For the most part, the increased use of automation in industry has delivered exceptional advances in terms of productivity and profit. This has been especially true for large company early adopters with the deep pockets to prove out the capabilities of these technologies. It’s also been true for most mid-tier companies that have been able to follow in the footsteps of the larger companies and implement their best practices without having to experiment as much.
Of course, automation technology continues to advance and companies continue to benefit. But there is growing disagreement and with it, some confusion, as to which technologies can provide the most value based on how far along the digital transformation path a company may be.
As pointed out in a recentMIT Management Sloan School article, “Historically, new technology has led to greater productivity as displaced workers shift to new tasks—typesetters might become graphic layout artists, while bank tellers focus on more complicated banking services. The current era of automation has been different…as new digital technologies become commonplace, productivity has stagnated and fears about unemployment have become widespread.”
The article references a few popular consumer-facing automation technologies that “disrupt employment and displace workers without generating much of a boost in productivity or quality of service,” such as self-checkout kiosks at grocery stores or automated customer service over the phone.
Technologies that don’t really improve productivity or reduce costs are referred to as “so-so technologies” in the article. The author references Tesla’s initiative to fully automate its California plant as an example of a company decision to pursue technology for technology’s sake—a decisionElon Musk ultimately admitted was a mistake。
So how can manufacturers avoid the adoption of these “so-so technologies”?
要了解，自动化世界与两个工业系统集成商有关，他们拥有各种各样的制造商的经验。有趣的是，他们在很大程度上分享了同样的建议。
它是否增加了价值？
“Technology adoption, including automation, should always be in service to an organization’s business goals, whether that be increased capacity, right-first-time quality, speed to market, or another goal,” says Bryon Hayes, PE, director of smart manufacturing solutions at授予。“第一个寻找非增值技术的地方是”白象“，那些正在进行的成本超过业务的益处的技术或系统。例如，如果新的高速包装线始终延续维护或计划计划的停工，则组织需要评估设备及其自动化是否实际上支持其业务目标。“
Todd E. Ebert，PE，高级应用工程师罗维斯Todd E. Ebert，PE，高级应用工程师罗维斯, notes that, in some cases, automation technologies can add costs to operations due to their complexity and inability to deliver on initial investment justifications.
"Capital projects adding new automation technology are justified with a business case and anticipated ROI (return on investment) prior to receiving funding approval. However, most are never measured against that business case after commissioning to determine if the ROI was met and continues to add value,” Ebert says. “The addition of value for automation projects can’t be determined unless the value metrics are carefully defined and are actually used to measure that value, ideally on a periodic basis.”
作为可以帮助制造商确定自动化项目的价值的指标的示例，Ebert指向OEE（整体设备效率）作为“帮助制造商确定自动系统，机器甚至一个过程的当前值的”伟大工具“。“
 |
Listen to this podcast onOEE在数字转换中的作用。 |
Causes
根据他与制造商合作的经验，看看无法履行期望的技术，Hayes指出，此类问题不一定与该技术相连。这些问题也可能是由一个业务部门选择工具和供应商的企业单位，而不输入其他业务单位的关键利益相关者。
“I’ve seen IT departments purchase MES (manufacturing execution system) software without input from the production, maintenance or quality groups,” he says. “When this happens, key requirements get overlooked and either the technology languishes unused, or the company spends a lot more money in change orders as the new stakeholders are brought onboard the project.”
Ebert adds that the success of automation is “largely based on a technology’s ability to be implemented to meet a requirement. If the functional requirements are not properly defined by the end user, how will it meet or exceed expectations?”
In the MIT Sloan Management School article, John Kelly, chief technology officer at IBM says: “[If] all you do is automate something which is lousy, you’re going to get a lousy result.”
技术评估
When it comes to avoiding the purchase and implementation of “so-so technologies,” there are specific steps manufacturers can take, according to Hayes and Ebert.
Bryon Hayes, PE, director of smart manufacturing solutions at Grantek“Coming from the pharmaceutical industry, I always suggest that the manufacturer start by preparing a user requirements specification (URS) that clearly defines the business goals and the explicit requirements of all stakeholders,” says Hayes. “I recommend that requirements be written using a SMART approach (specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and time-bound) so that the URS can be used in technology curation and vendor selection, and that it is easy to return to the URS after the system is installed to compare the results against the requirements.”
一组业务和生产目标place, the gap analysis is “pretty straightforward to define an automation and technology roadmap that will create a master plan that systematically works towards those goals one solution or project at a time,” adds Ebert. “Manufacturers need to focus on business strategy and goals first, then technology can be evaluated and selected to meet those goals and avoid ending up with a ‘so-so technology’ solution that doesn’t meet the goals. Don’t let an automation technology define your business goals, select a technology that meets the goal you define, and then select an implementation partner that can help you realize the vision for your business.”
Ebert强调评估过程应包括技术风险分析，以确定过时和可支持性，以确定该技术是否可以根据预定义的公制或哲学提供价值。“这[然后]成为自动化大师计划的基线，”他说。
