Rendering a human touch to smart manufacturing
If we can treat the Physical Processes in the manufacturing shop floor as human beings, then much of the information management practices may be applicable to the manufacturing sector as well. This humane treatment of machines and manufacturing processes may be the next generation Smart Manufacturing?
I was there at the Boston Common at the march form science. I was one among the thousands in support of Science and its vital role in our way of life. I could not agree more with all that I saw and heard. Yet, one poster got my attention the most:
MAKE AMERICA THINK AGAIN!
Every one who truly believes in Science have to step back and think hard on the cause – why we are here marching for Science? It requires analytical thinking and not merely repeating the slogans or expressing anger against one or the other. Science as it was explained by one speaker requires hypothesis, its validation through data leading to conclusions that help us progress or at least better understand the problem we have on hand. Let us practice this thought process on a few of our problems we face today.
Global warming is indeed a problem. It started when China and India started consuming energy in larger quantities. Their means and methods for energy consumption and the emissions are not new. They rely on the same practiced in the Western world for decades.
How did this explosive energy consumption come to be? It started with off shored manufacturing to produce lower cost goods for the Western world. This local economic activity in developing nations was followed by their consuming the same goods – such as automobiles and energy – in larger quantities. The collective effect of all these is more pollution and emissions and global warming.
The scientists and their supporters who marched yesterday can make a commitment that they will buy only products made through clean energy- no matter where they are manufactured – even if it costs a little more. It is the demand of this consuming public and their sacrifice that will push the politicians and business leaders to switch towards solutions leading to a reduction in global warming? Corporations move and make the right decision only when they are impacted at their pocket book.
But, what technology enabled the off shore manufacturing in droves? One would have to conclude the developments in Digital Technology – internet, e-mail, communication services and Digital data and information processing – and their indiscriminate deployment as one among the enablers. Global capitalism was the intended consequence; Global warming is the unintended consequence.
Recently I was speaking with an engineer implementing an automation project using robotics. I asked him, why are you doing this project? His response without hesitation was “I want to eliminate jobs”. I ventured to ask him if he would do this project if it eliminated the job of his friends, family members or neighbors. He seemed amazed at that question. He responded, “My boss wanted me to do this job”!
Every scientist and STEM worker need to understand causality of the growing economic disparity. Developments in Digital Technology (DT) applied without discrimination leads to smart machines with the potential to marginalize human contributions. Contributions of workers through their cognitive skills, their ability to process information as well as through their physical labor. three pathways for human dignity through work are being challenged today.
Any society with meaningful employment and broad economic prosperity is the employer as well as the consumer. Everyone who marched for Science must come to grip with this reality (i.e.) their developments in Digital Technology must be channeled for the benefit of all, not for the benefit of a few at the exclusion of the many.
One cannot be in support of Science without also being responsible for the larger scope of their work and consequences of their own actions. This responsibility squarely falls on the shoulders of the leaders in Science community. During the march I informally polled a few to see what they understood as “Technology”. Every one gave similar general answers such as something good for the society, where science plays a key role, etc. Then I asked them if I give you $100,000 what stocks will you buy? Every one instinctively said Google, Microsoft, Facebook, etc. Nobody mentioned GE, P&W, Caterpillar or even Dell or HP! Every scientist needs to ask why is this preference?
Over the past decades the society has begun to accept Digital Technology as the “Technology”. The true meaning of Technology as the integrated outcome of Science, its application (Engineering) and effective exploitation of such use (Management) has been lost in the public discourse. Developments in the field of Nuclear Science are called “Nuclear Technology”. Developments in the field of polymers and plastics are called “Polymer Technology”; Innovation in space exploration is called “Space Technology”. But we obsessively refer to DT as the technology. Then we fail to recognize the developments in DT that preponderantly favor a few workers and their efforts to automate cognitive work and leave majority of citizens of zero economic value.
When thought leaders discuss the societal needs they describe “innovations through Technology” as the savior of the future. Implication here is technology as derived from all fields of sciences and not limited to DT. But when it comes to decision making and risk taking Digital Technology is favored depressing the effect and impact of all other science based technologies. The ills in the abuse of the DT are brushed aside as they are not identified as such.
Society has disdain for the widespread 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 that promote indiscriminate off shoring of processes using energy inefficient and ecologically ill-fated outcomes are not openly addressed. The potential of DT enabled solutions to marginalize human contributions, automating all forms of work (i.e.) Physical, information and cognitive work and leaving society with large swath of citizens without any economic value is not yet fully appreciated and baked into the thinking and planning of thought leaders, large majority of whom are the “Science and engineering” workers.
The role of DT to spread hate and foster home grown terrorists is not met head on. The recent mishap in Facebook and the mild apology from Mr. Zuckerberg is another dimension to this pitfall of the unbridled use of DT. Instead of addressing them head on, they are brushed aside under fallacy and illogical arguments claiming first amendment rights and free speech. An eclectic circuit without proper protection will never be allowed for use by broad public. There are no such restrictions for faulty DT circuits.
Scientists and Engineers cannot merely march and expect solutions to be developed by economists and politicians. They need to start thinking as managers and solution providers and on their own personal roles and through their jobs, projects and outputs that impact the broader issues. Every scientist needs to think as an engineer and a manager and a leader. They cannot wait for someone else to fix the ills of DT dominated society.
Let us Make America Think Again!
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:
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 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
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.
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:
In his essay The Populism Perplex, Mr. Paul Krugman describes the sad reality that Secretary Clinton lost the POTUS election despite her winning over 2 Million of popular votes than the PEOTUS Donald Trump.
Mr. Krugman describes this reality as a result of news media spending very little time on policy positions and explaining the fundamentals of the economics at work. He conveys his sense of disbelief while explaining the economy and job situation in Kentucky where the uninsured for health care are far fewer today. The jobs lost in the coal country are due to shifts in methods of mining (from underground to surface layers) as well as due to cheap natural gas through fracking. Clinton lost Kentucky heavily when she spoke of this reality and promised to replace the lost jobs through new jobs through renewable energy.
Mr. Krugman concludes: To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment. In particular, I don’t know why imagined liberal disdain inspires so much more anger than the very real disdain of conservatives who see the poverty of places like eastern Kentucky as a sign of the personal and moral inadequacy of their residents. One thing is clear, however: Democrats have to figure out why the white working class just voted overwhelmingly against its own economic interests, not pretend that a bit more populism would solve the problem.
We would like to offer a few thoughts to clarify the situation.
Income can be through wages and non-wage income (through real estate appreciate and making money off money). This is 99 % Vs. 1%. Deriding this gap serves no one any benefit. This grip of the 1% on the 99% can be lessened only though higher taxation of the 1% for the benefit of the 99%. But sadly the country has elected one among the 1% as the next POTUS. This is like hiring a fox to guard the chicken coup.
The 99% make their living through wage income. As we have described in the past, any wage can be earned only through one of three avenues: Professional Skill (ability to develop, deploy and implement a new solution – one could describe this as “Brain power”), Information work (to collect, process, analyze and disseminate information – one could call this as “Pen Power”) and Physical labor work (one could call this as “Muscle power”). Of these three today one can gain reliable income through Professional Work. Even this situation is precarious as the physical effort and information work content are being depleted routinely through relentless application of Digital Technology and its uses.
The pen power and the muscle power have been diminished substantially as the sources of income through evolution in Digital Technology. This is well understood and well documented in many places. These jobs have literally fallen off the cliff.
How did we get here? Any organization – place of work – is described as a pyramid. The bottom of any Organization Pyramid is made up of labor work force. Above them are the information workers and then the professional workers. In any organization we use a pyramid to depict that for good reasons. There were always more non-college educated labor workers. The number of college educated white collar information workers is fewer than physical labor workers. The number of professionals required are always far fewer than the other two categories. These work categories have been increasingly stratified since the advent of Digital Technology and its evolution since the late 1970s.
But when these categories are clearly stratified and mobility across them is limited or eliminated (thanks to the standardized nature of work) now we have the highly divided and polarized America. Most of those with college degrees and professional work live on either coast (East of I – 95 and West of I – 5 corridors) and the rest – non college educated and mostly white, who have lost their jobs in information and labor work, live between these two highways. Indeed these are also the two polarized groups which have supported Secretary Clinton and Mr. Trump respectively.
But this polarization and support for either candidate is not directly correlated to the level of employment as noted in the analysis reported in Fivethirtyeight.com. Instead it is far better correlated with the standardized or repetitive nature of nature of work. More routine and standardized the job, the voter support went for Mr. Trump. The majority of the voters with their work content that is least standardized or routine overwhelmingly went for Secretary Clinton.
What does this voting pattern tell us? It seems to be directly linked to what we have described as the Binary Economy!
Jobs or wage earning work at any level of skill can be standardized and hence de-skilled using Digital Technology tools. This de-skilling of work can be seen at any job and in any industrial activity and in any sector and in any region of the country. Such de-skilled jobs can also be automated and outsourced. What is left can command only low wages and often below the minimum wage. In these de-skilled jobs the power of the union is minimal as their contribution though skills that cannot be replaced is constantly reduced or eliminated. Industrial Midwest and much of the nation between the east and west coast has not found ways to replace these jobs with higher skill level jobs.
There are few opportunities where the worker can integrate knowledge from many sources and hence offer higher skilled and higher value addition. This knowledge integration is not a matter of higher education alone. While higher education and college degrees help, that is not the minimum requirement. Instead an aptitude for discovery of a need, developing a solution and implementing the same and get paid for that is the new skill required. The startups culture and the entrepreneurship in the East and the West coast foster such on the job skill development. These are also the voters who see new opportunities in Globalization, alternative energy sources, solutions to counter global warming, etc. These are the voters who have overwhelmingly voted for the Democrats.
The above skills development are not the Republican or Democratic priorities. Instead these are the priorities of those seeking high wage jobs and better incomes. But Democrats need to find ways to promote such skills development that supports and fosters the “Economy 1” in the Binary Economy model displayed in the figure above. This skill development cuts across all genders, races and economic levels. This new skill development has to be seen as the new Democratic priority. In this respect Senator Sanders’ call to Democrats to go beyond identity politics is correct. But his call that” understand that working-class incomes are down, and “stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industry” may be dubious at best since these are obvious action steps without outlining the fundamental reason (i.e.) the relentless need for new skills development and investment policies that will draw on these skills with new job opportunities and solutions focused on that.
Returning to Mr. Krugman’s comment: “To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment. In particular, I don’t know why imagined liberal disdain inspires so much more anger than the very real disdain of conservatives who see the poverty of places like eastern Kentucky as a sign of the personal and moral inadequacy of their residents. One thing is clear, however: Democrats have to figure out why the white working class just voted overwhelmingly against its own economic interests, not pretend that a bit more populism would solve the problem”.
The resentment of the voters is not liberal disdain or affirmation of the conservatives. It is certainly against their economic self-interest. It is like the person sinking in the lake grabbing on to any straw no matter how flimsy it may be. Mr. Trump’s promise as an “outsider” to create new jobs and stop the bleeding of jobs from USA through trade agreements are the flimsy straws for the voters who see their demand for their skills – through muscle power and pen power – depleted. Either party that sees the real underlying causes – the polarization of jobs into few high skilled jobs (with decent wages) and large no. of low or no skill jobs (with constant spiral of diminishing wages) at all levels of the economic activity – and finds answers for that will be rewarded in the long run. In the meantime the elections will be just toss ups governed less by rational choices and more by emotions and irrational events such as hacking and Comey letters.
As we have often said in our columns, the individual workers need not wait for politicians to figure out the evolving Binary Economy and the solutions for that. Instead they can seek out and learn skills for new solutions development. We call these new skills as the System Thinking and Transformational Skills.
STIMS Institute 