Creating a decision tree for internal customer so they can decide what work to send me and what work to outsource.

[Rough-cutter]

At our place, engineers typically don't make this decision. All parts route through the manufacturing department, who does the make by decisions based on how busy the shop is, whether the work fits in there domain etc etc....

Sounds good, but our issue is that we no longer have a manufacturing department. They closed it about 5 yrs ago and I am just a small engineering mechanical support lab with a mill and a lathe.

 

[Donkey Hotey]

It can't be long-term because otherwise, why even have the machinists, the engineers should build all their own parts.

Production is production and--yes--that's exactly what I was pushing for: engineers making their own prototypes. The issue was (and remains) that production is always priority. Prototypes and development demonstrators never got done. And we had to argue with low effort manufacturing people (and machinists) who insisted things couldn't be done, tolerances couldn't be held and then the engineers would make dozens of them.

And generally it will only work if you can get the engineers to book to overhead. It'll get killed by the PM who looks at the guy who spent a week and $12K in the internal shop making his own parts, two brackets, a mounting plate, and one sexier part, vs. the dude who sent it out all approximately the same for $1500.

The math never worked that way. The engineers had plenty to do. The problem management had was "Spindle optimization." Some numpty got it in their head that if there was a spindle, it had to "produce." Sitting idle for a week was not acceptable. By their logic, production had to run on those machines (bought for prototyping) as well or they had to go. Production had lots of idle spindles (which was also a bad thing but, a different manager's problem). Nobody charged to overhead, ever. A body on overhead was two weeks from out the door.

It lets the engineer know the pain in the production process, and assign a value to it. Actually this is a good reason to not have engineers make the parts, because then there can be a tendency to compromise things too much to make them easier to build. Plenty of projects screwed by short term cost reduction to make things cheaper.

You had no way of knowing this but, one of our largest projects was precisely working on technologies and construction methods to reduce maintenance cost. It was manufacturing who said things couldn't be done and that's why we had to do it. Our machinists couldn't put twelve holes in a straight line on a 10" long part, or get two bushings coaxial enough to not be able to reject the tolerance visually. The extraordinarily low quality we got out of our production shops was embarrassing. 0.010" tolerance on a hole diameter was considered "tight tolerance" and unnecessary by manufacturing.

This comment confused me because I thought you were the one preaching the benefits of the uni shop. Formula SAE is a great program, but only a minority of undergrads participate in it or similar.

The ones I want designing and making their own prototypes will have gravitated toward something like that or had plenty of personal life history doing similar. They self select. Not all formula SAE people will be high value. Lots and lots of cling-ons with those projects too. We had one guy in particular who is on here but, not terribly active. He was the guy mopping up behind everyone else who couldn't hack it. It helps that he also grew up with machines in his garage.

My offhand comment was just the grad student who built the custom lithography machine, carbon fiber winding/patterning system, or unique kinematic end-effector for harvesting fruit from tree/plants/bushes spent a lot more time in that shop making parts that they had more direct design experience with, so benefited more.

Again, we must have been in different circles. The grad-level people I met did nothing practical at all. Everything was in the realm of theory or basic lab experiments. The projects you described are often enough, Bachelor level senior projects now. Maybe the undergrads working for the grad students?

 

[Rough-cutter]

I appreciate all the support and advice. I know this thread has gotten way of the topic of the title. And I know I have been guilty of just making threads to complain and vent about the poor management of my company. But on this one I really am trying to stay positive and find real solutions. I also know that most of these threads devolve into the timeless debate of engineers vs. machinist.

In any case to update my specific situation. The boss came in and we have a good 30 min chat. Basically rehashing the email I sent him. He seems to be in agreement that the mission of my shop is to support immediate need projects and cannot be bogged down with larger qty larger project work that could tie up our spindle and block other emergency needs that come up.

However we are trying to figure out how to explain that to his boss. We are trying to get a meeting with him soon. I am told that his boss is of the opinion that if we outsource making of any mechanical components then why wouldn't they out source the making of cables or soldering circuit cards or assembly etc.. basically he is of the opinion that if we outsource anything. Then we risk outsourcing everything and then we don't have a department anymore.

He does not understand that these mechanical parts were made by a fabrication department of over 100 people who did production parts and engineering support. That dept. is closed and we are left to fill the gap. However we are not equipped to handle filling that gap. When our fabrication department closed. The engineering mechanical shop I am in now did not invest or add any capacity. It was never designed to handle this kind of volume. And I explained to my boss that trying to do so is hurting the original mission of this R&D shop. And to try to do both without adding any capacity or investing in any equipment to increase efficiency or out put. Then that is being set up to fail. My boss is firm on not adding capacity. Says it will not happen. Because when the work dries up there will be even more cost.

I then told him that his boss will need to decide on which direction they want to go and what objective my shop is suppose to serve. I told him if they can not make a decision and understand the objective. Then I will need to figure out where I am going to work because it is only a matter of time before not meeting expectations will be called into question.

The look on his face was priceless. Like (please don't quit, we couldn't function with out you). But he only said, "there is no way they will close this shop."

I thought to myself. I heard that before, many times. In a much more capable and more needed department. All it takes anymore is some bean counter to make the call that this does not have enough value. and the damage of cutting it all together gets passed on again. and again.

So in that regard my boss is not wrong. Stay small, stay cheap. Do not add equipment, space, personnel. Because the bigger the cost the bigger the target that accounting has to shoot at.

I guess it all boils down to being in a giant corporation that is run by financial people. Which sounds good in theory. But where the rubber meets the road and how do we accomplish what we need to do. Is just lost and it gets harder and harder to accomplish anything. I guess that is why at some point giant companies have to split off.

 

[mhajicek]

I've been in that boat, being a one-man captive shop for a medical device company. My solution was to maintain a spreadsheet of jobs with time estimates, and estimated start and end dates. Everyone on the list, and my boss, would regularly get group-emailed the spreadsheet, and any changes or additions when they happen, so they could hash out amongst themselves who would get priority order.

"Yes, so-and-so, I can meet your need-by date if I move these other three projects back by two weeks. Is that acceptable to everyone?"

And I'm sure you realize that a whiteboard can be had for less than $200.

 

[gmax137]

Somewhere near the beginning of this thread you said you had one engineer give you a 4 month task. Later you said you have 1000 (or 10,000 ?) potential internal customers. Say it is 1000, then on average each gets 2 hours of your time per year. 4 months is 660 hours of your time. As I see it, that's an immediate problem.

 

[Rough-cutter]

My solution was to maintain a spreadsheet of jobs with time estimates, and estimated start and end dates.

We have an online list that everyone has access to. However no one wants to put any need dates or what I call promise dates. What I would estimate as completion date. I have pushed for this but no one wants to do it because no one knows when they need things. They always just say asap. Which I think is b.s. and a core problem.

 

[Rough-cutter]

Somewhere near the beginning of this thread you said you had one engineer give you a 4 month task. Later you said you have 1000 (or 10,000 ?) potential internal customers. Say it is 1000, then on average each gets 2 hours of your time per year. 4 months is 660 hours of your time. As I see it, that's an immediate problem.

Yes, the workload fluctuations are vast. Bi have customers that may only give me a few hours work once per year. Others I have done a week project once every other year. Others need things from me weekly or monthly. It is all over t he place and unpredictable.

 

[Rough-cutter]

Reflecting on my covo with the boss. I remember he realy is a car salesman. Good at talking but no real action is ever taken. Basically the take away I get from him is that we have limited resources. We will never be able to meet the expectations. But we will do what we can. And he does not ever seem to take these deadlines seriously. Saying things like. Well they probably couldn't get it done faster anywhere else anyway. And so what if they get it a month later than they want. They have no choice.

I even argued with him about his philosophy that is everyone is equally un happy with him he must be doing good because we don't have the resources to make everyone happy. He uses the analogy of when he gives lab space to projects they always want more and he can't give anyone of them what they want because that would make another projects space even smaller.

I told himnif all of your customers are unhappy. You will not have customers. I told him ultimately if they need the space and you can never give them what they need. You are not meeting thier need.

He said limitations are set by higher management. Everyone does not get what they want and they have no choice.

I told him they do have a choice. We all have a choice. And if a company is trying to execute and accomplish more. While having less resources. And is not actively finding ways to make most effective use of resources it does have. Then it will not accomplish what it set out to do in the first place.

He again said well that is what we have.

Salesman. Who is retiring. I can't blame him. Just wish I could get honesty instead of "what's best for the company" speak.
If I were in his shoes I would say , ,"yeah this place is dysfunctional. I would be looking for other prospects".

But I suppose he believes everywhere is dysfunctional and this is how it will always be.

 

[mhajicek]

Your boss is not doing their job, and that's beyond your power to fix. You basically have two choices; keep suffering though it, or find somewhere to move on.

Edit to add: You can still make your own spreadsheet with estimated completion dates, and send that around.

 

[David Ferguson]

Your decision tree, needs to have a time/size component to the projects. Does the required workload for a project exceed 2 wks -- go outside for a quote -- compare quote to your available (and expected) short-term workload.
Good Luck!

 

[Rough-cutter]

Does the required workload for a project exceed 2 wks -- go outside for a quote

I like the idea of longer than 2wk project may be a no go for me. It just clogs up the works. However some times I am forced to take on such a job, sometimes I do not have a choice. Also the requestor has no idea if a job will take 1 day or 1 month. They really have no concept. They usually don't even look at the drawing. They are just told we need part # X . then they ask me, can you make part # X. sometimes that part # has 60 unique custom made components. And other times I am not asked. I am told that I have to.

 

[Rough-cutter]

Your boss is not doing their job, and that's beyond your power to fix. You basically have two choices; keep suffering though it, or find somewhere to move on.

Edit to add: You can still make your own spreadsheet with estimated completion dates, and send that around.

#1. the requestor has no idea the size or time it takes of the project. But I suppose I could put that decision on my end.
#2. I do like the white board idea, but I have realized they wont allow that to work. This week I have had constant interruptions. And the boss says he does not want me to get permission to switch priorities for every little thing. 2 hr job here. 4 hour job there. and on and on.

So how can I predict any sort of dead line if I have no idea if I will be forced to do other pop up jobs all the time. There have been times when some "emergency" job comes up and takes days to do. putting everything else that much farther behind.

So I think I am just going to have to take a stand and say, "I cannot give prediction or estimate of completion dates, if I am constantly pulled to other jobs at random and with out warning". And if they cannot accept that. Oh well. That is the reality.

And yes you are correct. I should just (a.) stop caring and tell them whatever I don't care anymore. Or (b.) find another job.

 

[mhajicek]

#1. the requestor has no idea the size or time it takes of the project. But I suppose I could put that decision on my end.
#2. I do like the white board idea, but I have realized they wont allow that to work. This week I have had constant interruptions. And the boss says he does not want me to get permission to switch priorities for every little thing. 2 hr job here. 4 hour job there. and on and on.

So how can I predict any sort of dead line if I have no idea if I will be forced to do other pop up jobs all the time. There have been times when some "emergency" job comes up and takes days to do. putting everything else that much farther behind.

So I think I am just going to have to take a stand and say, "I cannot give prediction or estimate of completion dates, if I am constantly pulled to other jobs at random and with out warning". And if they cannot accept that. Oh well. That is the reality.

And yes you are correct. I should just (a.) stop caring and tell them whatever I don't care anymore. Or (b.) find another job.

1. Yes, when you get a job request, you estimate the time needed and put it on your spreadsheet to mail out.
2. The spreadsheet can take the place of the whiteboard. You can pad your time estimates a bit to give you some room for brief, urgent jobs, and anything that doesn't fit goes on the spreadsheet, at the end. If everything is top priority, then you must do first-in-first-out. If some things actually do have higher priority, that decision must be made by someone. Maybe ask your boss who should decide the priority order; if he says that's you, well then, that's you and no one can legitimately complain.

If everyone in the building has the authority to redirect your priorities, this is an absolutely unworkable situation. You cannot have more than one boss. Unless the group will discuss and come to consensus, there must be one, and only one, person who decides the priorities. That could be you, that could be your boss, it could be anyone. But then that person's decision stands, and no amount of whining can overrule it.

I was thinking to suggest having your internal clients give an urgency rating to their jobs when requesting them, but chances are they would all rate their own job top priority.

 

[dstig]

#1. the requestor has no idea the size or time it takes of the project. But I suppose I could put that decision on my end.
#2. I do like the white board idea, but I have realized they wont allow that to work. This week I have had constant interruptions. And the boss says he does not want me to get permission to switch priorities for every little thing. 2 hr job here. 4 hour job there. and on and on.

Well this goes back to my earlier point about you coordinating outsourcing for stuff like this. I may have not been clear as my point was that you decide what stays inside and what goes out, and then you manage the outsourcing. Not that you just outsource everything. So you maintain the work that you like and what is time critical in-house, and handle the outsourcing for people who apparently clearly can't handle that task well.

But with a management change coming up and a second level manager that doesn't want you around (as you say) then I would also start fluffing my resume and looking around... Heck you could go out on your own and become that outsourcer...

 

[Rough-cutter]

1. Yes, when you get a job request, you estimate the time needed and put it on your spreadsheet to mail out.
2. The spreadsheet can take the place of the whiteboard. You can pad your time estimates a bit to give you some room for brief, urgent jobs, and anything that doesn't fit goes on the spreadsheet, at the end. If everything is top priority, then you must do first-in-first-out. If some things actually do have higher priority, that decision must be made by someone. Maybe ask your boss who should decide the priority order; if he says that's you, well then, that's you and no one can legitimately complain.

If everyone in the building has the authority to redirect your priorities, this is an absolutely unworkable situation. You cannot have more than one boss. Unless the group will discuss and come to consensus, there must be one, and only one, person who decides the priorities. That could be you, that could be your boss, it could be anyone. But then that person's decision stands, and no amount of whining can overrule it.

I was thinking to suggest having your internal clients give an urgency rating to their jobs when requesting them, but chances are they would all rate their own job top priority.

Yes, it seems that everyone has the authority to change my priorities. Every customer has their own sperate project and team that does not interact with other projects or teams. So in their eyes they are priority #1 and I work for only them. No one is running the overall structure of the department. Those people that should be doing that job either do not have authority or are more concerned with much bigger picture things. Like cooperate mergers and Securing future contracts with customers. It feels like no one is on the ground running the department.

And yes. Spread sheet with time estimates would help. Except there may be a 2 day long job that comes in and interrupts everything else. I have told the boss he needs to make that call. He says that he should not have to in every case and that I can make the call. Except I have no information to make that decision and when other projects are delayed. I am to blame for making the decision. It feels like everyone is just working on making someone else to blame. I guess that is what I am doing too. It is like no one has any information to make these decisions. And we do not have enough resources to accomplish everyone's goals. So we just do what we can. But that feels like being set up to fail. Every project feels like they could be getting better service from us. Deadlines are not met. and we are all told that is the best we can do with what we have. But then they need someone to blame for that. And blaming whomever decides our operating budget is not an option. As we like to say. S@#% rolls down hill. I am at the bottom of that hill. And without at least a 4 yr bachelor degree. There is no way for me to climb up that hill. So I guess just accept and get used to getting S@#% on. or get out of the way.

 

[dc_v01]

As for your point #4. "Ability to hide/reduce costs of engineering design". Unfortunately they want me to charge as much time to projects as possible.

So, after you other responses, I realize I was probably too aggressive in my initial statement. But a lot depends on the accounting structure of your company. The PM's can still be more restrained by materials costs more than labor, and may have more flexibility in moving labor around. Outsourcing work is still cash that leaves the "company". So they may face more pressure on ballooning materials costs than on labor. Without knowing more it's hard to say.

I appreciate all the support and advice. I know this thread has gotten way of the topic of the title. And I know I have been guilty of just making threads to complain and vent about the poor management of my company. But on this one I really am trying to stay positive and find real solutions. I also know that most of these threads devolve into the timeless debate of engineers vs. machinist.

Sometimes the off-topic is interesting discussion. I'll try to keep it in separate posts for you!

However we are trying to figure out how to explain that to his boss. We are trying to get a meeting with him soon. I am told that his boss is of the opinion that if we outsource making of any mechanical components then why wouldn't they out source the making of cables or soldering circuit cards or assembly etc.. basically he is of the opinion that if we outsource anything. Then we risk outsourcing everything and then we don't have a department anymore.

So there have been several comments from you and others, about polishing up your resume, looking for another job, because you have too many customers and can't do everything. That's fine! It's great to be in demand! How many times to we see advice to shops to "no bid" work, beyond their capacity? Or, alternately, how many people asking "how do I find work?" You don't have that problem! It's simply a question of how to do you pare it down to a manageable level. Generally, I don't see an issue to your job.

Your boss's boss is the only potential issue. But that is why I focused my initial response not on your capabilities, but on what you offer that the outside shop will not. Those are the jobs you should be handling, and that is why your company should not be outsourcing everything, because your company should be reaping the benefits of those advantages. Since there is more work to be done than can be accommodated, some things won't get those advantages, but that's fine if the overall investment balance is deemed best for the company. Your meeting with this upper boss should reinforce this. Who is going to replace you current boss when he retires?

One thing I don't think is acceptable is your online spreadsheet does not have estimated delivery dates. The biggest problem with your current situation is a lack of communication, and some of that is on you, and why the female PM mentioned earlier had a complaint. Now, I suspect there is more to the lack of dates than just juggling priorities - you probably have to deal with "walk-in" work as well, the guy that needs a few holes added, or advice, or whatever. That's fine too. You just need to plan on it, not putting the best case scenario on times, "if no one bothers me". Someone always will. So if you're working 40 hours, plan on 10 doing something else, or whatever, and only 30 hours on these jobs. And then put dates in the spreadsheet based on anticipating fewer working hours, and just put in the projects on a first come first served basis. This adds communication, and puts the visibility in place for the PM's to also help make outsourcing decisions based on deadlines. Of course only parts that made in through the first screening should be on this list in the first place. And then it also puts visibility in place for your boss and other PM's and argue about shifting priorities to push one job in front of another. You don't make that decision and shouldn't. Just make sure they're aware if the active job is shifted it could take more time due to wasted setup time or whatever. Potentially there are also some hiccups with materials delivery, ideally your products are similar enough you can keep raw material stock. Hopefully they're only discussing things further down the line.

But I think this enhanced communication is essential for your success in this position. It's what sets expectations, and determines if they are met. The PM's can't work without dates.

You should also minimize your role in outsourcing decisions. Not your role to find shops with capability for larger parts, or whatever. That's on the PM's. You have enough to do. Just focus on your internal decision tree, and then add to the end of the spreadsheet.

 

[dc_v01]

And we do not have enough resources to accomplish everyone's goals.

No one ever does!

So we just do what we can. But that feels like being set up to fail. Every project feels like they could be getting better service from us.

Keeping the projects that don't make the internal decision tree off of it in the first place will help reduce the lead times and make them feel like "better service". And communicating that they can't get it because you're at capacity makes them feel like "better service". And having the dates will make them feel like "better service!" Communication is key to effective service. If eventually enough people want higher internal capacity, you may get that investment you are looking for. But at the moment no one can see that.

 

[dc_v01]

Production is production and--yes--that's exactly what I was pushing for: engineers making their own prototypes. The issue was (and remains) that production is always priority. Prototypes and development demonstrators never got done. And we had to argue with low effort manufacturing people (and machinists) who insisted things couldn't be done, tolerances couldn't be held and then the engineers would make dozens of them.

There's actually a lot to parse in there, but much of it is a dysfunctional management issue. Obviously it shouldn't be necessary for the engineers to show the machinists something can be done. And if machinists try and purposely fail to prove they're right, also a management issue. Seen that too! As far as prototypes vs. production, there's a lot that's industry specific. I deal a lot with capital equipment. "Prototypes" may last forever as the engineering test mules, in semiconductor for instance. In custom equipment, the "prototypes" end up being the shipping product.

I thought you must be using unburdened labor rates, but man, that's a lot of dysfunction, with your idle spindle issues. If your shop is really running scheduled production jobs, that function needs to be entirely separate from prototyping.

One of the best setups was with a startup I was working with. The shop manager worked day shift, met with the engineers, reviewed drawings and models submitted, maybe did some programming if there was time. Machinists worked night shift, an hour of overlap with the shop manager. Depending on size, of course, the engineers could reasonably expect to complete a design one day and be assembling and testing the next. This enabled very fast prototype revision cycles, more than one per week, to speed the development!

Again, we must have been in different circles. The grad-level people I met did nothing practical at all. Everything was in the realm of theory or basic lab experiments.

Probably. I think you're in Socal, maybe blessed with undergrads from Cal Poly SLO? I've been involved with uni shops on both coasts. Maybe they're better in the heartland. Got 4 major unis nearby now. One exceptionally well known one near me has the most embarrassing undergrads. They all put nearly the exact same words to the effect of "familiar with operation of band saw, drill press, lathe, and mill" in the exact same order they appear on the course syllabus on their resumes. Bwahahaha! You went to the uni and learned how to use a band saw?!?!?!

Plenty of grad students don't do anything practical, either, the guy doing thermodynamic calculations for gas turbines, or whatever. But such people are less likely to apply to a design engineering position in my experience.

The projects you described are often enough, Bachelor level senior projects now. Maybe the undergrads working for the grad students?

Lol, please send them my way! They can show the engineers currently trying to make those things work how to do it. I've felt the undergrads have been getting lower and lower every year for decades. I have a little hope that the Makerspace movement may help practical skills, and have noticed a bit of a bump up in recent years.

Gearheads, as another poster mentioned, also used to be a good bet but car culture has also been declining. So many kids don't even know how to drive anymore, or at least don't learn until after 18, which is also in part due to the newer laws on the books.

 

[Donkey Hotey]

Obviously it shouldn't be necessary for the engineers to show the machinists something can be done. And if machinists try and purposely fail to prove they're right, also a management issue.

There should have been firings, far and wide. I'm talking about parts so bad that you'd show it to them with a $10 Harbor Freight caliper and they'd blame the caliper. I'm talking dimensions of 0.020-0.040" off, that you could see and they'd honestly say the part was good but, I was using inferior measuring equipment (never mind that the parts also don't fit and don't work).

If your shop is really running scheduled production jobs, that function needs to be entirely separate from prototyping.

Many shops, spread over multiple sites. Hundreds of spindles. The prototyping machines were in a completely separate location. Didn't matter. If it's a spindle, it has to be running or it goes. Making a prototype and leaving the machine set up for a week wasn't permissible in their eyes. Keep in mind: this was a lab that at one point was producing 25% of the total invention disclosures for the entire business unit and the cost of everything in the shop was more than covered.

Probably. I think you're in Socal, maybe blessed with undergrads from Cal Poly SLO?

Yes, lots from SLO and some from Pomona. Plenty of CSUN and sprinkling from others up and down the state. Varying levels of experiences. No single school stood out as "Yeah, those guys really get it." It came down to the individuals.

They can show the engineers currently trying to make those things work how to do it. I've felt the undergrads have been getting lower and lower every year for decades. I have a little hope that the Makerspace movement may help practical skills, and have noticed a bit of a bump up in recent years.

There are engineers who did it because they love designing and making things. There are engineers who were good at math and needed a career where they could actually earn some money and had little or no aptitude for mechanical things. The first group is getting harder and harder to find and my employer didn't see any difference between them. Management believed anybody could "take a class" and then they were an expert. All interchangeable bellybuttons.

From your comments, I can tell you too would rage and shake your head in disbelief at the things I've lived. Thanks for being a beacon of sanity in a sea of corporate morons.

 

[mhajicek]

Letting engineers use machine tools is a recipe for disaster. Some of them are up to the task, but others will damage the machine, or endanger themselves and others. It can be something as simple as leaving the key in the lathe chuck. If you want them machining, they need to be trained in as junior machinists.