parts. You are required to complete an entire jig saw puzzle( the new solution) and not just fit one piece in it.
4. Focus on the SCIENCE (Quantitative understanding and use of the Transformation); Use Digital and Mobile data as much as possible.
5. In developing and implementing the solution reach out and use a broad network of resources and clients. This is called networking in general. It is more specifically called as Ecosystem development, since everyone in the network feeds off of each other for their collective success and growth.
6. Be motivated to go from beginning all the way to the end (= Discovery X Development X Deploy)
7. Practice Emotional Intelligence (Be useful to others which in turn can be useful to you).
https://stimsinstitute.com/2016/03/18/urgent-need-for-education-that-addresses-the-real-needknowledge-and-its-use-to-deliver-solutions-that-commands-better-wages/

Building a career where you are seen as useful is always much easier than simply chasing ideas and connections. It is not easy. It will need you to set aside time and effort to gain clarity on your new solutions and the value through them. There will always be pressure to do a lot of tasks unless you set aside time to step out of them and think clearly to work on the above sevenn steps.

If you build your external reputation when you are not seen as valuable in your current employer that may get you a new job, but it will not be a solid base for building your career path.