By Jeff Reinke, Editorial Director

I promise all New England Patriot fans that this will be the first and last New York Giants/Super Bowl reference. But I couldn’t help but wonder if the way in which the Giants’ season progressed offers some perspective when comparing it to the product design and development process.

After losing their first two games, the team put together an impressive string of wins, followed by some tough losses, then up and down some more in finishing the regular season. Then in the playoffs, they put together an awe-inspiring series of performances (including a heartbreaking win over my Green Bay Packers) to claim their championship.

So while their process in achieving the ultimate and desired end result was definitely not according to plan, the team was still able to reach their goal.

In response to increasing competition and a need to improve cost controls, a great deal of attention has been paid to the processes used in both the design and manufacturing stages of getting a product to market. That said, it’s still safe to say that there are more companies that have not implemented lean, Six Sigma or other efficiency-focused processes than have allocated resources for these initiatives. This makes me wonder where greater focus should be placed: the process or the end result?

The cop-out answer is to say that greater attention on the process produces a better end result. Additionally, I’ve championed the principles embedded in a leaner, more efficient process within the confines of this and other columns. However, when one considers the time, energy and money that must be allocated in order to fluidly implement these procedures, isn’t it worth looking at things from a results-based perspective?

The clichés are numerous when it comes to “cutting corners” or “doing whatever it takes to get the job done.” After all, who hasn’t rooted for the cop or soldier who refuses to follow protocol, fill out the necessary paperwork or take the right steps to get along with everyone else in action flicks? Similarly, if the design is complete, and the product hits manufacturing on schedule, does anyone care that it could have been done two days sooner if more attention was paid as to how the information was routed? Or that if different software was available, even more costs could have been shaved due to simulation or virtual prototyping capabilities?

The answer here is that I certainly hope so. Even though the Giants won, they did so by taking the most difficult route possible. And while it may have worked on the football field, that won’t work in our everyday lives. We’re put to the test more than once a week, and we don’t always have the chance to compensate for our mistakes the next time. So while results are what everyone is ultimately measured by, repeated success lies in doing things the right way. And by taking a closer look at the process, the end result should be that much easier to attain.