Learning About Why Companies Do RP

From: Thomas Graver (Georgia Institute of Technology)
To: RP-ML
Date: Thursday, November 2, 1995
Subject: Learning About Why Companies Do RP
     What are the catalysts and barriers to the successful deployment of RP technologies?

Purpose:
Graduate students and faculty at Georgia Tech are studying the process of
how companies adopt RP technologies, and we need your help.  Please take a
few minutes to respond.   Your responses to the following questions will be
compiled with others to try to identify keys to successfully implementing
rapid prototyping in an organization.

Results:
We will provide you with a copy of our results in about six weeks.

Structure and Time:
The questions address four stages of your experiences with rapid prototyping
technologies: adoption, pre-implementation, implementation, and
routinization. Seven questions require a short answer.  The rest require
only a single digit numerical response.   Most respondents have been able to
complete the questions in less than 10 minutes.

Confidentiality:
Your answers to these questions will be used for academic purposes only.
Neither your name nor your company name will be identified in any way.
NOTE: Please make sure you send your responses only to
tom.graver@marc.gatech.edu, and not to the entire RP-ML list.  You may also
respond by fax or by mail.  This information follows the questions.
************************************************************************************************
a) Please give a general description of the industry in which your company competes?
b) What was your role in the adoption of an RP technology?
c) What is your job title?
d) In what field(s) are you educated?
e) What rapid prototyping technology or technologies did you chose to adopt?
f) Please describe the current uses of RP at your company?
g) About how many people are employed by your company?
************************************************************************************************
For the following questions please type a number from 1 to 5, where:
	1 = Strongly Disagree
	2 = Disagree
	3 = Neither Agree nor Disagree
	4 = Agree
	5 = Strongly Agree
Please leave blank any question that you are not able to answer or that does
not apply to your situation.  

The Adoption Phase:
1.1)  The investigation into RP was motivated largely by management's desire
to have the latest technology. >

1.2)  The investigation into RP was motivated largely by the need to solve
some design/manufacturing problem, or to improve the design or manufacturing
process. >

1.3)  The investigation into RP was motivated largely by the need to improve
our position in the market and/or our relationship with our customers. >

1.4)  The investigation into RP was motivated largely by a strategic plan
which calls for the adoption of new technologies as a part of our
positioning in various markets. >

1.5)  Detailed studies of RP were performed, plant visits were made, and
conferences and trade shows were attended before a technology was chosen. >


The Pre-Implementation Phase:
2.1)  There were specific plans for training that the new technology would
require, and it was completed by the time we were ready to implement. >

2.2)  There were specific plans for integration with maintenance and
production. >

2.3)  There were negotiations and subsequent agreements with the vendor
concerning the performance of the equipment. >

2.4)  All aspects of the project were carefully planned while we were
awaiting the equipment. >

2.5)  There was a formal implementation team of which I was a member. >

2.6)  Approval for expenditures were required from someone outside the
implementation team. >

2.7)  The project had an oversight team which reviewed progress, gave
approval and otherwise supervised the implementation team. >

2.8)  The implementation team reported to one person. >

2.9)  The implementation team turned the project over to an operating team. >

2.10)  The people assigned to the implementation team kept changing. >

2.11)  The implementation team leader was from engineering or manufacturing. >

2.12)  Team members had too many demands on their time to devote enough
attention to the project.>

2.13)  The team leader had enough authority to make things happen and the
leadership skills necessary for this project. >

2.14)  The same people who selected the technology planned its
implementation and stayed with the project until start-up. >


The Implementation Phase:
3.1)  We did not allow enough time for a smooth implementation. >

3.2)  The transfer from the implementation team to the final operators went
smoothly. >

3.3)  We ran into problems with the equipment during start-up. >

3.4)  Sessions were held to inform interested employees how RP would be used
at the company. >

3.5)  Adequate provisions were made for follow-up training and problem
solving. >

3.6)  The end operators participated in the selection and implementation of
the technology. >

3.7)  Certain negative aspects of working with the equipment became apparent
after implementation. >

3.8)  The company recognized those who implemented the technology for their
work. >

3.9)  Performance appraisals of operators reflect how well they can use RP. >

3.10)  There is incentive for other parts of the company to work with the RP
facility in order to produce better quality products. >

3.11)  Performance bonuses were available for meeting implementation targets. >

3.12)  A feedback system is in place to evaluate how RP is doing within the
company. >

3.13)  Considerable gains could still be gained if people utilized RP more
often. >

3.14)  As we went along, we found our own ways to improve the performance of
the equipment. >

3.15)  The project was even more successful than we had hoped for. >


The Routinization Phase:
4.1)  The equipment requires more maintenance and down time than we had
anticipated. >

4.2)  RP lowered product development costs. >

4.3)  RP improved product quality. >

4.4)  RP increased the company's competitiveness. >

4.5)  RP makes us more attractive to our customers. >

4.6)  RP is smoothly integrated with other design and manufacturing processes. >

4.7)  There seems to be a general consensus that this project was a success. >

4.8)  Management is pleased with the result of this project. >

4.9)  The company is strongly committed to RP technology upgrades. >

4.10)  Management spends a great deal of time working on quality improvement. >

4.11)  This technology had a champion within the company who was
instrumental in the decision to adopt RP. >

4.12)  This champion is still associated with our company's RP facilities. >

4.13)  RP is a technology that has added value to my company. >

4.14)  I would describe the adoption of RP by my company as successful. >
 _______________________________________________________________
Thomas W. Graver
Director of Operations
Rapid Prototyping and Manufacturing Institute
Georgia Institute of Technology