The introduction of a new software tool to develop equipment strategies had a major impact on the Engineering Division. Obviously, when adopting new technology people had to be retrained and needed get used to a new tool. The main challenge however was the impact of the new tool on the efficiency and output of the Equipment Engineers due to lack of complete data. Robotic Process Automation (RPA) has recently been introduced to help the Engineering Division eliminate this challenge.
The main challenge…..
In the transition from the old software tool to the new one, all data had to be transferred from the old database to the new database & structure. However, not all of the data was linked to the corresponding new fields available in the new tool, and some of the data was just not present in the old one. The datasets concerned are ‘Environment’, ‘Process Stream’, ‘Toxins’ and ‘Business Consequence’.
The consequence of this decision still resonates today. The Engineers need to manually retrieve data and copy it over to the relevant fields in the new tool before any actual update of an equipment strategy can take place. This manual action turns out to consume a considerable amount of valuable engineering time, impacting the overall time an engineer can focus on evergreening a strategy. A considerable <efficiency> impact to Engineers output has been observed resulting in the evergreening backlog to expand month after month since the new tool implementation. Unfortunately, in some cases, Engineers even emotionally “checked out” and indicated they wanted to stop using it.
How the company solved this challenge?
Clearly stopping use of the new software tool and reverting back to the old one was not an option. When diving deeper into the mechanisms how Engineers populate the Environment, Process Stream & Business Consequence fields in the tool it turns out this activity consist of a lot of repetitive, manual, clicking, copying, and pasting, tasks. A textbook example of low value re-occurring monotonous tasks where technology can assist and take over the tasks.
The Solution = RPA but what is RPA?
Robotic Process Automation (RPA) is a software technology that makes it easy to build, deploy, and manage software robots that emulate manual human actions, like copy-paste, interacting with digital systems and software. It performs manual tasks automatically.
One of the capable Fixed Equipment Engineers, is very proficient in the new tool and has a strong affinity with automating workflows leveraging Robotic Process Automation technology. He is the driving force behind the introduction and deployment of RPA across the Engineering Division.
The Fixed Equipment Engineer partnered with a Senior RPA Developer of Axisto Group to deliver value. He identified the workflows while the Axisto Group RPA Developer programmed them into the Robot. Within a month’s time the first workflow was up and running and only two weeks after another 2 bots were delivered and activated.
The impact of RPA = 7.5K hours saved
All Fixed Equipment is divided into so-called “parents”. For each parent identical data must be entered for each child component. The site has a total of 5,839 parents containing a total of 34,834 components. Automatically pre-populating all components for Environment, Process Flow and Business Consequence by leveraging RPA saves the Engineers in total about 7,500 hours or about 5.5 man-years. Next to reducing impact on ergonomics by eliminating and automating tedious clicking/copy-paste activities we see more potential savings linked to RPA in the context of equipment strategies as site wide, including non-fixed, we have about 11,703 parents for all equipment…..
Europe’s ESG Pay Pivot: Between Purpose and Pragmatism
As Europe advances its sustainability agenda, the conversation around ESG-linked executive pay is undergoing a critical shift—from confident leadership to careful calibration.
Once heralded as a symbol of Europe’s commitment to responsible capitalism, ESG pay metrics are now being reconsidered in boardrooms and policymaking circles alike. Not because the commitment to environmental and social progress is fading—but because the balance between purpose and competitiveness is being reevaluated.
Certainly in the Netherlands business leaders and policymakers are openly questioning whether the pace and complexity of ESG obligations—especially those stemming from the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD)—risk undermining innovation and industrial competitiveness.
Europe is not retreating from ESG. But it is entering a more pragmatic phase—one that demands smarter integration of ESG principles, not just broader expansion.
From Symbolism to Strategy
Over the past five years, ESG metrics have become nearly ubiquitous in European boardrooms. According to Willis Towers Watson (2024), over 93% of large European companies now link executive pay to at least one ESG target—more than any other region globally. But as the practice has matured, so has scepticism. Investors and governance experts are increasingly asking whether these targets genuinely drive impact—or merely pad bonuses with easily achievable goals (Gosling, 2023; Bebchuk & Tallarita, 2023).
Many early ESG-linked pay plans relied on vague or low-bar targets. Executives could check the box on “sustainability” without changing the substance of business as usual. A climate goal set too low—or a diversity goal without teeth—isn’t stewardship. It’s optics.
Investor Influence: Raising the Bar
Shareholders have taken notice. They still want to see sustainability embedded in compensation—but they want it done right.
We saw this in HSBC’s recent adjustment, where it scaled back certain environmental metrics in long-term pay plans after shareholder feedback (Financial Times, 2025). Standard Chartered similarly removed short-term incentives tied to financed emissions while reaffirming broader climate commitments. These changes reflect a more sophisticated approach: prioritize ESG metrics that are measurable, material, and aligned with a company’s operational reality (PwC, 2023). Leading proxy advisors have echoed this shift. ISS and Glass Lewis (2024) support ESG-linked pay structures, but emphasize that these must be outcome-driven and tightly aligned to company strategy to be considered meaningful.
The ESG–Competitiveness Crossroads
What’s new in 2025 is a more public acknowledgment of the trade-offs. In the Netherlands and across the EU, industry groups and national policymakers are calling for a more proportionate application of ESG and CSRD obligations.
The Dutch employers’ federation VNO-NCW, for example, has warned that one-size-fits-all sustainability disclosure rules could burden mid-sized companies and risk Europe’s competitive edge in global markets. Similar concerns have been raised in Germany and France, where policymakers are emphasizing the need for “industrial pragmatism.” Even European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has proposed a regulatory “pause” to give companies time to digest existing ESG legislation, without stifling growth or innovation.
This moment of reflection doesn’t mean sustainability is being deprioritized—but it does signal a new phase: one focused on implementation quality, strategic alignment, and economic realism.
Smarter ESG Incentives, Not More
This climate of recalibration is not a dismissal of ESG-linked pay—it’s an opportunity to make it more effective.
Instead of proliferating generic sustainability metrics, companies should focus on fewer but more powerful ESG incentives. Targets should be tightly linked to business strategy, tied to measurable outcomes, and substantial enough to influence executive decision-making (McKinsey & Company, 2023; Korn Ferry, 2024). Investors are evolving too: from requesting ESG metrics in executive compensation to scrutinizing their quality and impact (Conference Board, 2024). They understand that accountability only matters if the goals themselves are meaningful.
In this context, ESG-linked pay can remain a strategic lever—not a compliance burden.
Conclusion: Purpose with Pragmatism
Europe isn’t abandoning ESG leadership—it’s refining it. The continent’s strong regulatory foundations, from CSRD to SFDR, remain intact. But implementation is now being tempered by calls for flexibility, competitiveness, and industrial relevance.
This is not weakness. It’s maturity.
For ESG-linked executive compensation to thrive in this new phase, it must serve both sustainability and strategic agility. Done right, these incentives can align leadership behaviour with long-term value creation in a world shaped by climate risk, social expectation, and global competition.
This isn’t about ESG versus growth. It’s about ESG for resilient growth. And that’s not idealism. That’s smart governance.
Conference Board. (2024). ESG performance metrics in executive compensation: Current practices and investor perspectives. https://conference-board.org/topics/esg
In 2023, Gartner found that 79% of business strategists considered the use of AI to be crucial for their company’s success in the next two years. However, AI had only been integrated into daily operations in 20% of cases. It turns out that successful implementation of AI hinges on two things: (1) what AI can actually do – which is improving rapidly – and (2) the willingness of people to genuinely integrate AI into their work.
In the February 2025 issue of the Harvard Business Review, Julian De Freitas, Assistant Professor at Harvard Business School, describes five obstacles to successful implementation and how to address them. What he describes is fully aligned with what we at Hi Automation experience during our implementations:
AI is too opaque – a “black box.”
AI has no emotions
AI is not sufficiently flexible
AI is too autonomous
People prefer interaction with people
On top of that, there is the general concern that the introduction of AI will come at the expense of jobs. That there is a growing risk of data being used with malicious intent. And that roughly half of people believe a day will come when AI will attack humanity. Implementing AI within this general context is already a major challenge. And on top of that, the aforementioned obstacles must also be addressed in any specific company implementation.
That humans must be at the center of AI implementation and continued use is therefore evident. Being in close contact from the start and deeply understanding the underlying emotions and needs is crucial. Addressing these effectively is no easy task. An explanation in the context of an obstacle may be logically sound in itself, but may actually have the opposite effect and increase resistance.
This post is meant to point out these issues to you, not to delve into them further. The subject is too complex for that. The HBR article gives you an initial, somewhat deeper impression. Together with our subsidiary Hi automation, we at Axisto Group have the knowledge and on-the-ground experience and are happy to support you further.
We help industrial companies accelerate their operational performance. This can range from quick, short-term support for an acute problem to implementing a complete transformation. We rapidly analyze the situation and, together with you, develop and implement future-proof (digital) solutions that enhance your cash flow, working capital, and EBITDA. Throughout this process, we cultivate data-aware employees who feel co-ownership of the company and its results.
Under otherwise equal circumstances, the success of an organization is determined by the attitude and behavior of its people. While placing people at the center of the organization is essential for a successful change or transformation, focusing solely on the human aspect—the “soft” side of the organization—is not sufficient.
The “hard” side, the operating model, is also a crucial component of the change or transformation program. Many challenges on the human side actually stem from a poorly structured operating model.
A successful change management or transformation therefore requires an integrated “hard-soft” approach. With increasing digitalization, technology has become a necessary component of any change management or transformation initiative.
Outcomes of the program must be sustainable. Developing ownership within the organization for both the changes and their results is crucial to achieving this. That is why we involve people from the very beginning. They take ownership of the program, the solutions developed within it, and the results achieved.
For the development of a more effective attitude and behavior, a concrete, measurable performance improvement context is necessary.
Ensuring lasting results is not a matter reserved for the final stages of the process—it is a continuous effort that begins with the first contact and runs throughout the entire program. It goes hand in hand with the development of ownership.
Phasing and Execution Approach
The phasing and content of each stage of execution depend entirely on the specific request of the client. In most cases, we follow this structured approach:
Quick Scan
Based on the request for support, we gather all relevant information to define the first assignment in collaboration with the client. We engage with key stakeholders to understand their perspective on the challenge and request, visit the operational environment, and develop an initial understanding of the organization. The first assignment formulation includes the intended qualitative and quantitative outcomes, as well as a plan of action for the “Analysis & Design” phase.
Analysis & Design
We conduct a thorough analysis of the current situation while simultaneously building productive relationships within the organization. By gaining shared insights into how the actual performance levels are achieved, we develop organizational acceptance of the current reality.
These insights are then used to co-create an operational vision and ambitious goals with the Top Team. Together with key personnel, we design a phased transformation approach and finalize the assignment formulation.
Implementation
Initial Phase:
We assist the existing organization in designing the necessary adjustments to the operating model. Even at this early stage, we begin integrating new elements.
Middle Phase:
The focus shifts to achieving the targeted quantitative results, in parallel with refining the improved operating model. A key emphasis is placed on developing more effective behaviors and mindsets within the organization, as these are the critical factors for long-term high performance.
Final Phase:
The last stage ensures that improvements and results are fully embedded. The elements of the new operating model are stabilized, proficient use of tools and methods is secured, and ongoing leadership development is reinforced. The onboarding process for new employees is also embedded to ensure continuity.
By the end of the implementation, employees are proud of the improvements they themselves have delivered and are equipped with the skills and motivation to continue advancing to the next performance level.
We partner with Human Resources, Finance and IT to improve quality, speed and cost so that they provide an advantage over the competition.
Compliance deadlines vary:
Large public interest companies must report from January 1, 2024. Other large companies start on January 1, 2025. Listed SMEs must report from January 1, 2026, with an opt-out option until 2028.
The CSRD requires detailed ESG reporting aligned with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) and audits. Companies need to set up internal processes to gather and verify sustainability data and ensure interdepartmental collaboration. However, ESG reporting is often a complex and time-consuming process, making it an ideal candidate for automation. Hi Automation offers an effective solution with UiPath RPA (Robotic Process Automation) and RaccoonDoc IDP (Intelligent Document Processing) to streamline and improve ESG reporting. By automating ESG reporting, companies can save up to 70% of the time usually spent on data collection and processing, allowing teams to focus on more strategic and valuable activities.
HOW A DUTCH MANUFACTURING COMPANY TACKLED THIS CHALLENGE
Let’s look at the story of one of our clients, a large manufacturing company based in the Netherlands, and how they transformed their ESG reporting process using Hi Automation’s RPA and IDP solutions.
The Challenge: A Patchwork of Data Sources for the ESG Report
Our client, a renowned manufacturing company, struggled with the growing demands of ESG reporting. The necessary data for these reports was spread across different departments, from finance to procurement and supply chain. Consolidating all this information was time-consuming and error-prone, with manual data entry having a 10% error margin. The ever-changing regulations, such as compliance with the EU Taxonomy and the CSRD, added extra complexity to their processes.
The company’s ESG team spent over 500 hours annually gathering data and reporting—time that could have been better spent on strategic sustainability initiatives. Additionally, the team was under significant pressure to ensure data accuracy and meet strict deadlines. It became clear that a new approach was needed, one that would automate and simplify the ESG reporting process.
The Solution: Automation with RPA and IDP
Realizing that automation was the only way forward, the company turned to Hi Automation. We started with a thorough evaluation of their ESG reporting processes to identify key bottlenecks. Our team proposed a tailored solution, utilizing UiPath’s RPA capabilities combined with RaccoonDoc Intelligent Document Processing.
The implementation began by automating the data collection process. Using RPA, we created bots that could collect data from multiple systems and departments, automatically consolidating it into a data center. This reduced the time spent on data collection by 80%. With IDP, we addressed unstructured data sources, such as invoices and supply chain documents, extracting the necessary information with over 90% accuracy. The automation also included built-in validation checks to ensure data consistency and reliability.
The Result: Efficiency, Accuracy, and Compliance
The transformation was impressive. The time required for ESG reporting was reduced by 65%, allowing the ESG team to focus on strategic projects instead of routine data tasks. The automated data collection and processing improved the accuracy of their reports to 98%, significantly reducing the risk of compliance issues. With audit-ready reports at their fingertips, the company felt confident they could meet regulatory requirements without last-minute stress.
In addition to time savings, the financial impact was substantial. The company reported a 40% cost reduction in ESG data management. The transparency and real-time monitoring of automation also boosted stakeholder confidence, enhancing the company’s reputation with investors and partners. By automating ESG reporting, the company not only met regulatory requirements but also positioned itself as a sustainability leader in their industry.
WHY HI AUTOMATION’S APPROACH IS UNIQUE
This project demonstrates why Hi Automation’s approach to ESG reporting is the best choice for companies looking to streamline their processes and enhance their sustainability efforts.
Scalability and Flexibility:
The RPA and IDP solution is designed to be flexible and scalable, allowing the company to quickly adapt to changes in ESG regulations. This flexibility ensures they can meet new requirements without redesigning their processes.
Customizable Workflows:
We tailored the automated workflows to the company’s specific needs. This meant seamless integration with their existing systems and ensuring the solution was suited to their unique complexity.
User-Friendly Implementation:
A key advantage of our approach is its accessibility. Employees without technical expertise were able to adapt to the new tools within two weeks, ensuring a quick return on investment.
THE BROADER PERSPECTIVE: BENEFITS OF ESG AUTOMATION
The benefits of automating ESG reporting go far beyond just saving time and costs. For our client, this meant:
Improved Data Quality:
Automation virtually eliminated human errors, ensuring ESG reports were reliable and met stakeholder expectations, leading to a 98% improvement in data accuracy.
Lower Costs and Time Savings: By minimizing manual work, the company saw a 50% reduction in costs and a 60% time savings in reporting. This efficiency freed up resources that could be reinvested in other strategic initiatives.
Enhanced Compliance and Transparency:
Automation provided real-time monitoring and immediate reporting, keeping the company compliant with both local and international ESG regulations. Transparency also fostered greater trust among stakeholders, including regulators and investors.
Sustainable Growth:
The time and cost savings generated by automation are now being invested in sustainability and growth. Their improved ESG performance attracted positive investor attention and strengthened their brand reputation as a leader in sustainability.
GETTING STARTED WITH ESG AUTOMATION
The success of this project shows that automating ESG reporting is not only possible but a strategic necessity for companies looking to stay ahead in a competitive and increasingly regulated environment. Companies wishing to embark on this journey can take the following steps:
Assessment:
Identify the key ESG reporting processes that can benefit from automation, focusing on areas where manual work is the most time-consuming. Our team at Hi Automation can conduct a free assessment to identify these opportunities.
Implementation:
Take a phased approach to implementing RPA and IDP, with minimal disruption to current operations and maximum impact from automation.
We ensure smooth implementation, with over 90% of our projects completed on time.
Continuous Improvement:
Leverage automation to continuously improve ESG data collection and reporting. Our solution includes AI-based analytics to monitor and optimize ESG performance, helping you stay ahead of regulatory changes and industry standards.
CONCLUSION
Automating ESG reporting with UiPath RPA and RaccoonDoc IDP provides significant value to Dutch companies, enabling them to combine growth with sustainability. Hi Automation’s expertise ensures ESG reporting processes are efficient, accurate, and compliant, allowing companies to focus on their core business while maintaining high sustainability standards. With time and cost savings of up to 70%, automation is the best way to tackle ESG challenges effectively. Contact Hi Automation today to discover how automation can help you meet your ESG goals.
CHALLENGE
Developing new products and introducing the industrial production processes to support them is highly complex, especially when you’re at the limits of manufacturing technology. Increasing market demand only raises the pressure further, since each and every product manufactured can be sold. Also, demand for new product types was growing very fast. It appeared a toxic combination.
We had already worked with this business unit to solve its manufacturing problems and enable it to become a more reliable supplier, now the management team asked us back in to help them improve their innovation reliability and reduce their time-to-market for new products.
The situation in the innovation-to-market department was complex. There was strong demand for additional product types and the market was shifting from B2B to B2C, which meant a shift in product requirements. On top of that, additional resources were required to address problems in production, and the department was constantly hiring additional new product development resources. Competition was growing, so speed was of the utmost importance, and the improvement targets were extremely high.
APPROACH
Our analysis, which we conducted in close cooperation with the client, revealed three main problem areas:
1. Portfolio management
The innovation portfolio was too big, its content was inconsistent and the priorities were regularly changing. This situation had developed because of poor business and operations planning and, as a consequence, poor technology and product roadmap planning.
2. Resource management
a. The organisation had created a self-inflicted resource bottleneck. The problem was caused by trying to manage too many portfolio projects at the same time and by allocating too many projects to limited resources. The result was plummeting productivity.
b. The constant inflow of new hires was creating a skills issue. There was no time to train them, and knowledge was not readily accessible for the new hires because very little had been documented.
3. Project management of innovation projects
A project management process had been defined for only 2 out of 5 project categories. And because of time pressures, people were cutting corners in projects and tollgate discipline was poor. This behaviour was creating rework and thus project delays. Project quality was suffering, and this in turn was causing production problems and an increase in customer complaints.
We worked with the client to set clear goals to increase innovation output by reducing time-to-market and improving project reliability. The time-to-market target was a reduction from an average of 23 months to just 9 months. We set an aggressive 6-month timetable for achieving these goals and formed joint teams to drive the changes. Because the three main problem areas were very much interdependent and the lead time was short, we ran four workstreams in parallel: (1) single project management, (2) portfolio management, (3) business planning and roadmapping, and (4) knowledge capture and design rules. We selected six pilot projects to introduce the new ways of working and deliver actual results.
We set up a project governance structure, including a review team, a project team and several workstream teams, and established milestone deliverables. We used a combination of “waterfall” and “agile” approaches to get things done.
THE IMPLEMENTATION
Performance improvement programmes must carefully balance human and technical aspects if they are to deliver significant, sustainable results. A critical aspect for sustainability is the development of a deep local ownership of the solutions to the problems. Therefore, we approached the challenge by ensuring the solutions were found by a process of co-creation right from the start.
The developers just didn’t have any time to spare, but speed was essential, so we started by slashing the volume of projects in the portfolio. Next, we set priorities and reduced the number of projects allocated to the developers. This was a tough process as there were many invested interests. However, this reconfirmed the analysis finding that the business had to get its strategic and operational planning right.
During the project we identified five different project categories, ranging from large, complex innovation projects down to factory support (crash actions). For each category, we designed and implemented project process maps, which included the project management methodology with team meetings, tollgate reviews, tollgate criteria, along with tools relevant at each stage in the project.
We designed and implemented a portfolio management process and system with clear roles and responsibilities, set up review teams for various project categories, established criteria to allow / refuse projects into the portfolio and encouraged an attitude of “killing” projects as early as possible to eliminate waste and maintain a manageable portfolio. We also designed a process for allocating resources.
In parallel, we implemented five different business planning and roadmap processes, including a technology roadmap, a product roadmap and an application roadmap. To support the development of knowledge and skills, we established a process to capture and document learnings from all projects, regardless of whether they had been successful, unsuccessful or ditched.
The results were impressive. Time-to-market dropped from 23 weeks to 11 weeks within 6 months, with plans in place to meet the target level of 9 weeks. Equally important, the results were sustainable because the root causes had been identified and eliminated, and the solutions locked into the Performance Management Systems (PMSs) developed during the project. The PMSs also included key performance indicators to give managers and employees ready access to the quantifiable information needed to make fact-based decisions, both as teams and individually, and to take pro-active and predictive action.
Throughout the implementation, a balanced combination of human and technical aspects drove the successes, and solutions were added to the PMS to support sustainability. By creating and communicating the right culture from the very start, we helped the client establish and communicate roles and responsibilities for employees at all levels. As the project progressed, employees began to see the value of their own contributions and to understand how their own performance influenced that of others, both within their discipline and beyond. As this understanding grew, a culture of accountability and collaboration evolved. Clear goals were communicated in a common language that everyone could understand, and employees embraced the new systems, processes and ways of working as their own.
CHALLENGE
Faced with rapidly ever tougher global competition, customer demands and cost pressures, the management team of this manufacturing and technology licensing company needed to increase both the effectiveness and efficiency of its innovation/R&D process in order to secure future market opportunities. The challenge was to increase the success rate of innovation projects and to cut the time from product concept to market introduction by half.
The company had a central R&D department, but there were also people working on innovation in the various plants across Europe. The people in the plants were closest to the customer and were working mainly on applications, whereas those in the central R&D department were doing ‘blue-sky’ development.
APPROACH
We began by working together with the client’s European business team, the R&D hub and a representation of process engineers from the various plants throughout Europe to analyse the “as is” situation. Three main issues were identified:
The customer release process was problematic because samples did not meet customer requirements, and this had created the perception of the company being an unreliable supplier for its customers.
The increased number of additives being used was creating in-house manufacturability issues and additional complexity both in the plants and in the supply chain.
Instability in the innovation/R&D portfolio contributed to an increasing time-to-market.
However, the definition and management of product platforms was strong, as was the skills level
throughout the innovation/R&D organisation. Therefore, there were some solid elements we could build on.
We worked as a joint team with the European business team, the R&D hub and process engineers from the plants to identify the root causes of problems, establish key levers to turn the situation around, and set clear and challenging targets. We set up a project governance structure, including a review team, a project team and various workstream teams, and established milestone deliverables. We used a combination of “waterfall” and “agile” project approaches to get things done. We selected nine pilot projects to introduce the new ways of working and deliver actual results.
THE IMPLEMENTATION
Performance improvement programmes must carefully balance human and technical aspects if they are to deliver significant, sustainable results. A critical aspect for sustainability is the development of a deep local ownership of the solutions to the problems. Therefore, we approached the challenge by ensuring the solutions were developed by a process of co-creation right from the start.
We worked on three workstreams in parallel:
Integrated strategic and operational planning
We started to break down organisational silos by bringing people together from the business team, the R&D hub and the plants in a series of workshops to craft an integrated strategic and operational planning process and to create a management and reporting structure. This meant that when technology and product roadmaps were generated they were better aligned with the market requirements and timelines. This prevented the development of applications and platforms becoming intertwined.
Transparent portfolio management
We achieved greater transparency and alignment through broadening the employees’ skill base and developing the use of existing IT tools. This meant that employees were better able to deal with uncertainty and to understand investment alternatives when “go–no go” decisions were being taken at stage gates along the innovation process. The development of effective behaviours in the project teams and around these tollgates was paramount throughout the implementation.
design rules and complexity
The principle of product platforms/product families was well understood and adhered to; however, new applications were not being managed well. A variety of additives was being used to achieve the same properties, and this was creating more and more complexity both in manufacturing and in the supply chain. In addition, rules such as design for manufacture were not tightly managed. In one case the company’s client was deeply impressed by the time-to-market of the new product they required, and the properties were spot on. However, the problem was that manufacturing the new product caused the production output to drop by 30%.
We ensured that the design rules were more explicitly defined, documented and accessible for everyone. We also introduced clear accountabilities and responsibilities to tighten the process for releasing additives and managing their variety.
The “as is” situation at the start of our joint project provided a good basis to build on. Many of the elements of world-class innovation management were already in place. The performance improvement was due mainly to an improved organisational alignment (and integration), more effective behaviours and, in particular, a more disciplined use of tools and methods.
Of course, there are a range of useful multi-project-management IT tools that can enhance visibility and enable more effective project portfolio management; however, the challenge here is to foster the behavioural change and teamwork that is required to build on the IT capability and not to rely solely on the IT tool to change the way people work.
Innovation, in contrast to health, safety and environmental management, demands risk-taking. DuPont’s Robert A Cooper sums up the requirement neatly: “Don’t manage the risk of failure. Manage the cost of failure.” Achieving this goal does not mean avoiding failure; it means failing clearly and early. To facilitate this behaviour, we developed a clearly defined and staged project management process with tollgates and explicit tollgate criteria. In fact, processes were designed for various project categories. “Go–no go” decisions could now be made based on facts. The development of effective behaviours in the innovation project teams and around these tollgates was paramount throughout the implementation.
Manufacturers that best navigate the challenges of the world they operate in have a number of characteristics in common.
1. A clear vision of how their manufacturing operation looks like and operates in three to five years’ time.
They have decided which markets and customers they want to serve and understand what it takes for their manufacturing operation to enable business success. They focus on a “vital few” strategic initiatives with clear deliverables, and timelines and drive consistent execution.
For most manufacturers business conditions are more volatile and ambiguous than ever. Therefore, they review on a regular basis their strategic initiatives in the context of developing conditions and adapt. However, their long-term course is stable.
2. An aligned operating model
Winning manufacturers align their operating model with their vision. They know that if they don’t, their defacto strategy (their day-to-day operation) will deviate from their intended strategy. And they keep organisational complexity low as complexity drives costs up and speed and flexibility down.
This means well-aligned and “leaned out” business processes, KPI’s that help to control the operation, unambiguous roles and responsibilities, decision power low in the organisation, a reporting structure that creates transparency and insight in the actual performance, and a meeting structure that facilitates effective, fact-based decision making.
3. Employees with a high level of ownership
Employees at all levels in the organisation feel co-owners of the company and demonstrate a relentless drive to eliminate performance bottlenecks.
They have the skills to be successful and make sure they acquire new skills in line with the evolving needs of the company.
4. Drive to eliminate complexity
Complexity creates costs and inflexibility. They consider each and every type complexity: product and service design, the design of production means, total cost of ownership of purchased goods and services, cost of ownership of a supplier, contractor or client,
5. Continuous investment in smart manufacturing
With an increasing digitalisation of their operations, they gain significantly in speed, flexibility, and productivity. They develop new business strategies and innovate products and services portfolios. In developing smart manufacturing, they not only focus on selecting the right technology, analytics programs, and algorithms but also nurture a digital culture and skills.
Ever since 2006 we have been supporting manufacturing companies to deliver on their vision. Please get in touch to explore how we could support you in becoming one of the winners.
In all sectors, companies are dealing with an increased frequency and magnitude of disruptions. Businesses must quickly scale down and then ramp up their operations once demand returns. They have to switch product portfolios depending on the availability of components. Some of the events that have caused havock in the past decade include the Fukushima earthquake and tsunami in Japan, Suez Canal blockage, lockdowns related to Covid19 and variants, semiconductor shortages(link resides outside Axisto), staff shortages, war in Ukraine, exploding energy costs(link resides outside Axisto), high inflation.
Understandably, most of these disruptions took leadership teams by surprise. The worst of these disruptions have taken a toll on business output, revenue and profitability. Recovery can take months or even years.
Process mining provides the much-needed overview of the end-to-end supply chain and provides better insight and information for better, proactive collaboration internally and in the overall supply chain. Process mining also provides proposals for decisions with their consequences for real-time optimisation of flows.
(*) click here for introduction to process mining.
PROCESS MINING – WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT CAN DO
It provides all insights for targeted performance & efficiency improvements: fast, end-to-end and fact-based.
DISCOVER AND IMPROVE YOUR REAL PROCESSES
APPLICATIONS OF PROCESS MINING
FULL TRANSPARENCY
Instead of working with the designed process flow or the process flow that is depicted in the ERP system, process mining monitors the actual process at whatever granularity you want: end-2-end process, procure-2-pay, manufacturing, inventory management, accounts payable, for a specific type of product, supplier, customer, individual order, individual SKU. Process mining monitors compliance, conformance, cooperation between departments or between client, own departments and suppliers, etc.
OVERVIEW OF THE ENTIRE SUPPLY CHAIN
Dashboards are created to suit your requirements. These are flexible and can be easily altered whenever your needs change and/or bottlenecks shift. They create real-time insights into the process flow. At any time, you know, how much revenue is at stake because of inventory issues, what root-causes are and which decisions you can take and what their effects and trade-offs will be.
If supplier reliability is not at the target level at the highest reporting level, you can easily drill down in real-time to a specific supplier and a particular SKU to discover what is causing the problem in real-time. Suppliers could also be held to the best-practice service level of competitive suppliers.
MAKING INFORMED DECISIONS AND TAKING THE RIGHT ACTIONS
The interactive reports highlight gaps between actual and target values and give details of the discrepancies, figure A. By clicking on one of the highlighted issues, you can assign an appropriate action to a specific person, figure B. Or it can even be done automatically when a discrepancy is detected.
Figure A, details of the discrepancies. Figure B, pop up to create a task
And direct communication with respect to the action is facilitated in real-time, figure C.
Figure C, exchanging information.
WRAP UP
Process mining is an effective tool to optimise the end-2-end supply chain flows in terms of margin, working capital, inventory level and profile, cash, order cycle times, supplier reliability, customer service levels, sustainability, risk, predictability, etc. Because process mining monitors the actual process flows in real-time, it creates full transparency and therefore adds significant value to the classic BI-suites. Process mining can be integrated with existing BI-applications and can enhance reporting and decision-making.
CHALLENGE
A container terminal reached the limits of its capacity due to a further increase in the number of units to be processed. The terminal also had to become more attractive for ships to dock by faster loading and unloading for shorter waiting times. Furthermore, container ships are getting bigger, increasing complexity and time pressure at the terminal.
The assignment was to increase efficiency to make more inbound and outbound truck movements possible and to shorten ship waiting times.
APPROACH
Based on data from the ERP system regarding plan and actual over a representative period, the current working method of the terminal was reconstructed in our Planning Platform. The actual operation was visualised and animated, allowing the movements of each individual container to be tracked from position to position. The reconstruction was validated and further fine-tuned in a highly interactive process with the client.
Subsequently, with our Planning Platform, the current operational performance of the terminal was determined based on jointly identified Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), such as the mooring time per barge, the number of crane movements in/out and the number of truck movements in/out. Subsequently, a simulation of an optimised operation was performed using the exact same dataset and boundary conditions. The comparison of the KPIs of the current and optimised operations immediately gave a clear picture of the improvement potential.
In close collaboration with the client, the plan for a number of containers was then optimised step-by-step until the total was finally optimised. After each step, the improvement was measured against the identified KPIs.
Instead of working with the designed process flow or the process flow that is depicted in the ERP system, process mining monitors the actual process at whatever granularity you want: end-2-end process, procure-2-pay, manufacturing, inventory management, accounts payable, for a specific type of product, supplier, customer, individual order, individual SKU. Process mining monitors compliance, conformance, cooperation between departments or between client, own departments and suppliers, etc.
