At Issue

Some quick fixes are great time-savers, some are deadly alternatives; others are a complete waste of not just time, but my time.

by Meaghan Ziemba, Associate Editor, PD&D

I had the pleasure this past weekend to sit in the Beloit, WI ER with my daughter at three in the morning. She started throwing up chicken nachos a little after the dinner hour, Friday; and the vomiting saga continued into the early hours of Saturday. In fear that she may become dehydrated, I wrapped her in a Little Mermaid fleece blanket and hurried off to the hospital.

She lay in fetal position on the hospital bed, staring at the doctor with zombie-like, sleep-deprived eyes as he explained the little tablet he was going to give her that would stop the nausea (and hopefully the regurgitation marathon). I was amazed at how fast the miracle drug worked as he placed it on her tongue to dissolve–at the same time, irritated because she could have been asleep at this time if I just would have brought her in earlier.

As this quick fix cured my daughter, I couldn’t help but think of Toyota (Yes, I am as sick of hearing about it as the rest of you, maybe) but Toyota is not the only major company guilty for shortcuts and quick fixes that help increase profitability–or getting rid of irritating bugs that maybe floating around.

Today’s society is fast-paced. Everyone wants the news as it's happening, and the advancements of technology have brought us closer to those split-second moments of receiving information through our iPhones, Blackberries and laptop devices.

Some quick fixes are great time-savers; for instance, the progressive food choppers, fast food restaurants, Google Maps, and GPS systems.

With everything and everyone constantly on the go and working more than 40 hours a week, who has time to stop for directions, look at a map that doesn’t speak; sit down for home-cooked meals; or even yet, take a knife out of the drawer and chop up fruits and veggies? It’s just asking way too much.

Some quick fixes can be deadly alternatives–cue Toyota– for example, skipping safety and usability testing before releasing a product out into the market. I get every dollar counts towards profitability, and sometimes shortcuts are made during the design process to increase time to market and to keep the competition on their toes. But those shortcuts (as we have seen) can produce fatal scenarios.  

Other quick fixes, however, are not just a waste of time, but a waste of consumers’ time.

Not only did I have to waste time in the ER waiting for a drug that I strongly believe now should be available on store shelves this past weekend; but I wasted personal time sitting in a garage while a mechanic explained to me that a simple oil leak could have been prevented if the proper materials were used instead of a “quick fix” silicon.

My 2008, Hyundai Elantra requires a metal gasket to be replaced every time the oil and oil filter gets changed–which for me occurs quite often due to my commutes from school and work.

The oil place–I refuse to give it credit by naming it here–is responsible for thousands of oil changes each month; so instead of looking at each car as separate models and types (which would waste the company’s time), every car is viewed the same and undergoes the same treatment for oil changes—sealing the oil filter with a silicone, jelly-like material.

The material not only saves time but saves the company money, because it is a cheaper material than the metal gaskets that my car requires. However, it doesn’t save me time or money when I need to purchase kitty litter just to get the oil stains off my garage floor.

My point for all this bantering and ranting is to demonstrate how quick fixes may seem like a great idea in the moment of rushed decisions; especially in the manufacturing and engineering industries–or when six-year old girls are throwing up all through the night. But cutting out certain steps or rushing through them can result in devastating consequences, and turn consumer fans into consumer critics.

And clean-up costs seem to put a bigger dent into company wallets than if things were done properly the first time around.

What are some of your quick fixes? And any suggestions on what brand of kitty litter works best on oil stains can be posted below or sent to meaghan.ziemba@advantagemedia.com.

By Jeff Reinke, Editorial Director, PD&D

I have to admit that I can be a real sucker for an interesting headline.

Maybe it’s some form of subliminal, professional courtesy or just the simple fact that I gravitate towards unique points of view – especially if they differ from my own.

That might be the only reason I read a recent article about the environmental benefits of … wait for it … mining.

The article offers perspective on the need for mining operations in order to recover several precious metals and other elements that are vital in progressing new or alternative energy platforms.

So while I doubt these thoughts will drive Greenpeace to embed a pick and shovel into their logo, I can appreciate the fresh perspective on an industry that is often more synonymous with stripping away from the earth’s composition than working to restore it.

I have to admit that my knowledge of mining operations is quite limited. It’s primarily relegated to pictures of big holes in the ground made by enormous machines that require monstrous amounts of oil-based fuel sources and lubricants in order to function – not exactly the backdrop for talks about new hybrid vehicles.

Although it would be difficult to obtain the lithium used in the battery composition of such vehicles without these holes in the ground caused by fossil-fuel guzzling vehicles the size of an office building.

And I think we’ve all seen the dark and murky images of coal mines with equipment and personnel covered in dust and soot. In reinforcing the consequences of our continued use and reliance on fossil fuels, many like to present these snapshots as living arguments that reinforce the individual health problems and polluting ways these mines represent.

Of course without the coal obtained from these hotbeds of environmental carnage, I’m not sure how much juice would be available when plugging in those electric vehicles or to help supplement solar panels on cloudy days or wind turbines when the breeze fails to blow.

So we’re caught in that viscous circle that is alternative energy development. In order to get to the promise of tomorrow we seemingly need to continue our reliance on the methodologies of today that so many loath.

What this article showed me is that while a vocal minority wants to scream for the implementation of new, greener technologies without any delay, they fail to see the full picture in understanding the benefits of a more moderate transition.

As an example, coal is abundant and works extremely well in generating energy. It’s not the sexiest option out there and certainly has its negative qualities, but until alternative options can match its performance, let’s not dismiss its place in our energy grid.

Similarly, mining, although vitally necessary, is definitely not the most environmentally friendly operation. However, right now it simply doesn’t make sense to vilify either. And more importantly, completely turning our backs on coal or the mining operations that retrieve it would actually work to the detriment of developing a replacement.

I’m not arguing for the continued use of fossil fuels or against the implementation of new energy sources, but I think greater attention should be given to the benefits of our current approaches. In doing so, we’ll have found the fuel we need for better efforts down the road.

What’s your take? Comment below or email jeff.reinke@advantagemedia.com.

By David Mantey, Editor, PD&D

The latest threat to secrecy, as if any hint of secrecy seemed legitimate in a new culture of voyeurs and confessors, is a current trend worrying our former British parents across the pond. No longer shall we scream out, “The British are coming.” Our new 21st century battle cry will be, “The British are bugging ... everything.”

Rest assured, we’ll remain ignorant when it comes to espionage and war games. This tragic tale of spy vs. spy has the Brits embedding microchips and sensors in everything from the nation’s best friends to leftover fish and chips from last night’s clip at the pub.   

LoJacking pets makes sense as they attempt to take down the dangerous organized canine crime syndicates currently running the kitten-trafficking mills plaguing the countryside. The country is also weighing mandatory dog insurance — essentially a dog tax — that would penalize the law-abiding pet lover while thugs who dabble in dog fighting continue to place bets on Fido mauling Spot under five minutes.

For some reason, if a person is willing to starve, torture and train his dog into a lethal killing machine, I just don’t see him re-upping his pet insurance every six months.

According to Dylan Sharpe, a campaigner with U.K. privacy rights group Big Brother Watch, "[Embedding microchips in pets] is yet more surveillance and continuous data-grabbing by government who wants to have as much information on us as it can possibly have.”

But wait, Mr. Sharpe, there’s more.

Among the many lifestyle choices, practices and habits — most of which remain under some sort of rudimentary surveillance anyway — Britain authorities are fitting garbage cans with sensors. Intelligent rubbish receptacles began to hit the streets eight years ago, but the practice has been ramped up in the past year. Big Brother Watch claims that at least 2.6 million households are currently a part of the smart trash network. 

Does the state have the right to analyze waste? It seems harmless. You would hope that the practice would increase household responsibility, provide the government with the information to prepare alternatives to over-capacity landfills, and maybe even tweak the garbage collection system to become more efficient, and thus, less costly to the tax payer.

Unfortunately, as the Brits tease the idea of pay-per-weight refuse collection, I don’t foresee responsible property owners receiving a tax break if they recycle larger portions of their waste.

Would this work in America? For all I know, when Madison, WI introduced the new garbage collection system with uniform waste and recycling bins (which in a stroke of pure genius turned tons of former garbage cans into garbage), the city could’ve embedded a camera and sensor into my receptacles.

If you monitor my garbage, though, I’ll cover your camera with feces. I don’t have a pet monkey, nor do I practice similar slinging, but I do have a dog in a townhouse without a yard. The math is simple if you credit me with even a minute amount of social responsibility.

Beyond pet waste, I wouldn’t fear a sensor on my garbage and recycling bin. It wouldn’t be an exciting analysis — of course, other than my copies of the Socialist Worker, empty bottles of wine and dirty needles. I suppose that I’m willing to go down for a petty crime if the city is willing to assign a man to wade through Marshal’s (our dog’s) business.

According to the Brits, the chips’ purpose varies across the country. Some of the chips sense the weight of the bin, others track bin location and/or whether it’s been emptied. Every other industry is going lean, so why can’t we pare the waste from the waste industry?

The reason I believe the sensors would make users more responsible is based on my vast experience with big wasters/non-recyclers. My brother refuses to recycle anything; I think that he actually prides himself on an overflowing receptacle. And I grew up in a small town that, until recently, only offered recycling services at a remote dropoff.

I once thought the monetary incentive to recycle cans was enough to justify the transportation of 20 leaf bags full of cans in a Nissan Maxima — the odor, sticky interior and ensuing hornet infestation simply wasn’t worth $16 in loose change.

I now challenge myself to recycle as much as possible, and I take pride in the fact that the trash can doesn’t have to be roadside every week – and when it is ready for pickup, the recycling bin beside it is just as full, if not more.

Let’s not go too far with it. We don’t need cap and trade on garbage collection unless I stand to make money if I recycle more — I don’t want to have to purchase recycling credits to offset my weekly waste.

Is this another move by Big Brother to slowly move the pillow over our faces as we sleep? Or is this a good intention getting greatly blown out of proportion? Comment below or sling your responses to david.mantey@advantagemedia.com.

By Carrie Ellis, Editor, Chem.Info

So what’s the holdup, you ask? And rightfully so.

Lawmakers have been hailing the environmental revolution as the way out of this deep pit called an economic recovery, but have yet to sign anything that would toss a ladder into the deep hole to offer a few folks a glimpse of light. (Listen closely for the whispers of health care.)

They have also been stalling the Renewable Fuel Standard and other green legislation, while holding them up as ideals—a bastion between the U.S. and some other dark economic force like China or India.

Well, experts say that the delay could be due to the fact that it’s an election year. Or simply a stalemated Congress. Or bringing up the rear of a long line of other bills that need to be prioritized first.

For experts, their expertise seems scatter-shot. However, this administration has promised that going green would spur economic recovery. Jobs creation. Bi-partisanship. Blah, blah, blah. Is it me, or can you only read the same article so many times?

On the other hand, some processing facilities are crossing their fingers that environmental bills (the cap-and-trade program, anybody?) fall simultaneously through the very cracks of the government’s fingers.

This is understandable considering the capital implications of such laws, with new equipment, more traceability procedures and so on. This stalling on the part of lawmakers has cost industry jobs, though, while we’re left in the lurch of a bad economy with double-digit unemployment rates.

According to a Biofuels Digest article, “Brussels and Washington remain mired in red tape, regulations and confounded by the perplexing uncertainties of defining ‘sustainability’ from several perspectives. It is important to remember why some nations started biofuels regulations in the first place: national security. More importantly, international security.

“The three largest emerging markets of the BRIC countries — China, India and Brazil — continue to move forward on biofuels policies, mandates and programs, while Washington and Brussels sidestep, punt and delay mandates for unclear sustainability rationale.”

The end result is that the Renewable Fuel Standard (and other bills just like it) has left many biofuels advocates sitting on the edges of their drivers’ seats. Without any promise of government funding, investment has slowed and projects have languished.

Furthermore, since this trend has remain unchanged for quite some time, the barometer for biofuels production success has become whether a company must rely on a government mandate or tax credit, or whether that company can stand on its own infrastructure and technology. Many startups will remain stalled, withering and dead if this collective heel-dragging doesn’t find a swift conclusion.

Another enormous point of contention for biodiesel producers has been the lapse of the biodiesel tax credit last year. According to the National Biodiesel Board, “Biodiesel production has ground to a halt and more than 29,000 jobs have already been lost across the industry since the tax credit lapsed on January 1, 2010.” As of last month, no timeline has been discussed either.

I say that it’s time to get off to a start on our greener foot even if just to maximize our global profit potential. Whether we choose to admit it or not, we’re in a race in which the world is clamoring to pinpoint that next big thing that’s going to naturally stimulate the economy, as opposed to hearing more of government handouts. No one wants to hear more about that.

Normally, I’d say no, no, take your time on passing this potentially far-reaching energy legislation. It’s not something I’d like to think that lawmakers rush through, especially considering the amount of politicians who admit to just not having the time to read bills before voting begins.

However, some things are worth risking, and if anything, let’s sink something into an issue that we can all benefit from in the future.

We know that our contemporary political polls indicate that we’re not sure what change really means, but we are in dire need, no matter if it’s in the form of a mandate, a tax credit or other green legislation.

Are you on the edge of your driver’s seat, too? Or you one of the people crossing your fingers in hopes that green legislation continues to languish? Sound off by e-mailing me at carrie.ellis@advantagemedia.com.

By Mike Collins, Author, Saving American Manufacturing

Most of the new product failures I witnessed in my many years in manufacturing were ideas dreamed up by the manufacturer or inventor.

They were always “cool” ideas and well designed prototypes, but they didn’t sell in the marketplace.

Internal new product ideas are popular, because it is fun to have an “ah ha” moment with a new idea scratched on a napkin, and the subsequent development from an idea into a real product. Too often, these internal ideas do not produce real benefit for the customer or solve their problems

As an alternative, why not connect the idea directly to the very person who will make the final decision on buying the product, the customer? It means you have to become a good interviewer and take off your selling hat for awhile, but the most obvious benefit of such a process is that if the customer likes the design, they might buy it — and you have killed two birds with one stone.

Erik von Hippel, a new product guru from MIT, notes that “lead users - often the trend setters in an industry - are often better sources of new products than the manufacturers themselves.”

He claims that in the high technology field, as many as 80 percent of the new product ideas originate with users.

Here are some examples:

• Most of the innovations in scientific instruments come from scientists and researchers rather than manufacturers. Hippel’s study showed that 77 percent of 111 new scientific instrument innovations came from these users. Another study shows that 67 percent of the innovations on printed circuit board equipment came from users.
• Pultrusion is a process of making fiber reinforced plastic products for aircraft and sports gear.  85 percent of the innovation in pultrusion comes from users - typically small and medium size manufacturers without R&D departments.
• In the semiconductor and printed circuit board markets, the large electronics manufacturers are responsible for 67 percent of the innovations.
• I have personally experienced and documented customer driven innovation with packaging machinery, material handling equipment, industrial robots, drag line shovels and ground engaging wear parts for front end loaders.

Mentor Graphics — Beaverton, Oregon

In 1981, Gerry Langeler and his partners founded Mentor Graphics to develop a new software product for the emerging computer‑aided engineering (CAE) market. 

The partners spent weeks developing the specifications for the product and had progressed to the point where they were convinced that they had produced an invention that could revolutionize the CAE market. 

Unlike the founders of many high technology start‑ups, Langeler and his partners knew they had to get a reaction from the marketplace before they asked people to invest the large sums of money that would be needed to launch the product. 

They chose 20 companies in the U.S. that they considered potential customers in this emerging market niche, and they flew around the country presenting their ideas.

These target companies not only told Langeler and his partners about their needs and problems, they helped them to change the specifications so they would meet their future needs. After a whirlwind customer trip that lasted four weeks, the partners returned with a completely revised product and several potential customers.

There was still a lot of work to be done, but the founders had defined customer needs well enough to design a leading edge product that achieved phenomenal success. In its first year, Mentor Graphics achieved $1.7 million in sales. Within 8 years, they grew to $400 million in sales.                                                                                                                                                              

PASCOR — Hillsboro, Oregon

PASCOR is a small manufacturer of high voltage air switches for utility substation and transmission lines. Utilities don't always have the luxury of building new transmission lines, because of environmental pressures. 

Instead, they must find ways to transmit more power over existing lines. To do so, they need components that are heavy duty and easily replaceable.

PASCOR saw this market opportunity and began looking for new product opportunities for its line of air switches. 

"The way to find new product ideas was obvious,” says Kathy Wakefield, marketing manager. "You listen to customer complaints and service suggestions. We found that if you have a systematic way of documenting customer comments, many new product ideas will present themselves. All of our products have to be ANSI tested, which costs us $50 to $100,000 per product; and we cannot afford to test a product no one will buy."

PASCOR spends the time necessary for gathering customer data, and then engineers a prototype.

The new product is developed into a working prototype and is mounted on a trailer to demonstrate the idea at the customer's plant. This method gives customers the opportunity to see and feel the concept, and it gives PASCOR a perfect method for gathering the final data necessary to finalize the product for tests and certification.

"Our system to develop new products works very well," says Wakefield, "because the end users have a hand in the development and it paves the way to immediate sales."

Customer Problems

Perhaps a supplier’s product is not meeting the customer’s needs, and they want to find a new supplier to design and manufacturer a variation of the product. 

As a result companies leave themselves open to attack from innovative newcomers. 

Ajax Foundry — Tualatin, Oregon

In 1973, a consultant to the paper industry brought Ajax Foundry a casting called a refiner plate that was used as a wear part in a larger machine called a refiner.

The refiner is used in pulp and paper processing to prepare the wood chips and pulp stock to be used in paper manufacturing.

He'd gotten the plate from a local paper mill that was interested in finding another supplier of the wear part, because the original equipment manufacturer was high‑priced and unresponsive. 

This is a classic case of a large OEM becoming successful and complacent, but not paying attention to the prices, delivery and changing needs.  

First, Ajax forged an alliance with the dissatisfied local paper mill and produced a refiner plate that could replace the existing part and sell for about 25 percent less.

After this initial success, the owners of Ajax Foundry decided to go to other mills in the Northwest and see if they could copy their refiner plates as well. 

Since Ajax had a 25 percent price advantage over the two other competitors in the industry, paper mills gradually took notice and sales began to improve.

The company hired an engineer away from a competitor and began improving the refiner plate designs based on their experience and ideas. At this point, Ajax was developing new plate designs that were more effective and still less expensive.

Ajax joined a paper industry association, and using the association's directory, they targeted a number of mills around the country that used refiner plates.

The primary reason for Ajax Foundry's success was that they chose to focus on the customer problems of price, delivery and quality — where they could gain a competitive advantage. 

The OEM never responded to Ajax’s competitive challenge and eventually lost all of the refiner plate business. Ajax has grown from a small local foundry to $20 million, and one dominant supplier serving these market segments worldwide.

There is a message here for small manufacturers: There are always opportunities to develop new products by focusing on the weaknesses of complacent larger competitors.  

Gathering customer ideas on new industrial products is a good idea that can lead to immediate sales, but gathering the necessary data requires being able to conduct an unstructured interview.

If you want a very thorough approach to interviewing, look up Erik Von Hippel’s Lead User Tutorials.

If you want a simpler approach to the unstructured interview, read Chapter Three on interviewing in my 1994 book The Manufacturers Guide to Business Marketing. 

Mike Collins is the author of Saving American Manufacturing. His website is www.mpcmgt.com.

Just when I thought it was safe to get in front of my computer, I find out that it’ll kill me – and management knew all along.

by David Mantey, Editor, PD&D

When I put together a comprehensive daily news resource (fancy talk for the PD&D Design Daily), I have the opportunity to not only cover the latest news in the industry, but I also have a chance to transform into a maniacal news junkie.

I click on provocative headlines to read about the unfixable economy, to listen to analysts bang their chests and make wild predictions in hopes of creating some new conventional wisdom by sparking a little awareness-building fear, and to sift through the PR rabble — it’s a practice similar to listening to white noise for hours with hopes of connecting to voices from the other side (dead people).

I recently had a conversation with a futility analyst who, after crunching the numbers and conferring with his peers, found white noise distillation to be 10 percent less futile than combing the wires and feeds for legitimate news. Stand by for his upcoming 1,000-page report that will be available for purchase at the end of April.  

I used to think that Friday night was the wire punch line filled with puff pieces and features similar to those published in Parade Magazine, and the free tabloids littering the streets after a mighty wind. As I’ve found, that Friday night news black hole is a great place to read the news that, I can only speculate, the publishers hope go overlooked. 

My latest conspiracy theory/empty tirade is the result of another notch in Exxon Mobil’s terrible person belt — singular, because corporations are legally considered people — which I found Friday night as I was exercising my individual right to a quiet weekend.

On Friday, a state district court jury in Gretna, LA decided that Exxon Mobil failed to warn workers that the offshore drilling pipes, which they spent decades (between 1977 and 1992) cleaning, contained radioactive contamination. According to the plaintiffs, they were exposed to high levels of radium in the residue that built up inside the drilling pipes. 

What a fact to neglect. I’m assuming that they were trying to skate on hazard pay — or the fact that “radioactive contamination” in the workplace is similar to … radioactive contamination in the workplace. I’m not sure a work situation could be worse — try and have Mike Rowe bring his Dirty Jobs crew into cancer-causing pipes and see if he’s willing to risk his Ford deal for an episode inside a nuclear cavern.

I can imagine the lawsuit years from now. I’ll receive a notice in the mail to be a part of a group lawsuit against my company when a former associate finds that we cheaped out on new computer monitors to save a buck, and had for years been working on knock-off Dells that were seeping radioactive sludge. Pair that with the hidden Adderall in the coffee and the mood-altering chemicals slowly leaked from the sprinkler system, and we’re on our way to the next-generation’s Erin Brockovich — I’ve always hoped to be significantly put upon enough to inspire a Lifetime movie. This could be the ticket.

Sure, the 16 former employees can now split the $2 million for the increased cancer risk, but can anyone really put a dollar amount on anticipated loss of life? Possibly a sliding scale based on tumor size and quantity?

As employees, we have the right to believe that our employers have our physical best interests in mind — unless we know going into the job that we’re ridding a house of asbestos or spelunking into radioactive contamination. Of course, we’ll always expect the corporation to deny any wrongdoing.

As Exxon Mobil’s attorney Charles Gay stated, “We still believe that our pipe did not cause any harm.” Thanks for caring Chuck, it may take some time, but here’s to hoping you lose sleep if the effects of the radioactive contamination ever show in any of the 16 workers. Meanwhile, many of us will skip deniability and pray that it never does.

What are your thoughts? Should employees expect a minimal standard of safety? Comment below or email rebuttals, legal threats and further deniability to david.mantey@advantagemedia.com.

by Anna Wells, Editor, IMPO

At the risk of being pelted with apple pies, I’ll just come right out and say it: I’m not really into the Olympics.

As someone who has dedicated a lot of time to sports—a lifetime cumulative I’d find embarrassing and depressing, I’m certain—the Olympics was never really very compelling for me. In fact, I’ve always found it to be strange that so many people take a passing interest in curling once every four years.

This year, as friends, family, and media chatter about nothing but, I decided to take another look at the Olympics. A look that made me realize that I’ve been going at this thing all wrong.

Despite the fact that I have very little interest in ever snowboarding (it’s too cold here!), I still stared slack-jawed when helicopter cameras showed Shaun White’s private half pipe built for him by Red Bull in the backwoods of Colorado. He spoke to cameras in a very humble manner, and then obliterated all elements of “average guy” with a graceful and athletic gold medal-earning performance. It’s the kind of display that makes you think, “That guy really knows what he’s doing.” For someone like me, it also makes me all too aware that I will never be that good at anything… but instead of feeling defeated, I find myself energized. Why? Because watching people exceed your expectations is exhilarating.

I think people get wrapped up in the Olympics not just because of the athletic component, but also the human elements. Allowing myself to become lulled into the nurturing overtones of Bob Costas’ voice, I watched some coverage here and there, and realized that the value of the Olympics, for me, was in the profiling of the minds of folks who are just really good at something. The fact that I couldn’t even explain the rules of that skiing and shooting thing is sort of irrelevant.

Not to sound like a motivational speaker, but perhaps if we surround ourselves with visions of success, no matter what type, we can benefit from its intensity. I can tell you that watching Olympic athletes these past few weeks has been a great motivator to try just a little bit harder. Nobody makes it that far by phoning it in or cutting corners. Whether it’s figure skating or manufacturing: wouldn’t it feel good to be great?

Athletes always say that the way to get better is to play someone who is better. Tennis players have been known to “play down” to the level of a lesser-skilled opponent. Maybe it’s because these amateurs hit the ball in an unpredictable way, much like an inexperienced blackjack player can throw off the shoe for the whole table.

It stands to reason then that if you can “play down” you can also “play up.” Keeping an eye on those that do something really well might just help permeate your organization with a bit more vitality and motivation.

Check out the IMPO Onsite article in IMPO’s upcoming March issue, which talks about a MA-based turnkey manufacturer that has really mastered its relationships with suppliers. There are good ideas to be gleaned from a 125-year old company with an eye for this part of their business and, in general, it’s a pleasure to watch someone do something very well.

Talent, focus, skill cultivation, and motivation are goals which transcend an individual sport or industry and it’s a qualitative benefit if we take an Olympic caliber approach to our every day… not just when we’re under pressure from the boss or when production goals don’t get in the way.

That said, I’m about ready to pack up the Olympic TV coverage in favor of regular programming again. Recent reports say that NBC actually ran more net time of commercials than athletics, and that’s something from which I could use a two year break.

Do you get inspired from the Olympics, or do they just bum you out? Are you a manufacturer who likes to "play up" with the competition? Let me know your thoughts at anna.wells@advantagemedia.com.