transcripts_cleaned.csv

question;answer
What would you say? Which industry 4.0 technologies are currently used mostly in the supply chains?;I would say cloud based collaboration platforms. Other than information sharing through ERP systems, of course, which have been around, they're not really. industry for technologies, but I think certainly the vertical and horizontal integration from cloud based collaboration platforms is the most used thing. Some of our research we've done on the. On the use of Microsoft Teams and planner, for example, for collaboration across time zones and geographical locations, but also.
And would you say there are specific bundles or combinations of technologies which are common in the supply chain?;I think the core actually the core for Industry 4.0 is the Internet of Things. That's what the industry 4 is based on, right connectivity and sensors, sensorization and actuators within the production system. So I think both of those together are key technologies. , I think something. It's all often overlooked is quality, but I think quality problems relay themselves nicely to industry for technologies. But again, it's you have to understand each quality problem in its own right. I think looking at defects. And non-conformances or or deviations in the product. I think we have to understand why that defect has occurred and and how indeed in industry form might help us to prevent that. So I think we've done a lot of work also on 0 defect manufacturing, it's Intel. So we've been using some kind of. Uh imaging using cameras to try and detect. Deviations in the product and and then use machine learning to try and reprogram or update the parameters of the machine to reset them and and prevent that defect from becoming a problem.
And do you think the organizations follow specific sequences when they implement the technologies or they did it? How does it come?;I mean, if you look at where when you look more closely in the supply chain, I think. Even things like 3D printing, additive manufacturing technology is also becoming more prominent in supply chains. Agvs robotics these types of things. So , you can bundle them up into the various different places. And II think something that also came out about more recently is not necessarily augmented reality or virtual reality as it's only in their own right but. I'd say extended reality. Also kind of including in that assisted reality like real wear, real wear headsets, which you can use to communicate in real time. See what I hear, hear what I hear technologies. , this is. That's a good. That's a good question. I think many companies look for a road map like the Holy Grail. But from the lean perspective, it's completely wrong. I think every, every journey should be tailored to specific requirements and problems of the organization. So in in, in lean thinking we say it's not so much about implementing the right solutions, but it's about finding the right problems.
When we talk about the problems. What do you think which problems are? Solved by the technologies from industry 4.0 in the supply chain since now.;So I think that's key to key to successful deployment of industry 4.0 is to understand your challenges and your problems in the organization and the supply chain of course. And we also used augmented reality to help train employees on quality, specific problems. I think that's also a core. Capability of the technology so.
And would you say there are some challenges that will require? Industry 4.0 technology, which is not here at the moment for our solution, is not there.;I'm not sure we know what we don't know, right? But I think I think this is what I say to companies it's a great starting point is to understand the problems you have now and find the solutions for them. But I think they also we need to have kind of a sandbox culture where we play with the new technologies to actually understand what the capabilities are. That's what I think.
And how would you define supply chain 4.0 for yourself?;There's there's specific developments to solve specific problems, and it's also more of the. Expiration which needs to be done to find out what are the capabilities that we don't know. The technology gives us.
And what would you say, how do? The organizations recognize opportunities for new technologies regarding industry 4.0.;Supply chain 4.0 I guess would be a completely connected, coherent and transparent supply chain, so using digital technologies. To give. , a real time picture, wherever you are in the supply chain to see the status of the supply chain in, in developing, developing and delivering value to the customer.
And do you think in the organizations are triggers for the technologies implementations or do they come from themselves before there's the big trigger problem?;I think right now it's technology push, so technology providers, consultants, they, they go around with their specialized bag of tricks and and try and sell to the sell to the companies on generalizable problems. But again, I don't think this is the right way to do it. I think that the right way to do it is to actually understand the company specific problems and see what technology is available to solve them. I think that we're much more helpful in the long run. Rather than just trying to how we make the same mistakes as we've done with lean in the past, you know where the lean consultants go around and sell value stream mapping and 5S projects. It helps you play catch up with your competitors, but you'll never really succeed with just that one pilot project with the Internet of Things on your production line, you know. None. Make sure both. Perhaps make sure both. Maybe I think it's. And it and it will be that way. I think it's how some people don't understand what is available to them until you until you really decide to them and and show them what's possible. Others realize what they need and what's available and we'll and we'll pull the technology in. So it's it's it's both examples but maybe it's too much on the push side at the moment.
Why does the organizations choose industry 4.0 as they are opportunity to gain benefits?;It's it's it's, it's because it's the new, it's the novelty. So there, there's, there's there are novel solutions out there which we we don't really understand and I think that's also. That's also makes it interesting as well. We don't really understand what the technology is, so it, but other people are using it and we hear the success stories all the time, often pitched by the tech providers themselves. But I think it's that's what's creating the curiosity, I think compared to lean. Which is often people say I'd sell a worn out buzzword from the 1990s. You know, it's 30 years old. What? What, what? What do we have to gain from Lean Now I think. But the problem with lean is no one's really understood what it's about in the first place.And so I think that's. That's a challenge, but I think that the whole human centered manufacturing thing in industry five that's just lean rebranded, that's old wine in new bottles. Same says same to some extent with resilience and. Sustainability the other two pillars of Industry 5, if we look at Toyota as the benchmark for what we call lean, I think sustainability is part of their hundred years old precepts in Toyota, from Sakichi Toyota himself is that respect for the natural environment. I think if you do lean properly, you're taking all of the STG boxes.
And what do we, what do you say? How does the organization decide which technology? They use or which part needs the first improvement of their supply chain.;that's good question. I think it's it's more, it's more luck than strategy I think. It just depends. It just depends who's selling, which salesman is shouting the loudest, or who is in the right place at the right time with their toolbox, I think it's. It's more or less based on recommendations from consultants. Again, you know, so, so people, people are hiring the consultants to analyze the performance of the company and come with cost cutting measures. And one of those might be to implement some cohorts in the production line, I'm sure. So it's it's coming from advice of consultants more than anything I guess.
So do you say again it's more a push than a pull for the problems?;And the way we did more in research terms is to actually go and understand the use cases first. So in the end project, the 0DP manufacturing project, we had five cases all over Europe. We had two in Germany and one in Norway, one in Spain. One in the UK, but the idea was to map out the use case 1st and really understand what are the problems that we're looking at and how might technology be useful and so on. Sorry, 18th to me was the other one, not the UK, but the Italy example was interesting. It was a small producer of micro catheters which are medical devices which go inside the human body. So the demand for quality is quite high. But actually what they did there was they used together with the operators, some augmented reality headsets which were able to have a very high level of resolution. Zoom into these micro catheters are very small. So you could do the inspection using the headset to a very finite degree. So that was very nice for improving the quality. And another example, we were using image recognition on the machine using fringe projections so shining light at the components and looking at the shadow and then analyzing that shadow in a machine learning model to actually look at the if the product was in or out of spec. So there's different, there's a lot of technology available which could be a solution if you find the right problem. So I think it's but you have to understand.
When we talk about the problems, what do you think are the most common problems in today's supply chain, which have to face with technologies?;The situation first to know what the problem is.
what would you say how do the organization implement these technologies and what would you say would you make different in, in the view from your academic side?;, I think I think that the biggest problem is a poor understanding of production design for manufacturing. So it's I don't think any level of industry for technology in the production system will help us overcome the stupid design choices that are made in making the products. So industrialization process and design for manufacturing, having this, and understanding that somewhere somebody has to screw together these products or these parts, these parts have to fit together. You know it's understanding that when you're designing the product makes the whole production process much easier at the end. . So we, we we we presented a you one of the use cases for my PhD student in Denmark at the Lean Forum Conference yesterday in in. In Oslo. And there the management decided that the LEAN program wasn't really reaping the results that they expected because they were doing it all wrong, by the way. But that doesn't matter. They weren't getting what the consultants promised them, so they needed to find the next best practice. So they decided to do a digitalization project and they got the consultants to make some recommendations that if we implemented Internet of Things. On the production line and give the operators some tablets so they can see the performance data, the machine the operators will be able to improve the overall equipment effectiveness and make the machines more available and and perform better. So they went for the solution, they implemented it. Didn't really involve the operators in the system, it was a system for the operators to use, but. Obviously they would use it right? It's a new part of. It's a new part of the process, like that. About 66 months later, there was no change at all. No improvement. And maybe they realize, well, actually we should probably have involved the operators. Because the people are doing the work, they really understand the process. If only we listen to them. And they and they said, well, actually, we all these sensors are in the wrong places. They're not giving us the information we need to improve the machine. We should actually have a sensor here or you should put a couple of sensors over there because that gives us much more useful data. So then the next six months, then suddenly there's a massive improvement, 40 to 60 of OE, you know, because they involve the people and I think it's what once the people know and understand the technology, they can tell you how to use the technology to get the best result.
Mmm. Yep. , of course. And what do you think? Does the industry 4.0 technologies improve the processes or do they replace the existing processes?;, but I mean to be certain, I'm. I'm not. I'm not. I'm not sure that should have been even the the right technology or the right place to lo I'm not sure what the the major problem or the challenge for the company was, but it was. If you're going to implement some technology, implement it with the people not to it, it's a kind of a, it's a choice that executives make that they don't know they're taking, you know, it's unconscious choice that they implement technology to try and control. Equal and processes more tightly. Lien teaches us another perspective. It teaches us to build the conditions to let people grow, to foster improvement and learning. So I think if we can, if we can give people the right tools to do a good job, we don't need to control them with technology.
Mmm. And what would you say? How do organizations should ensure that the use of the technologies remains efficient in the future?;A bit of both bit of both it depends on which technology I guess. So I think additive manufacturing is replacing and disrupting entire supply chains. But the Internet of Things, for example, it's more often just adapting and improving existing processes. So I think it's a mixture of both then.
And what do we just say when, when do you consider the implementation of a technology as successful?;, I think I think it's it's about you keeping the technology there as a system for finding the right problems. So that's what we see with. These cloud based collaboration platforms, it gets people talking about the right problems rather than using it as a solution for something specific. So I think also we need to keep it to identify opportunities.
And back to the road mapping techniques. In the. The theory of a road map is quite good. I think you talked about it. But do you think the organization use Rd maps and stick to it or? What would you say?;It's successful if you. OK, that's it. Can be quite difficult, but I'd say it's quite simple if if you're able to solve more customer problems with fewer resources then it's been successful. I think I think the larger the organization, the more likely they are that they have a road map and stick to it. Which is also not necessarily an advantage. I think the smaller the organizations are, the more dynamic they are and the agile is certainly a term we can use here. It's they don't need to stick to the plan because they learn on the way right. So I think a big company might just try and bulldoze this road map out that was strict regime, which doesn't necessarily give you the best outcome. So I think we need to be dynamic. I wrote a paper which we presented in cabinets. Earlier this year. About designing a digitalization road map for SME, so we and we kept it at a very generic level, but we saw there are some steps which everyone should go through in a particular sequence and I think again, it starts with management leadership. It's not, it's not a decision they make and someone has to fix it for them. It's a process that they have to lead. So they have, they have to understand what is, what is digitalization, what is industry for. What is it? What is its capabilities and possibilities for our company and and to do a kind of a maturity assessment, right? How mature is the management and how mature is the organization? Are they ready? Like a readiness assessment? I think that's a good place to start. I mean, if you're not ready, then please don't start the industry for.
And if you were responsible for building up or introducing industry 4.0 in the supply chain, which has no industry 4.0 technologies to this point. Which? Technology would you implement first or which problems would you tackle first?;Because it's it's not going to work unless the management understands why they're doing it. I think quality starts with quality. I think that that's that's sort of the the the sort of firm you're describing with now with no technology. I'm guessing they understand their products quite well, but they are experiencing a lot of quality defects.
. And what would you say which resources are essential for the implementation of supplied strain 4.0 like technology, technological or from the human side or financial which are the the key?;And I'm not non conformist, so start there and then it kind of match the requirements of the company with the technologies. That might be as simple as just using Microsoft Teams to structure the product development process. To integrate more tightly, the engineering with production. There it sounds very simple from an industry 4 perspective, but for the company involve it it's very complex because it's people involved in this and it's.
Huh. And what do you think? Which skills are essential for a company to implement supply chain 4.0? Successful.;I think it needs needs, needs a good vision. We need a common vision. Why? Why do we need the supply chain 40. And what? What are the benefits? I think we need management commitment. The ownership from the top management certainly from the OEM or the organization as you called it in your map. Because that aligns the customer requirement with the rest of the supply chain. We. . And of course. Not just the understanding of the sponsor, but you need the financial sponsorship as well because there's a cost associated with it. So I think it's that's why at least European horizon projects come in nicely, they make funding available for infrastructure, but also for research and development. So we can pull together these pilot operations for supply chain 4.0. So I think having a good research project behind you will also help you achieve the right results. Soft skills. So I tell my students a digital transformation. It's only it's only 20 about the digital technology. So we have to have the technological skills, but that's a small part of the puzzle of 80 is the soft skills we need for engaging people in the change management. So certainly understanding of change management process and how we communicate with people, how we build the team. What are psychological safety is also an important part of this. Emotional intelligence. So I think it's not just a case of the manager deciding we're going to do 4.0 in the supply chain, we need to, we need to do it together with the people, not do it to the people.
And do you think there is a specific sequence to implement these technologies?;No, I think there is each case is a different combination, a different sequence.
And what criteria are used to make the decision in which sequence are these technologies implemented and why?;I think the biggest criteria is the problems that you got. So depending on the problems, the solutions are gonna vary and of course the level of resources that you have right this is gonna be a restriction. Adoption is in adopting this technology.
What do you think are the most? Features of the supply chain, which have to be improved by the technologies from industry 4.0.;I think that one of the most common ones is tracking and tracing. This is one. I would say that. Maybe. Scheduling and procurement would be another one.
And what do you think are the next upcoming challenges which have to face with industry 4.0 technology solutions?;And of course, inventory management. In the supply chain.
Thank you. And how would you define a supply chain, 4.0?;I think supply chains are becoming very complex. And information flows are very, very hard to manage, especially when we involve overseas operations in countries. That are facing geopolitical tensions, right? So I think this is going to be a biggest challenge in the coming years. I think we saw a little bit of that during COVID. But I think job politics quotations could be even worse, because there's going to be a some, some kind of data data protection and. Restrictions in terms of sharing information and et cetera, so I think. This is going to become a big challenge in the coming years.
OK, perfect. What do you think the most? Companies start from when the strategic decision is made to digitalize their supply chains. In which, , in which level of technology?;A supply chain that. Adopts the technologies. And tries to follow the design principles of Industry 4.
So are there the supply chain sector, mostly the first sector where they start with industry 4.0 or is they're mostly another part where they have started and they can participate from?;Where did they start?
Do you think supply chain management is the 1st? Part of the organization where industry 4.0 starts.;I'm not trying to understand the question. Are you in which year of the supply chain starts first? Or are you asking about the industry sector that starts first?
OK, how do you? How would you say is the best opportunity to recognize technology, technological progress for the people in the supply chain management?;Echological progress. I would say that it's pretty much.
Do you think it's more common to? Put in an industry 4.0 technologies in where a problem is. Or do you think the most it is most common to look at the technology and then see how to implement it and what problems we can face with it.;I would say that's pretty much related to the digital solutions that have been developed, right? How model they are, how sophisticated they are and how disruptive they are.
And so what do you think? What is the best way to? To see the problems, to recognize where we can implement these technologies.;ideally we should adopt where the problems are, but in practice I think companies start where they think it's more important or where is the easiest part to be implemented. So. Do think any company that follows their indicators can identify abnormalities and deviations from the goals and the targets
Why do you think it is Industry 4.0? An opportunity for supply chain management.;You better the problems that you got the root cause and then you see how you can benefit from digital technologies.
And do you think it would be beneficial for the companies to interact with each other and work on the problems?;I think this is going to help supply chains to overcome traditional challenges. And. Ideally this is going to make the supply chain collaboration even more transparent and trustworthy. So, I think those technologies can bring that.
What do you think? How to best decide which technologies or which part of the supply chain? need improvement from technologies.;I think so. , we'll need it. . And same stuff as before. The problems that are right.
So , and you also mentioned which? We supply chain require parts, require the most technology improvements, . Do you think? The most organizations are more. Result oriented. Or they use more opportunity oriented approach for these technologies.;And how many resources did you get?
. And what do you think are the motives for selecting the? You have the exact technology.;I'll say a little bit of both.
. Would be the best, of course. What do you think is the best? Way to implement these selected or prioritized technologies?;Problems right seems.
. But what do you think? How to implement it in the best way and how? What should? What is the best way to implement these technologies? So is there a pathway you would say is the best?;Again, according to the problems you have and the resources you have. I think it's gonna dictate which technology to be entered and what sequence should be followed.
What do you think which specific requirements for the implementation of industry 4.0 are necessary?;I don't think there is. I don't think there's a pathway.
Do you think more that industry 4.0 technologies improved the processes or they replaced them more in the organization?;First of all, capital expenditure capacity, second of all in the proper knowledge and skills. 3rd the infrastructure. I don't think they replace.
What do you think is a good way to deal with the resources and capacity capacities during the implementation, such as technology? Technological. Or the staff and the financial things.?;Well, depending on the process that you're talking about, depending on the person that you're talking. I don't see there is any difference from any other capital expenditure that the company does, you know. So it's simply any company that has any.
What would you say? What is the best way to ensure the readiness in the organization for the change and the technology acceptance?;Financial controlling in place will be able to do that.
And how would you ensure that technology? Remains efficient in the future.;Well, I think there must be champions of this change and those guys are going to facilitate the change and maybe help remove the blocks.
OK, so the best way is to implement technologies which are facing directly to the problems we have supply chain, that's;I think again, if you adopt the technologies according to the problems you got, those technologies are not just. Something that is nice to have, they become essential for the process efficiency, right? So whenever you do that, I think you are sharing the sustainability of technologies.
What would you say? When do you consider the implementation of a technology to be successful?;Every bit of digital solution that you implement is a step forward. I don't think there is a completion date. And this is not an on-off activity. This is something that just like continuous improvement, right? It experiment you run your PDCA and you do experiments and. Those experiments lead to successful opportunities or learning opportunities, right, so.
. And would you say Roadd mapping techniques are, , the go to when it's regarding the implementation of industry 4.0 or would you say it's it's better when you implement the first technology and then you look how to what technology comes next or is it better to use the road map.;The way is valid.
. If you were responsible for supply chain 4.0 transformation and you have a very classic supply chain with the very classic problems. Like what you say? The traceability or something, or the transparency which. Technology, would you? Or which topics would you tackle first? What? What? A road map looks like.;All depending on the skepticism that you have in your organization. Sometimes you do have to start without any road map just to fill the water you know to check the temperature of the water and if there is adherence from the organization. So ideally every organization should have a road map but. Sometimes you don't have the necessary support for it like that. You just gotta keep moving and start with no one technology. Get adherence, more stakeholders together and then move to the other one. And so on so forth.
To the last part. What do you think? Which resources or specific resources are essential for the implementation of supply chain 4.0.;I think there's a paper from Frank at all 2018 that you should read. They talk about base technologies and front end technologies. I think that's a good way to do it.
, but more more the the specific ones like what you need only for for industry 4.0 you know what I mean?;I think I said before that right kept the picture infrastructure.
Perfect. , it was my last question. I think it's helped me or helped ask for study a lot and. , I'm very grateful for the interview.;No, I don't, because there's nothing just like, only in this forbid. So with the infrastructure you need the skills you need the money, right?
Would you say yes, well, EAP systems of course, but in the direction of robotics and therefore direction?;Well, of course, we don't have robotics as such in the warehouse, we're continuing to develop it from a degree, no, I think, but in total now, if we really say 4.0 and not for me it's clear, we have a NEAP system, I think our EWM is the latest and best that you can get on the market and we've got it that way, I think most of what we're having developed for EWM is something new that Accenture will then market itself because we were the first to have these requirements, that's why I. We're at a good level there, but I still wouldn't consider it 40. And plan, we'll have an automatic warm warehouse, an automatic small parts warehouse. We're getting a fully automatic, organic warehouse, we're currently building where transport will then take place with small robots. But let me put it this way: the supplier connection is not yet ideal - we are working on it, but it does not exist yet. We are dependent on it, because it will be introduced for the entire supply chain, i.e. purchasing, logistics, and accounting. There are some automatic reading processes using OCR software, but for me that is not 4.0, but more 2.0. I think we are only just getting into touch with it, we are getting there and we are not great yet. Now somewhere in the supply chain, to the point where we can say that we are really state of the art here and are doing it - but as I said, we are doing the small parts warehouse is new, so I think that is exactly what we need for our requirements with the goods to the man principle and very efficient. In contrast to the previous small parts warehouse, which was also automatic, but we have twice the speed. In the future, transport will be partly carried out by robots and all of our external transports have been tracked since this month via Lowoy Range Bluetooth, so we have real-time tracking of the material. We are working on a good conscience, so I think we are already very far along in terms of heat.
. Yes, OK and what characteristics would you say have been improved by these technologies or will be improved in the near future by the automated warehouse and so on?;Firstly, efficiency and then above all transparency, I think both are there, we can work much faster with less effort and we are much more transparent about where our goods have gone? Where are the goods at the moment and also derivation, OK, how much have we managed? How much is in the backlog, where are we at the moment, being able to react to it at short notice because we really have all the data at all times, so that is clearly the advantage of EWM that it is very, very detailed but can also be evaluated quickly.
Yes, and what challenges are there now? Now that this has been implemented, these are perhaps the next hurdles that could perhaps be overcome with Industry 4.0.;When these topics that we have already raised are dealt with, the most important thing for me is that we can connect our suppliers and simply speed up the whole supply process, because we still spend a lot of time in goods receipt, especially to record data that the supplier has hidden somewhere, whether on the delivery note or on the material, but that is exactly the data that you enter, which is also on certificates and so on, I would actually like the supplier to send us everything in advance and we just check whether it is always there or not. At the moment we basically have to record, we scan a delivery note and the header is also read out automatically, but the individual items cannot be read out, I also want that either, so it is also provided as an IT, that the delivery note is read out completely by software, but where it goes, of course preferably the supplier is connected via an EDI interface and he can send us the data 1:1, it simply creates a lot. This makes our goods receipt significantly more efficient because we have now worked a lot on goods issue, so the next big goal is to make goods receipt quick and efficient. So that we can also receive the material quickly.
Yes, OK, and how would you then - you've already touched on what Supply Chain 4.0 is and so on - how would you define that? So Supply Chain 4.0.;For me it would be Supply Chain 4.0, which is a big topic. The supply chain is interconnected and the data exchange simply works in a uniform system and not somehow by email, post or something else and the data also flows continuously from back to front if desired. And the other thing is that a lot of AI is used to replace routine activities or simple administrative activities, the fact that this simply happens automatically when something like reading out or I type something is no longer up to date for me and that is why classic processes that I would now shelve, the same in the outgoing area we are already working on, if we know from the outset where we want to send it, we don't have to think about it in my opinion, that is also a demand that is currently running and which will then soon be implemented, that we simply pull the data out of the system, which then automatically creates shipping documents and ideally even automatically offers this in an exchange for freight forwarders. A freight forwarder hardly ever takes the order, picks it up and according to the regulations that are laid down, we proactively transfer the money and then it is the supplier's job to check in case of doubt whether we have paid too little or what? But the fact that we can eliminate all this effort is, for me, the step we have to take, that we use AI where it is clever to get rid of routine activities and on the other hand we have to connect it in order to be clever even without AI and to always have data available as quickly as possible, then you will simply become fast in logistics.
And would you say that getting rid of routine activities on the one hand would mean that we would free up time to do tasks that are not routine or what would you say, what is the background to why you say they should go? The routine activity.;Per se they steal time and they require staff, and in my opinion we don't have either of those things, because it's simple. We're going to ramp up now, we're going to have to set up a second location. We're going to have to outsource huge amounts of materials, we can see that already, and of course we can still help ourselves with staff from production, because they're on short-time work, but they'll have to go back within a year at the latest. And then I'll lose all that staff again. Until then I'll just have to be efficient or hire new people. But that will be much more expensive than any IT development, and that's why I see it primarily from an economic point of view, and ultimately from a time point of view, in order to be able to handle the new projects in the time that is intended.
OK, what would you say? So what is the current state of technology when you decided to go into logistics? We want digitalization. Were there other areas in the company that were much further ahead with digitalization or were you also a bit of a pioneer in logistics? And where are you now compared to other departments?;Well, I don't think we were pioneers, but I don't know if we, well, I think we started with a few others and I think we are the furthest along in that regard, well, I think the only other topic that I would think about would be the hololens, if it works properly, where I think a lot has been created, if everything happens as it should, but. v
Yes, and how is it for you? How do you recognize opportunities for technological progress? How do you see what's new on the market for solutions or technologies for problems?;"Well, generally speaking, we are in relatively good contact with our suppliers for storage technology, etc. What kind of state-of-the-art technology do they have? Well, let me put it this way: the robots that are coming from young Hainich are a new development by Johannes, and we will be the first customers we get. There are already smaller versions in this size, so if it were completely new, the question is always, are we taking the risk? Here I simply say, OK. It has already been sufficiently tested on a smaller scale and the technology works; we have also looked at it. We are happy to take the larger model, which is better for us, and do this and the other thing is, we actually go to several trade fairs a year to just see what is being teased and what the point is. But we are lucky that we are part of Chicago and can therefore work relatively quickly with larger suppliers, simply when we get inquiries that tell us something and I make sure that I describe requirements in the tender and not techniques, so what sometimes bothers me is that I didn't say, I want a rail-guided, I want an automated forklift, I want this and that, but I deliberately said I don't care, I have to keep to these process times, please give me the most efficient and best price-performance ratio that meets my requirements. It doesn't matter to me at all. Whether forklifts are automated, whether they are shelf handling devices, whether it was a so-called? Another idea that you have movable shelves like in the library and move them back and forth because that makes you as big as possible, unfortunately that has been rejected because I actually thought the idea was pretty cool. But it didn't work out with the weights that we needed, but that's why I'm here to make sure that we're open, that we don't tie ourselves down to certain suppliers and still have a good relationship with the suppliers, so we haven't had any problems with anyone because I've said that from the start, in the end it's the price or the price-performance ratio that decides and I'll choose based on that, that's why we also make sure that we don't just buy forklifts, for example, from one supplier, but always from two different ones, to keep the competition high. And that's actually how it is with all the others too, that we don't talk to 10 suppliers in detail because that would be too time-consuming, but now, with the larger purchases like the automatic high-rise warehouse, we've been talking very intensively with two for a long time and then we went with one. Its technology with automated forklifts is perhaps not as high-end as automatic storage and retrieval machines, but it's simply good value for money and, above all, the technology behind it.The other one used conveyor technology, now with robots, which are simply cheaper and more flexible and that's why they were and that's why they became cheaper and that's why we decided to do it. But that, that's the important thing for me, thinking about requirements and constantly looking at what's available on the market? What else can we do? Sometimes I also think about whether we could look at universities a bit more, because maybe new ideas will come up."
In any case, would you say that these Industry 40 initiatives arose from problems, analyses or was it also the case then that, so to speak, and now you said you have set the requirements, but maybe also like this? Yes, I know that there is something and a bit like we bring the technology in-house and then derive a benefit from it or rather we have a problem, we need something now.;I think it's always both. Well, on the one hand, I encourage all my employees and, and some do it, some don't - no question about it, but always looking at what, what else could you think of, what we can do better and that's where some ideas come from. Some are good, some ideas are good but not economical. So, for example, have we tested now? There are these green straps that you often have around boxes, you have to bend down, move them around once and then they are welded. There was now, or we tested, a device that basically moves the pallet down automatically. Under the pallet and back up again is ergonomically great, but you have to say, it costs 25,000 and we don't have the business case for it, so that's where that comes from. And otherwise, it's also from the desire for improvement from employees. How can you make their everyday life easier? The main reason now was that we asked ourselves the question OK, we want to build twice as many boats in almost less time, are we designed for that or not? And what can we do then, what do we have to do? And luckily we asked ourselves that question 3 years ago and not just now and that's why that was actually the main trigger, so for the larger investments it was clear to look into the future, what do we have to be able to handle for all our smaller issues, it's more that I look at the existing process for my employees or when I see something somewhere, oh cool, that's available now, so like in the packaging we'll probably get there now too, it's not because we have to be faster, it's just that we're controlled by it. We need a very long time for a certain packaging, there now seems to be a device on the market that does exactly that for us and in a fraction of the time that we need. Then I'll control it and would buy it now, I'm also confident that we'll buy it now. But you pack it in 2 minutes instead of 20, so with over 10,000 parts that we have to pack for a book, that has a significant impact on the costs.
Yes, of course. Do you have any other companies besides your suppliers that you interact with or work with when it comes to digitalization?;Not at the moment, we used to have various ones, including consultants, let's put it this way, although it is always important to me that I have implementing consultants, we don't bring consultants who put up nice slides or I'll tell you what I want and what you'll do on a slide and say now that's it, I always chase them away from the yard. We once had Abcon, they were called them, and they really did manage and implement the projects that they proposed. But that was five years ago now, and my experience has been that they usually don't know any more than the suppliers and what they can do is project management. But I have built this quality into my own team. So I have two employees directly below me who do it, plus myself, and I deliberately send my group leaders to ipma or Greenway so that we can actually do that, well that's the easy part and the technology, what's best is that the suppliers are always better than any external consultants? That's why I usually avoid external consultants and if you put me directly in touch with the suppliers, you sometimes have to pay money for preliminary studies, but the money is usually better spent. For the last four years we have not had any external consultants here, instead we have deliberately always gone to trade fairs by train or the suppliers of things we found interesting have simply invited us to show us, let them demonstrate it to us, or we have even driven there. For the warehouse again I was in Hanover once and once in Holland to have a look at it, because it is important to me that it is shown to me that it actually works and is not some kind of figment of my imagination.
And how do you then decide? Or you then basically decide which technological option is to be used or what still needs improvement, so to speak.;Oh, those are two questions, so how do we decide what needs improvement? It's simply a matter of, we look at where are we? We look at where we should be or where from? Where could we be able to go? Well, one thing is, we have to do something and the other is, we want to do something to become faster, not necessarily because we have to be faster, but because it's more economical if we get faster or use fewer staff. And that's where it comes down to in the end. It always comes down to what is the best in terms of price and performance, what suits my requirements, well, when it comes to the anger camp, the others were there too and said, yes, we can do a lot more than the others. I say, great, but it costs more than half a million more and I don't need this requirement, well, the technology that I have here now, as I have described. I need this number, that's twice as fast as we work today. That's enough for me, it's fine if you can drive 100 km/h faster when there's a 120 zone, that's no use to me, so to speak, and that's where I generally go, for me price-performance is always the deciding factor and not who gave the best presentation or who brought out more bread rolls at an appointment? Yes, in the past, external storage service providers were often viewed on that basis, so at which meeting were the best and tastiest bread rolls served? I've stopped that too, no, I still let the selection happen, I actually leave it up to the project manager or the person in charge of operations, I'm also consciously involved, so if you recently bought a new forklift, for example, then they also define the exact requirements for the equipment so that someone can say at the end that we've bought the wrong thing. The choice of which device will we buy? That still makes sense to me, so of course some suppliers are clever too. They deliberately send their field staff there and greet people by saying yes, I want the red forklift and not the one that the game, but for me at the end of the day, if both meet my requirements, then it is the one that is cheaper. So cheap is always too simple, price-performance ratio has to be the best and then it doesn't matter much.
And what would you say, MDA, which is now being operated by TKMS. So what aspect requires the most technological improvement? Welding speed or efficiency or? Ah, maybe quality?;No, a bit of freedom but only speaking for logistics, well, I get everything from, let's say, the order is placed until it's with us, where I would say if we planned much better with our suppliers, when do we actually need something? And when do they send us what and how do we deliver it? There's a lot of potential there, because we're simply flooded with material, of course it's better to have material too early than too late, but in my opinion it's still a bad thing, but that's a general philosophy that I've not yet really got through here in the company, but for me too much stock is just as bad, or stock too early is not just as bad as stock too late but just as problematic, because it means a lot more storage costs for us and we'll be spending over €1,000,000 on external storage costs over the next few years just to meet all of our requirements. And that, that's nonsense in my eyes and that's where we should look most from a technical point of view, because fortunately I can now say that in future we will keep the logistics and process times exactly as we have demanded and even expanded it a little so that in future we will even deliver a bit of a workplace where we previously delivered everything.
Ah, ah, no, you've already answered all of that here, so we can move on to the next problem. Exactly what does an implementation of a technology look like for you? Maybe if you think about the high-bay warehouse, how does that work? Are there teams or whatever?;Yes, well, that develops to a certain extent during the project, well, first of all there was the initiation, where, above all, a smaller team was busy finding out what our requirements actually are, what target times, what turnover do we need? And writing that down, so, then of course it was actually just me and the purchasing department, who negotiated a lot, and my warehouse manager, who was there to look at it from an operational point of view. Then it went into, let's say, reordering, and of course purchasing was pushed out to a certain extent. It went internally, where we replaced purchasing with IT and infrastructure colleagues, so to a certain extent there was a core team that formed the heads, because, of course, I lead the project as such, but I don't know all of the IT things. Of course I can describe processes, but what kind of IT security and how do the different topics communicate with it? We now have our own project manager from IT. The government naturally regulates our infrastructure. Infrastructure. What do we have to do with the ground? Electrics. We talk to our colleagues in the construction department. They are part of the team. And of course my operations. Because we naturally have to dismantle and rebuild. Future schools are there. Both the management and, let's say, an employee as a key user and a and the first worker drives the technology. And let's say the further the project progresses, the larger the circle of participants becomes. In order to explain this to as many people as possible and to get them involved as early as possible. Because that is important to me. I noticed that back then with the EWM introduction. The more people are involved early on and know how the new system works and have tested it, the more important it is for me that we test at least four times before we go live, if we have the luxury of being able to do so in terms of time, but then we have a good product at the end and everyone is on board. That is the decisive factor for me. So, in the end, to become very big and get as much acceptance for it as possible and also to gain knowledge - of course not too big at the beginning to get through it reasonably quickly. But outside of the requirements process, I prefer to involve more people so that I can get an overview.
What are the prerequisites now? So did a lot of IT investment have to be made, did a lot of work have to be done to convince people to accept this technology, or what prerequisites had to be created so that this technology could even come into the company?;So yes, it must be a lot, I think so. The IWM introduction was already in the mid-millions, which formed the basis for it, because that was in 2017, then last year we also set up the EWM in Hanau, so it was before the ECC and there really was the most modern technology and also all, I would say, that comes with all automation. AI-related topics are IT-related, which is why we have now completed over 50 IT changes for this financial year, for the last financial year. Or rather, this calendar year, I think. The evaluation that we have in logistics alone means that we are more involved than all the others. The IT part is always very big, which is why we are in very close contact with both our IT team and our service provider Accenture, who we sometimes involve directly and who are there to a certain extent to support IT and sort it out 1:1 without bothering IT. But yes, in all of them, every year we spend. I don't want to say millions, but several hundred thousand euros on IT costs us to get the issues to work.
Yes, and the employees who will later use the technology will be trained or even if new employees are hired, they may already have the knowledge.;No, per se, training is part of every project, including training materials. That's also important, be it click-through instructions at least. We also have Vorhinassima at EWM, where you can create and record processes in the system, and the employees can then work in the system in the training, and the system says stop, if you enter something wrong, you can continue like this, if you enter the right thing, you won't go to another transaction, you'll just get a message. That was wrong. That it's really close to the user, that's always the case when we roll out something new, and it's always important that we involve users early on, because we've seen that too. Doing something like that at the start of a project is good, but during the ongoing process people can look at things like that, but it's always best when there's someone who teaches them what they're doing and shows them what they're doing, so documents are always good for double-checking. The important thing is that there is someone who feels secure about it, someone who is also keen to show it to the people who will join later, so we hire, we have never hired anyone because they were good at technology, we get the technology and always buy, let's say, training and user training for it and then plan it just before going live for all employees and also for everyone who potentially comes into contact with it. So the circle is too big rather than too small.
Yes OK, and how do you ensure that the use of technology remains efficient in the future and continues to give you a competitive advantage?;The question is, we're not really in competition, let's put it this way. We simply have to service our projects here, and that's securing the projects, because there aren't fewer, but more and more, the requirements are increasing and we're not getting tired of it for now, and I'll show you what I've learned over the last eight years. When I walk through the warehouse now, when the two projects are finished, nothing is where it was eight years ago. Before that, I had the 80 years, you can't say that, parts are still dying that were, well, maybe not 80 years ago, but let's put it this way: the honeycomb that we're now dismantling and modernizing dates back to 1900 and 70. And of course that's difficult to do so quickly, the new orders have helped, but otherwise you have to spend far too much money at once and that's why it's always important to me to continually renew it. And to be up to date, so to speak, but of course it has to be economically worthwhile and that's why, when I question our processes every year, what can we do better and what else is there, it doesn't matter, even if it's new? It's no problem to overhaul something after 2 years if I buy something and I know that it will get out of date very quickly. So we'll just go for something new again, right?
How would you rate when a technology has been successfully introduced? So, especially Industry 4.0? Technically speaking.;Per se, if it runs, meets the requirements. And the employees can work with it sensibly, then that is successful for me. We had a requirement. The requirement was met and it was proven that we also, that it is also sustainable. Now you can define when is sustainable? But first I say per se there is software that is successfully introduced and then at some point every software or every technology will have flaws, but that is normal error handling, that is no longer a successful introduction for me. That is why I am actually introducing. And the next three months are crucial, if you then say afterwards, it is exactly what we expected. It does what we promised, then we have just introduced something successful. So it doesn't end with implementation and co-life - that would be too early - but then you also have to show that it works. In the live business because you won't always be able to simulate it 100%, we noticed that before too. All individual processes fit together, it is difficult to test whether individual processes always fit together on a large scale. That's why you usually find out in the first three months, but if there is nothing, I still say after three months the project is used, it goes into control mode and from then on the time really starts to see OK, what can we improve, because to be fair you have to say I, I like to lead, so we define something, then we freeze it and introduce it and don't keep expanding the scope because otherwise you don't get it done, but then put the topics in the backlog and say OK, once introduced then. We then move on in order to have clear, let's say, introduction points and finished topics, which is why we have actually switched to sprints in IT topics now, rather than always waiting until we have enough topics to work through a large field, we actually move on relatively quickly with small changes and then play them live as big changes.
And will roadmapping techniques now be used in logistics to perhaps drive digitalization forward in the future? Is there a plan to do this?;We work with schedules and stuff like that, but. Otherwise. And does the term roadmapping techniques mean much to me now, apart from the fact that I understand Rotmaack, not so much.
Yes, so you use a roadmap to somehow plan the future digitalization, so to speak, so that you say, now automatic high-bay warehouse, next come the robots and then after that the flying drones or whatever.;So is that what you mean? Oh, we had that for Kiel, now we've set it up again, especially for Wismar, because we'll be dealing with that to a certain extent over the next two years. Getting the logistics up and running and so most of our work is focused on getting Wismar up and running and that's why we're not internally concerned with other issues. But per se we always look to see if something new is coming up, so we're going to completely remodel the packaging this year, we hadn't planned that a year ago, it just came up because we discovered the technology. What is now possible and because we can see again what's coming our way and therefore? Is the goal always? We want to develop further, but you can now say that this and that has to happen here and there. But we had all our big topics, and to be fair, we have now invested almost, or more than 10000000 in logistics in the last two years, so we are only just getting to the logistics concept circle, I would say, if Wismar is still introduced, an end for now and then logistics concept 20 will come at some point.
What? If you were responsible for a supply chain or logistics where Industry 4.0 was to be introduced and this supply chain had the typical problems, what would be the first technologies you would introduce?;The first topic is that you need a system that gives me complete transparency, so that for me that is first of all so that I know where I have to and can start, so that I have data to see which processes are running quickly, so that I don't start in the wrong place, well, you can definitely do a lot of things, but I need a system that tells me that and I need a sensible one is analysis, that is always the first thing I would do and it is also important to analyze and not think in terms of the target and then then also a, let's say, even a castle or a castle in the air should be defined process, but first to really dream. What would be the optimum and not, because you think it's not possible to say in your head, yes, that's why we don't even suggest it, I say with every project we think about it, well, when it comes to incoming goods I always say my wish would be first of all what we are assuming and then we align it with this goal, the goods arrive, we take them and put them on the shelf, we don't have to do anything else, we just put them on the shelf and the best way to do that is with a robot. So it's clear to me that that won't happen in the next 23 years, but for now it's that. The aim is the same, I'll say it's not a roadmap for me, but the aim that everyone should think about and when they see again somewhere in the chain, oh, look, here we can basically do the testing or inspection is already with the supplier or come on, let's send our boxes to the supplier and do it like this, which some people say won't work, it may be that it won't work this year, it may be that we haven't asked, but if we don't ask anything, it will suddenly work. That is simply my aim, first of all a really absolutely optimal process, it doesn't have to be implementable, but that we simply have a target image and from that we then derive various, so to speak introductory steps, in the first step we may only do part of it or a step in that direction, but we always know, okay. That should be the end goal and we are working on that - not that we do something now because we think it won't work anyway - in the end it will turn out that it does work, but we have already worked in completely the wrong direction. For me that is a sensible IT basis. It must be clear to everyone that it will cost IT capacity, but we also have a clear, precise desired goal and then sensible planning for it and we think about the requirements - we don't think in terms of solutions or anything like that, because you don't get very far with that.
But if you look outside of the whole topic, if you think in terms of requirements, couldn't you exaggerate the whole thing? You said we want the product to be taken and just put on the shelf, but what if you don't need the product anymore? So you deliver it directly, just in time, that would theoretically be the optimal process, right?;"That would still be the optimal process, yes, we do that for some issues too, we are even involved in that. But. Let me put it this way, it is not something I have control over, let me put it this way, because we are simply still too caught up in those issues. In other words, the suppliers are not allowed to drive into our production facility. And most of the time, the items do not arrive just on time, yes, the date they are required and when they arrive here, I simply cannot control as a logistics department, unfortunately that is not within my control, so for now I can only concentrate on where and what I can do and how I can get my piece of the pie or my part of the supply chain as efficiently as possible? Of course, the optimum would be to deliver it directly to production? However, you also have to say that our aim for production is to get a complete production order into production, and that consists of arrows from various suppliers, and that's why we'll have to deal with it here in the warehouse one way or another. You can also get Amazon involved; they store everything first; they make it a bit more mobile. They store it on pallets and then take it to the outsourcing station, where it's taken out again. But essentially it's the same, so it doesn't come ready-packed; like with some car manufacturers, their suppliers deliver the complete unit or the complete production order. That's simply not the case with us, and we wouldn't be able to do that either, because that would mean a lot of work externally, and that would be a lot more expensive than if we managed it properly internally."
Which resources are essential for the implementation of Supply Chain 4.0?;IT capacity and good project managers.
So my next question would be which skills are essential for the implementation of Supply Chain 4.0? Well, project management is probably more of a resource, but also a skill somewhere, but which skills are still essential for implementation?;Yes, I think it is also important that the translation of technical requirements into, let's say, a programmable language, we also notice that if we get someone from external services, including IT, who is good at what they do but doesn't understand what we are doing here, does that result in rubbish? That is why it is, or that is why I consciously take and demand of my project managers, who mainly do IT projects. They know the process on site, have already done it themselves and know it inside out, so that they can intervene immediately anywhere, or can also explain it to the IT resources. In general, we are working on ensuring that all IT employees who do something for us have been here on site at least once and have seen it in real time, because we have that too, right? That is an enemy from the past. You can talk a lot and mean the same thing, but what you mean won't come out if you haven't seen it before. You'll just have a different image. And the words may fit, but the image doesn't, and that's why I think the shipyard is failing a lot in terms of IT implementation, simply because we don't have the right amount of IT resources. We don't have enough of them. And then we also need project managers. That's why I say that they have an affinity for IT, but also the desire to do it and have good time and self-management skills to implement it. Of course we need motivated people to work with us and suppliers, but I think first of all you need motivated project managers and motivated IT people who enjoy working together in order to really make progress on these issues.
Thank you. So we can start with the main part of the interview.;I want to say like we primarily have the business need, right? So we are a company that manufacturers and distributes on a large scale, so. The main industry 4 dot or process automation started with our warehouses implementing the cutting edge technology for pick and drop the correct products of customers into the and make our process efficient. So I would say more warehouse automation. That's the main business right now. One of the goal we have is similar to Maison try to deliver the products the next day. So that's one of the goal we are working towards. And we achieved that for more than 95 percentage of the orders, so. Having said that, everything we do is based on our business needs. I would say start from warehouse automation and the next is the planning activities either say like supply planning or demand planning. You want the decisions to be as much as automated as possible, so for process automation we have created rules within our existing tools. It doesn't mean like industry 4.0 tools which we are currently exploring. But even before industry 4.0 tool, we have explored this option of process automation adding rules. Say if people are working on thousands of different activities, say 10,000 activities or purchase orders they are reviewing. We won't touch all those lines we have created rule that will focus only on the majority or high value driven or focus needed areas. There are some other stuffs will be handled by the rules, so that the plan us within the organization, right? They will focus only on the high priority activities. So that's how we have it. Worked towards technology on poll with Industry 4.0 technology, right. Our company already has a lot of data coming out from the system and from different vendors. Say like purchases, deliveries and everything. So we already have a technological background or an infrastructure that creates a lot of data for us. That puts us in a good spot and even without exploring the industry for auto aspect, we were pushed into the big data or analyzing lot of data and creating insights out of it so. I would say like that's where that's the industry 4 auto technology. We're using big data analytics. And we are also exploring on how to implement transportation. Monitoring system in place. And we are currently in the process of implementing advanced planning system. I would say like that is like creating a digital supply chain. Within the organization that helps us to plan better, make quicker decisions, run different simulations on what of scenarios and. Procure properly from current supply chain number and deliver to the customer with the expectation of the service levels we have within the contracts. So to summarize again right warehouse automation, process automation and then digital train. We are also exploring IoT but we are not very advanced in that journey. We are still exploring and trying to understand it.Since mentioned we already have like a bigger. Data pool within our organization data warehouses we are looking on technological solution on wants to understate 4 or solution to process that and provide us an action based. Recommendations.
And are there specific bundles or combinations of technologies you use so with the IoT later maybe?;Currently, like we are not using like a bundles of technology that are the business needs, right? Since our organization is a bigger organization, everyone will be exploring what is the next process and our technological improvement they can do so. They have various suits of technology. That provides the data from that process, which is like a like ERP system or warehouse system warehouse management system that provides the data for us which are. Basics for the industry 4 dot or two and on top of that we are trying to implement a particularly data analytical tools. Say like AI automation on the try to pull the data and go towards it and probably in transportation system, IoT comes into place. We have a bigger project for next 5 to 10 years exploring online implementation of IoT for tracking and. There are a lot of different use cases over the onus, timely deliveries, and we also have refrigerated supply chain within our network. So making sure we are maintaining the temperature to maintain the quality of the product. And even there are a lot of their use cases which the company's trying to explore now for warehouses like we can do facility management. Technologies digital to improve the safety of the workers within the warehouses, so there are a lot of use cases. We are very early in that journey and road mapping for industry for Rd.
And what are the main features of your supply chain with F being approved by these technologies you mentioned?;The main feature, right? Planning quickly. Planning on things. Where we should purchase the product or where we should reconfigure on supply chain 'cause there is a disruption and quickly implementing that into a supply chain. With thousands and thousands of interaction between item, brand, product, and the industry combination location. Deciding on where we want to purchase soon or where we want to cancel if there is a demand change. So planning definitely improved and efficiency so we are more a lean organization when I say lean organization. Try to keep the headcount as much as low as possible, but our business is growing steadily for last 30 years at the rate of 10 to 20 is every year, so. As business increases, right, you need more process on people to support it. But we are leaning more towards automation in order to. Support that growth.
Yes, And how would you define supply chain 4.0 in one to two sentences?;, I would say like a subpage in 4.0's, a cyber physical system of a separate chain that helps you to. Plan but. Predict things better through a very set of technologies. That's the main key you want to you want to have the exact representation of your system. Or monitor exactly what's happening in your system in the entire network and then the technologies associated with that, right, say internal of things to capture what is happening in the network. And then having tools different. I fold auto tools like a planning system that helps you to or assimilation tool that helps you to quickly run some scenarios. Could be a digital twin, a digital twin of a particular. Manufacturing location or an entire supply chain. So it's like a set of different. Technological suits, right? That helps you to push them to have like a cyber physical system. Without directly going their understanding what is happening in your entire network and then if you look at the entire supply chain that it's part of different vendors, different manufacturing location warehouses and then finally customers like that. Ending right amount of data we need from all these different members within a supply chain. For example, you cannot gather more information on either vendor or customer. So what is the basic data you need from that entity? Or you can control more your manufacturing or even vendors manufacturing and gather the data say like there's a manufacturing happening as you plan. Is there any? Disruptions have happened so that you can quickly recognize it on. Any the drug is that will impact your business or not and then quickly reconfiguring the solution. So for my industry 4 down to right, I know like you asked me a very short. Defining supply chain for it's still like in a short the cyber physical system that helps you to capture. Run State simulator state and we have three different things, right, descriptive, predictive and prescriptive. Capturing the current state will help you to describe your situation and then both predict and prescribe the solutions for your subjection activities.
Thank you. And how do you recognize opportunities for technological progress in your organization?;, definitely. So I said we are a bigger organization. There are a lot of data, a lot of changes happening, changes happening within the business and changes happening outside of the business in macro conditions. That of changing. So everything is disturbing for the supply chain we have like that. In order to efficiently navigate all those and meet our business objectives and strategic goals, right, we definitely need the technologists to support that. So as I said, primarily right, our technology implementation comes from the business needs and the challenges we face with the bigger supply chain like this, we face all the different challenges like. We have the first challenge. Lot of companies will have like gathering the data. We have the data. So the next step for us is to process the data, create insights from it and then continuously improve our supply chain. So if you look at the dead, it sounds simple, but in order to effectively do it and and we are also in the process of replacing our technologies suit on a regular basis. So for everything you need. A lot of different types of skill set and people say within the organization and outside the organization and. Implementing those so definitely we have scope. Continue scope for next say like 10 to 20 years Atlas to keep implementing new technologies on the support our business goals.
And what is there a trigger for a certain technology implementation in your organization?;So we have two triggers, 1 is. We have a part of. Leading supply chain market. My list tea like that. I'm saying like they're they're Gartner. So we are part of Gartner team. So we understand what is our technological advance solution. So over the continuously monitoring what is happening within the market and the vendors, right or vendors for those solutions. So that gives us a background to what is happening in the market and what. Your customers and competitors are doing so we're definitely getting that signal from. Partner and the second piece. So this is our business growth that is the main driver for us. Keeping the business lean. When I say lean, it's not not hiring a new people or something, so it's at the rate we are growing. We are not increasing our headcount in a similar proportion to that growth. That's fine. We should. We shouldn't do that because your business is growing. So that's where a technological. Advancement is helping us in order to meet that. So the trigger for us is. Scanning the internal environment through either conferences or partnership with governor, and there are also within locally different teams they work with the universities and try to see what is happening and we are also in the market right continuously adding new new candidates who bring new skills or discuss about new topics of addressing a problem like this. That gives us. Again, a signal to what is happening in the market or in the supply chain, both from educational perspective and research perspective. So once you have that new talent or proposing new ideas through internships or a rotation programs that. It's implementing opportunities within the company. So one good thing we have in the company is we're a company is improving company. So wherever go up idea comes from, we will evaluate it on. Prioritize those it if it is going to drive value within the business.
And when you have the trigger and you decide to improve it, how will you decide on the technology? What? Solves the problem and . That's also makes the improvement for this trigger.;If we hear a trigger and it doesn't mean that, say like a, there are a lot of trigger points for us to keep implementing the newer technologies, but doesn't mean that we have to implement all the technologies. So we do a due diligence process that helps us to understand what is a value that is going to bring for our business, a particular technology could bring a value for other business but not for our business. So that's the first step we do. Do the due diligence. And then we also have like a yearly goals and quarterly goals and see like next 5 to 10 year goals. So we will see how a particular technology's fitting within our goals we have for the organization and then what are the metrics or drivers that are going to improve. That tool and then trying to build a business case forward. So when you are looking towards the due diligence and building business case, right? You will understand what is the scope of a particular tool, a particular idea, a particular process and common. And then I'll go towards some work towards it. So if it is just a technological change within the existing tools we have here, we work with our local teams to implement it. But it's a new tool. We work with the vendor, try to understand what is the capability of the tool, what. What the tool can do is that fitting our requirement. Or the future state you are trying to be in. Once we understand all those information, then we will work with them and if, if we decide that that is a tool we want to implement, then that's where we establish a new. New strategic partnership with the company say add one's planning system or a transportation management system or a warehouse management system. So then you will work with them or even IoT providers. So work with them. Do the pilot study. I think so. There are a lot of things that could go right because of what you expect and what actually happens in reality. That's why we do the pilots, to understand if that we are really the value's gonna come from the solution we are expecting and once we find that, we'll go ahead and implement it in log scale that will help us to capture the value we 're looking for within the supply chain.
Mmm. And when we talk about implementing technologies. What specific requirements are or where necessary to implement industry 4.0 technologies in your supply chain?;, sure. So as I said, right now we have a not just we even in supply chain, we have major functions like plan, make, deliver and today even with return on sustainability is there. So we have all those bigger pillars within supply chain, right, so. Understanding. All those needs in the different areas and then try to. Sorry, can you repeat that question? What are the features?
What requirements are necessary in the organization? To implement any industry 4.0 technology, like the culture or more is more. Was it more from the IT side or more? . From another. Requirement to implement it.;Makes sense, makes sense, makes sense. So I'm sorry. I was going between different questions. So that's why I wanted to clarify before I answer the question. So you were expecting, what are the requirements you need within the organization to implement the solution once we decide the solution, right? . . So once we decide a solution, right. You want to see like what are the different teams you want to involve with so? If it is internal, that makes job easier. When I say easier, even working cross functionally with the organization, that could be a challenge. But if you're working with external vendors, right? So that's where you need a clear plan. The higher level plan within this particular timeline to keep it short like project management, when do you want to do a particular thing at what time? And then who's going to do it? What is a clear plan? So this technology implementation, right, people are going to do this as additional work compared to what they're already doing within supply chain. This is how we make sure. Planned well earlier so that we have resources in our organization supporting that implementation. So that is first thing project management. Necessary people. So for different tool implementation that we may need a different kinds of skill, cert or expectation or requirement say like. Different levels who should be attending those calls and who should be making the decisions will be actually implementing that within the organization. So you need a process expertise from these different business teams and the change management who's actually going to manage the change when you are going to implement a technology. So with supply chain 4.0 it will, it's not like. A easy process change or. A thing right? We are both having a bigger budget as being tied into this implementation and then also different people who are accountable for them. That's what I'm saying. Like all the understanding of who's going to do what, and then the skill set. And then the expectation of deliverables with them each particular time frame. So if we do that right now, that's a main record for your successful implementation of technology or solution technological solution within the supply chain and then a continuous feedback. So this will not be like a one or two month project. It'll be like an annual project, like that. Will be nice to get a tool, say, like two years back, and then we made a decision that you wanna go and implement it to see the entire life cycle, right? It'll be like two to three years and the minimum for a decent scale of technological improvement. So continuously have to go back and evaluate what value initial thinking and creating a value. Are is still on track, so you will go with like a big say like you want 20 features within the technology and then when you agreed to a vendor you may get either 20 or just 15 technological improvements so.15 things you're expecting from the tool. Is it doing what you want? So setting the expectation and then continuously so every quarter or every six months, are we on track in achieving that value creation from the tool? And then finally like doing a pilot and going live, so we have different rollouts and making sure that data and the technology interfaces are happening well and. Planning all those things properly and you need different kinds of skill set. People say it right from. Junior analyst John Junior planner until director of VP Level. So everyone needs to be involved at what level? When they need to involve planning those things on the executing to that it's a bigger ask. We need someone who actually manages the project. Someone just sees if the value's being captured someone is actually working towards mapping the program and giving inputs for the new technologies. So all this has to happen in parallel within the time frame in order to successfully implement. Did that answer your requirement question?
Yes, of course, of course. And when there in the past, some challenges when you are facing during the implementation what's in your mind? It was, .;So as I was explaining in the requirement right, there are a lot of different activities, so. Even when you're hearing this, it may be like a lot of different activities happening, but we're not actually involving it in executing it, right, it's it's a bigger change that was happening or bigger work and lot of bus will be within the conversation when we are doing like this kind of technology. So that is a challenge we need to. Buy buy in everyone across all the levels of organization. So even though if you see like the decisions is being made by upper management but it's actually the lower management, people like planners or. Those are the one who are actually going to use the book, so making sure we are training them properly, they're open for the tool. Change management skill set improvement. Lining the duck, keeping the engagement active at all the time. It's a bigger range, like that. When you're working on this, you may go through a lot of challenges on different emotions. Intelligence will be there for different kinds of people, so making sure you're managing that motivation on the reason or why what is the vision for this implementation and keeping that sustainment of commitment and. The value of planning to create, right? So those are definitely a challenge when you see about challenge, right? Most frustrating will be the people challenges change management. And the next thing is technological and managing that relationship between the tool provider and the company. So making sure you're communicating your requirements properly and the team is capturing it on either implementation of IO T or different things they are giving. The windows are providing what you are expecting to provide and manage everything, so those are the lot of challenges within the implementation. And again, as I said, right, if you have like a road map for any particular implementation that is just check you are expecting these different things of this happening. What is the challenge? What is the roadblock? You are just coming from. Is it coming from a particular team within the organization or outside the organization and let effectively and then keep moving forward. Usually in these projects or any technology implementation, time is the major aspect. If you get delayed, that puts additional budget or cost to it, so that is again managing cost by cost is the major, the deciding factor in lot of implementation. So making sure your write down time on managing that having the buffer for absorbing that additional cost of budget.
And if you were responsible for and supply chain 4.0 transformation in an organization. Which have the no supply chain 5.0 until now and. But the normal supply chain problems, which topics you would tackle first and what a road map maybe would look like?;So fiber responsible, right? I would like to like a. First thing I want to do is the current maturity assessment. So we have different. Aspects of supply chain, as I mentioned before, we have source plan deliver returns and you can take whatever framework you have on supply chain put it there. And then understand how we want to measure that cap current maturity. So do the current maturity first and where you wanna go, where your business is going in next year, 10 to 20 years maybe? And then see what else. Capabilities you need within the supply chain in the future. And then plan from there. Current state. You just state what are the gaps you have. Since this is a bigger transformation or road map. First, you're going high value projects first. Identify the pilots you want to work on. Take those. Work on out. And make sure you're collaborating with not just within the organization. External people like consultants or two providers, they will become certain because they will work with different companies and they will have like a knowledge base. So try to tap into that knowledge base, understand the best practices. But coming back to the higher level, right, you have a road map. Just identify priorities, different projects. I think the projects will come from either money value or cost savings we're going to bring or how it is going to support a strategic objectives. Or the direction you want to take, say like you want to be more agile on the dealer products quicker. Or do you want to be a lean supply chain? So based on the supply chain type priorities, those projects and then quickly work on pilot show value, get the trust in the organization that this transformation is going somewhere and is gonna be helpful. And once you have that, you need to even build everything, right? I have people process, so we'd hireright people and have, like a department that supports this transformation. Or if you have some department extend or similar to central Central of Excellence. See if the existing people are existing roles, will support your transmission or create new roles within the and make sure you have the entire road map and when you're working on pilot, once you identify this, go back to your maturity assessment, see how the maturity is improving in. Every year and plan your road map accordingly. So. That's how I do like what are the transmission you have and for us, right? It depends on business. You don't need augmented reality or virtual reality for certain cases. Certain case you need just a data analytics for certain cases. Just need a monitoring so have different capabilities is there as you see from here right monitoring, predicting and prescribing. So what kind of level do you need for your business? Is just monitoring sufficient or doing like predict and prescribe different things for supply chain.So based on that mapping everything and working with the different consultants on creating like the road map and continuously building on that for multiyear projects.
So first the big daughter basement and then build up the road map from this And what would you say? Which resources are essential for implementing industry 4.0 in the organization?;So as I said right now people, people are the first person that will help you to start on this journey, so. Creating that awareness for the industry for auto. So a lot of people are aware of what is happening, what is industry photography so creating the. Within the company. Access top management or commitment process. We have to believe that this is the investment in this on the journey or time we are going to spend. This is valuable and put creates a competitive advantage for us in the future. No, no. Building the capability, it could be a process implementation or a technological improvement. So just implementing technology is not sufficient. So we have to. Create a new operating model with the new tools we have. So whatever your changes are changing a particular tool, there will be new way of operating. So how that will happen creating like a standard procedure for the implementing it. So whenever you're changing a technology things change. So train the people's make sure they are on board on the new new way of operating. And at the end of the day, they everything, everything we are doing will be for the cost, cost savings or the bottom line. We are trying to influence. So making sure. We are actually creating the value within the organization. Continuously showing it and having everyone within the company, right or be a part of the any way so that they feel belonging to a particular transformation so. Everything right, people process technology. You want to manage those three plus carefully in this transformation and without one even one color working properly, the other tool will say so that's the critical thing. And also building like a mindset within the organization. Not having like a especially the mindset, not just for top management and for all the levels, senior management, management and even digital contributors. So making sure everyone is on board and seeing. You just get a working day. It's like.
Thank you. And normally my last question would be which skills are necessary, but I think. You'll you'll. You'll talk about it in the. Before and and to belong to, teach the people and take them. There. , bad thoughts about it and , thank you very much.;Definitely. Just touching on that last one, internal skills and external skills and everyone. So that just needed for the implementation of supply chain for auto.
Which Industry 4.0 technologies are currently most frequently or most popularly used in supply chains?;Tracking of components. Very, very directly and I wouldn't even see that as a major Industry 40 technology, I take a slightly different approach, but I think the key thing is: Where is the component in the supply chain? When did it leave the supplier and what other information can I take with me? In other words, do I have to pass it on as part of batch tracking or something similar?
Would you say there are definitely many bundles or combinations of technologies that interact together?;Well, well, these are of course scanning technologies. If we go in the direction of software, these are of course EAP and MES systems - this is also the topic of machine networking, which of course then contains machine data. So if I want to transfer further information, I usually get it via a machine data interface, which then goes into the MES, so where I put it now would not matter to me at first, then of course everything that has something to do with the cloud, if I want to put that in there, yes, one-touch solutions will not work if I think a supply chain is not running, so the building is somehow abandoned
  Yes, OK, and when implementing these technologies, they would say that certain sequences are followed, which is perhaps typical.;That has something to do purely with the company and what it does. Some of them tend to be, let's say, shop floor driven, which means they start and say, I'm networking my machines, I'm building my production systems from the machines, from the production system.
Yes, and would you say there are currently challenges in the supply chains that still require technological solutions?;My MES from the MESSERB, but that is not what I host for myself and then pass on to the outside world, and then of course we have those who say no, we do it the other way round, we need everything in the sense of track and trace. We record it as part of our logistics, push it into the ERP through the scanning process, for example, and then directly to other ERP systems that are connected to my ERP system. Well, one of the big issues is of course the question of network coverage, I'll stick with that, right, so 5 g or higher? Variant, yes, the second question is actually much more crucial, which data do I actually need? So do I only work with the tracking number and. Do I post it somewhere else in the database or do I push everything along at the same time? And then the question is, how do I actually track in the sense of? Can I, second, yes, hello. I'm just 5 minutes away. How? Back again. Which data set do I actually pass on and how do I record it if I can't get there? Ultimately, working with a laser scanner or something, so the topic of RFID and so on can of course be taken further, so how far does it go? What happens with the application of RFID attacks? And can I read them or not? Especially with, which are getting bigger and bigger, in principle I can also drive a truck through a gate and then I have that.
Yes, yes, OK, how would you briefly define Supply Chain 4.0?;Supply Chain 4.0 is the transfer of data or information. I, I deliberately say information because data is not necessarily information about the entire supply chain from the original manufacturer, recycler or whatever to the customer. I can see that as a big deal and now of course there is somehow adaptable data, that is. With possible intervention depending on the customer's change request. So we can make it really bad. You order a car. The supply chain goes all the way to, let's say, the paint manufacturer. If we just think about the price and I change my car color request and play the thing through to everything and it works by itself. Ideally, it will be as agile as possible. Maybe it won't be a car at all, but a bicycle, so if you think about it a little bigger.
   OK, thank you. How would you say companies are currently recognizing the need for technological advancement?;That's good, I think that's one thing. You have people who run companies with a certain technical whimsy, yes, you have to be really mean. The second is. They may realise that the market is no longer serving them and use that to generate something that you just have to have. When I think of all the logistics people, nobody actually needs Track and Trace. I don't really care whether the part is there or not. It doesn't really matter to me when it comes back to me, but unfortunately it's gotten to the point where I know who the driver of the vehicle is, what he looks like. What his cell phone number is, where he is currently and how much? I'll just stick with the classic postman. And how many more stops does he have to make before he gets to me? That doesn't change the quality of the service in logistics. The part has to be there then and if I want to be really lean then I have to be sure that it's there.
Yes, to come to the next question, when you say Industry 4.0, why is that an opportunity for the supply chain?;It's really bad that the supply chain is becoming really simple because the manufacturing technology, when I understand in Industry 40, that is, oh, I now have additive manufacturing processes, then all I really need is powder. And if I also move powder, then I can standardize the load carrier really well. And that gives me all the problems that I have. With regard to pallets, palletizing size, loading, unloading and so on, load security, I no longer have any of that, I just move powder from A to B. It can't be that easy and it doesn't make sense to do everything additively. For example, the second topic is of course. I can of course make adjustments very quickly if something isn't working in my supply chain. So I reduce it to logistics, but my trucks have broken down, it's always something really simple, I notice it straight away and can make adjustments straight away. Yes, and the others can also make adjustments in the sense of OK, then I'll bring forward certain orders and not wait for anything.
Yes, and in the past they think there were certain triggers that really drove these Industry 4.0 technologies forward. In supply chain management.;Well, I always see Amazon as a big trigger, right, that's just how it is, I've noticed in industrial companies that the argument always comes up: it works for Amazon, why doesn't it work for us? And? So the main topic is really the global topic of e-business, that's what everyone will certainly say, so how quickly can I get information about purchasing decisions from customers, so that I can then add it up across the whole supply chain. Yes, and if I can order electronically, I'm of course faster than usual - everyone knows that from their private life - we don't want to be without it anymore. Generating offers is of course much quicker too. And if I can compare more quickly, I can make decisions more quickly, yes, but I don't want to reduce everything to the Internet, no, but I think that's clear.
and what would you say? How are decisions made about technological possibilities and the need for improvement in companies? What should be used first, which technology?;That's very difficult, I think they have endless discussion rounds. The biggest difficulty is especially in the topic when you want to evaluate it. In terms of return on investment and similar things, but there are digitalization topics everywhere. They can't calculate a return on investment so easily because they don't know whether they'll get more customers now or whether the customers will be happier or whether they'll lose customers if they don't do it, they can only estimate it. And my manager also told me that's a good argument: if I'm an old shop, nobody will want to work for me anymore. Yes, and by that I mean them rather than me, in terms of the generational idea, right.
Yes, yes, I actually heard that from practice this morning. What aspects of supply chains would you say currently require the most technological improvements?;Which aspects of the supply chain? Can you phrase that differently? I find that a somewhat difficult question in terms of Oh yes, well, I have both now, I also have parts that I want to track securely, so yoghurt should stay in the cold chain, just as a standard example, yes then. How is it handled at all? I can recognize all of that from the box if I have it in one of these, when it arrives, but that would be a bit late for me, this damage protection, if what is comma then? Yes, well, how fast is it on the way, if I really push it to the limit? In the spirit of kind thoughts, then the component has to be there exactly when the worker reaches into the shelf.
To go into this in more detail, we have already talked about how one motive is financing and ROI and also that the company remains attractive. But what other motives can be pursued or are pursued in practice?;Because then I take that as a foreign aspect, well BMW does that as an advertising aspect 24 hours before the car goes into production, they can still think about what kind of car it will be an hour before it goes to the paint shop, they can only think about what color they would like. So that can of course be an argument, just as naturally, if you play it through, yes, how many options for change do I leave to the customer if I take the whole supply chain, in other words in the sense of intervention or how much information do I give the customer, who may even want to see how their product is made?
What would you say is the most normal way in industry to implement Industry 4.0 technologies at the moment.;We almost had that already, because the normal, I say, there are two variants, either you. We then thought in the direction of supply chain. Usually this is even initiated by IT, so the question is, at what level are you playing? Do you already have the classic automation pyramid in place? In other words, if you have an ERP, an MES and then your job flow somewhere at the bottom, then it is relatively simple, but as always it depends on your product. Highly automated processes already produce data today and have been producing it for 30 years like nothing else. But you can't get much out of it, so this Industry 40 idea is somehow a bit overrated if you are of course more of a, let's say, a one-off manufacturer, or you have perhaps a, let's say, a contract machining company - for me the best example is always some other orders in a huge pool that I want to bring in somehow and then I want to utilise my production to the maximum. Then it's good and there is usually no money for it, if logically they have at least networked their head, so the topic of machine data networking or machine networking plays a role in higher systems based on and then simulation of the current state constantly and then the component, that is the idea of ​​making it the information carrier and actually just saying I throw components in and the head organizes itself, that is the idea of ​​Industry 40, often forgotten, but then we have our destructive and so on aspects, because that presupposes that the whole thing then also.
And what would you say are the concrete requirements in companies so that these technologies can be introduced?;Yes, as always, you need data, right? You have to get the data from the machines, you have to know the position of your components by doing tracking things. If I now look at one company in isolation, then it can all flow together and it gets even worse, because they also have a tool cycle and they also have tools and devices that they have to track so that they can go through the thing exactly and don't fail at the things that then fail because the eight-milling machine is unfortunately being used on 24, to say it's fraud, so that would be the focus from my point of view, that's exactly what we're doing, so the first step towards that would be ultimately. Digital or a smart factory, whatever you want to call it. And we haven't even talked about AI yet, which we should obviously add on top of that, and we haven't really talked about simulation techniques or cyber-physical systems in general, because they don't have any cyber-physical systems at the moment. They only have data from machines.
OK, and how would you say that willingness to change and acceptance of technology is implemented in companies?;Of course they do, they have a pretty conservative industry, which needs it too. It's a completely different story with start-ups and with, wow, I'd say this Amazon model, they approach things completely differently, they're more reserved and there's also the big issue that, as always, you don't know. How to calculate a return on investment and therefore being very reluctant to invest in a lot of things is the second thing that arises when I can't get data out of machines - I have older machines, and many of them are also afraid of not being able to maintain and service these machines themselves. They source it out and as soon as you give it out, you don't get any data out because it doesn't go to the control cabinet or anything else. I can of course block it again and in the simplest case say, oh come on, worker scan just works and then the issue of the works council comes into play when I scan processes, namely Anne and then I know how. Yes, let's put it this way. The worker in particular is entitled to have a say. Of course, that is also often blocked because I can use it to monitor people. Period: finished. If we make systems, that happens automatically anyway, but it doesn't have to be employee-related, but of course these are all things that can then become barriers and that is the issue. Yes, according to technology readiness. I think that depends at most on the industry and the company. I know my way around. Even companies that are very active in this. Even at the risk of making investments that they don't know whether they will pay off at some point. And I deliberately say pay off at some point. Because technicians also have a lot of bosses, where the boss is gender-neutral, right, well, that doesn't matter at all, but why should I change a process that runs on sled bread? We sliced ​​bread, but I had already automated that well beforehand.
Yes, how would you say, can one determine whether this technology will remain efficient in the future and whether this is the case? We have just discussed it.;Yes, I have to think about OEE, well, the big issue for me is when I network things. The issue of system availability and if I push that up, then my OEU will be. Oh, and then it will be profitable too.
So, when would you say a technology implementation is considered to be successful?;Far easier, that's the whole point.
And are there specific bundles of technologies which are used mostly you think?;So in services, I would say that the use of AI techniques such as large language models to what is it? , generate interactions. That's of course being used a lot in client facing parts of the company, but also within the same in internal organizations. And image recognition. I think that's it too. A very invasive technology. If you think about how it's being implied. Shorts of , internal functions, finance and so forth. I've seen many examples of that. , so different classes of, let's say AI based technology. , .
. And what do you think? Which features of the supply chain? Can mostly improve by these technologies you mentioned.;Oh, , , I think I think mostly productivity. I think it mostly effects productivity of workers individually, hence also workers working in groups. that's the main benefit that I see happening now. .
. And are there any challenges you think in the future which require more technology, technological solutions for the supply chain? In this case.;So the difficulty with supply chains is that you have independence interdependence and you have handovers and all that sort of stuff. So that there's a high degree of variability. So if it's for instance. In let's say the transfer of information that is being used in different locations in a supply chain as it is in services with these. With these handovers you also need then technology which is able to. To cope with that, let's say increase the variability and increased complexity. So I would say that's the main challenge. , because right now these technologies are very capable in hand was hand handling quite isolated standardized tasks, but this real world complexity that's that's difficult.
Thank you. And how would you define a supply chain, 4.0?;II would say that as opposed to, let's say, more traditional supply chains, it's a supply chain that that's more and let's say dependent on the, the, the use of autonomous technologies that, that, that kind of have, , have interaction . Next to the more human collaborations that you see within supply chains. So, supply partners working together.
OK, what do you think? How the most companies are recognized opportunities for. Technology technological progress in. And the supply chain 4.0.;So how do how do companies identify?
How do companies recognize opportunities for technological progress?;How do they recognize? , by means of their managers that are, let's say, smart enough to see. What, what, what could be, what could be. . Business model innovations or opportunities. That's mostly how it's done. Of course it's managers in consultation with their employees who recognize the feasibility of a certain technology and start working towards you know deploying.
And do you think the mostly use cases for industry 4.0 arise from problems or they mostly arise from the solution and then identify the problem?;This for let's say valuable purposes now.
What do you think, why most companies identify industry 4.0 as an opportunity for their supply chain? Why don't they hire more people to make? Everything more transparent or something like this? Why do they use industry 4.0?;So interesting, I think mostly the problem. , because it's typically so in services. What I typically see is that there are problems that is benchmark wise. You are not as productive as others. So then you're looking for solutions or you hire a consultant that brings some solutions. That's typically then where technology can make a difference. It's very rare that you have, let's say, truly outside in. Perspective, experimenting, looking for innovations that are not. Let's say proven yes in terms of clear business case. So I think it's mostly inside out. , , , the problem. And we are looking for a solution. So I think, of course there's a topic of scalability. So it's easier to operate at scale. There's the element of control, so there's it's easy to have more or less say management control of the execution. It's not necessarily cheaper. I don't believe that.
And would you say it is beneficial for the organizations to interact with other organizations in this case of supply chain 4.0?;, but it's more the scalability and and the control. , it's very control. Shouldn't be even. , I think, , mostly these two. It's easier to operate a skill. . And you have more control. You're span of control. You need fewer people. So productivity increase. , I think so. , of course. You need to learn a lot about how you can, how you can implement certain technologies. I've got many examples. In my, in my supervision of black belts in, in our, in our programs where they, where they look for, let's say, proven solutions in other companies and see how it works and how they can implement it also in their company also more in C 4.0 oriented technologies.
What do you think, how the organization should decide in which technology they use and which problems they try to improve first? What are the mostly problems they faced the 1st?;So let's say what our typical problems for which industry 4.0 problems. . So that are probably problems that are related to errors. So if you have if you do automation then you have typically you're better able to control the amount of errors. Scalability. Yes. So that you're able to operate at 247 instead of only.
And what do you think are the most? Aspect of a supply chain which requires new technological improvements, so which are not here at the moment.;A day or day or day night shift. These type of so it's it's . Typically it's a productivity related. Matters I would say. . Do you want to? . You want to prevent errors. You want to make sure that there's no violations or for company policies, that sort of stuff. And you have more control over. When you use this, this productivity technology, .
What? What aspects of the supply chain need improvement in the future?;For instance, the research where I'm looking in is let's say, large scale adoption of AI based solutions and then comes in various forms in so there you always have the interaction with the existing organization, the legacy that you have with the existing it for instance. And to what extent it's what the extent to what to which it's complimentary with let's say such more modern productivity technology so. , there is. There is probably an issue, let's say the legacy of an organization, the existing, the fit, the fit between new technology and existing organizations by means of its, its systems and its people. Do they? Does it do it? Does it communicate? Does it work well? I think those are the . The main aspects.
All right. Thank you. What would you say? How is the best way to implement an industry 4.0 technology?;So there's a lot of writing on that topic. You have these standard approaches where you do, let's say first some, some piloting, some proof of concept. Phasing and then in gradual steps, you try to look for as a feasible area of ​​application and you scale up a phase approach.
And what do you think specific requirements which are necessary in the organizations for the introduction of industry 4.0?;You're that your basic. Let's say list of elements that. So that's leadership training. I think there've been many papers written about this, so I can sum them all up, but that's quite a lot there.
What do you think is more that the industry 4.0 technologies improve processes or they replace the existing processes?;The augmentation versus automation debate. So it's it's both. It's both. So if you look at IT industry where there's more, let's say volume and less variety. So where there's more control over processes, then typically it's more automation. If you look in services, if I look around, there's a lot of augmentation and so on, so people making use of these technologies. To become more productive, .
And how would you say? Should organizations ensure that their technologies remain efficient in the future?;And how to ensure, . . So I think it's always very important if you think about technological solutions, that is another one off transactions. So you're actually buying something that needs maintenance, updating and that sort of stuff, so. You have to make sure we get. And , to organize not only for let's say. Operations, but also for improvement and for maintenance. So to be very clear that, , technology in itself is not a one off solution, it's simply. A different resource than a human resource, but it's still a resource that needs. Development and maintenance and . And so forth, .
And what would you say when you are starting on a, on a Greenfield with industry 4.0 in the supply chain? What would be the first technology, what would you implement and how could a road map look like? When you're facing the normal supply chain problems.;I think I would, , I would. If I knew a greenfields in a supply chain. , I'm also thinking, let's say, from my own perspective. So in services. And then supply chains are of course different than an industry. Yes, I would. I would look for technologies that can facilitate collaboration and ease of the usual hand over, I think. I think that's most important. So it's it's applications. What is it all kinds of? So, I don't really know. So I mean in my industry the the examples that I gave AI in the different classes of technology therein be it the large language models or image image recognition, that sort of stuff that's really predominant, that's really the most dominant also in the in the supply chains there, let's say. Automated, let's say, signals going, going back and forth between suppliers and buyers also in our services sector. That can be nicely automated with such technologies. So , again, and that would be my, main, let's say orientation I would say, .
Which specific resources or skills? You would say are needed for implementing industry 4.0.;,you need, of course some technical background, because I think it's very important that you understand that conceptually what these technologies can do like these classes of technologies, what they can do. But you also need to have what is it good, good, let's say organizational change capabilities. . And that's of course a challenge. So I would say they're, two classes of, let's say, competencies. Yes, that's what I thought. . , . It's a little bit out of place for me, but I can relate to that. Yes, yes.
What do you think? Which industry 4.0 technologies are currently used mostly in the supply chain?;Speaking about that blockchain is 11 very prominent tool which has been very rapidly adopted in supply chain, IoT and some sort of AI is kind of getting in. But I think it is at a very infant stages. It is in very stages of infancy. I don't think we still have mainstream solutions using AI for supply chains. Machine learning is another big prominent technology which is being used in supply chains. So in terms of, it depends on the functions, what specific use cases of supply chain people are looking at. So if you look at traceability aspects, if you look at visibility of processes and and information then blockchain definitely is probably the the dominant technology . If you look at aspects of. Analytical abilities to predict or probably apply big data analytics on supply chain data. Then we are looking at machine learning. Now, what is more interesting is that it is very difficult to kind of think about these technologies as Eisler is silos because there is a level of integration which basically is required or probably it is a combination of these technologies which could make a critical difference in supply chains. I don't think as such 1 technology would be able to solve what it is intended to do. Rather, you would need to have integrate multiple of these, like for example in order for. Visibility and of transactions in supply chain or in the processes you need IO, IoT devices and sensor integration. Only then you get you get good data and and so is the case. So you can go on and on. It is difficult to kind of make such claims of about a single technology which would make a big difference. So AI again as I said I'm very new to this. It's AI is a new kid on the block. And I guess there is a lot of research in this front. I myself have looked into you know capabilities of explainable AI and gin AI solutions for supply chain. But as such, there are more tangible solutions which are probably tangible use cases which we have developed which demonstrate a real world applications in supply chain.
And do you think, did you know some specific bundles or combinations of technologies that I used common in the supply chain?;And I guess there is a lot of research in this front. I myself have looked into you know capabilities of explainable AI and gin AI solutions for supply chain. But as such, there are more tangible solutions which are probably tangible use cases which we have developed which demonstrate a real world applications in supply chain.
what do you think are the features which of the supply chain are mostly improved by the technologies you mentioned?;So when you say which features of the supply chain have greatly improved due to these effect of these technologies, is that right? So, so again, when we look at. Sourcing and procurement. So we have to look at the independent processes within supply chain, which basically can provide us some detail about how these technologies can make a difference. So going by that role, I would start with where we call raw material supplier to manufacture. So the, the, the product life cycle between when a raw material suppliers supplies a product. To the manufacturer and adhering to certain standards and quality, the level of transparency and visibility required in this process has been greatly improved with certain technologies. Now what happens in the manufacturing? Setup in terms of enforcing quality in force of ensuring the product compliance in terms of ensuring. So we are looking at a host of technologies which could play a role in this part in the manufacturing production part. And then in the distribution logistics and and in that space, again you have another set of technologies which could play a big role. So I think it is difficult to kind of. Describe specifically. How a company like 1 technology could make a big difference. Rather it would just require based on individual use cases based on individual requirements of these processes. Does it make sense?
And what do you think are there any challenges where no technology is there at the moment where we need to face with the technology in the future?;No, I don't. I don't agree with that. No technology is being there at the moment, which means we are not bringing in industry 4.0 tools just to automate a system or there are several supply chain technologies or I wouldn't call supply chain. There are several technologies which have been applied in, in, I'll give you an example. For example RFID and and and and NFC tokens, these are all new. RFID has been there forever. Barcoding has been there forever, so you had a lot of technologies in place. Which improve visibility within supply chain or transparency within supply chain. Now the challenge is that I don't think these newer technologies are going to kind of displace an existing system. The idea here is that all these newer industry 4.0 tools and techniques could actually enhance the capabilities of an existing you know problems or probably help to alleviate the problems within supply chain. In other words, we are looking at a very. Siled impact of individual technologies and the interplay of them within supply chain, because I don't believe that industry 4.0 tools can go ahead and completely remove and heal an existing setup and then bring in new light into this problem. Rather, it should. It should coexist, or probably it should have an interoperable means of actually enhancing the processes within supply chains.
How would you define supply chain 4.0 at this point?;Supply Chain 4.0 the definition I guess varies according to different people and according to different context. My my I mean there is no universe. For example there is no universal definition for resilience of supply chain as well. OK, so similar to that this is one of those things where people cannot agree that this would be a proper definition. Many people assume that industry 4.0 tools apply to supply chain processes. Is supply chain 4.0 good? Then yes, that is one way to look into it. But then if you look at digital transformation of supply chains, how that impacts that could give us a new definition of supply chain. So there is no universal agreement of supply chain. My perception of supply chain 4.0 is the impact of evolving emerging technologies in, in, in improving supply chain processes, in improving the efficiency and the operational efficiency and the performance of supply chain. Would go under the bucket of supply chain 4.0. Again, this is a very academic response I. Like I said when whenever I define supply chain resilience, people always come back and say I'm I'm mathematician by training, so I always go by the rigorous mathematical definition of supply chain resilience . I say that, OK, so if your supply chain is broken, when do you, when it goes back to normal functioning state, do you assume that your supply chain is resilient or do you say that well there was a disruption and then?
So how would you say is the how the companies recognize the need for technology, technological progress in their supply chain?;Now probably I'm achieving newer levels of improved performance after the disruption. Does that mean resilience so the Long story short is that is it the short term impacts or the steady state of the sub functioning of supply chain will determine resilience. People cannot agree on that. So I have an industry and practitioners can vary with their responses as academics when we define we always define it with the rigorous mathematical logic behind it and we never come to consensus on that.
What do you think are the the aspects of the supply chain which require the most technological improvements?;OK, so I'm gonna give you a long drawn answer for this. I mean if you look at historical perspectives of decision making within supply chain. This is 1 industry which had a lot of inefficiencies which had a lot of hidden, you know, truths which had a lot of opaqueness in the way. The processes of the conductor and plus combine this with the availability of rich data sources. So the role of technologies. In the way Futuristically speaking, I think it's very ideal candidate because I think whatever inefficiencies we had in the past are kind of disappearing. I think as and when we we have started to shift the way in which the supply chain processes have been transformed digitally then then I think the role of these technologies have a big. Role to play, I would say moving forward. These have to be streamlined. They have to have a big level of impact in the way supply. They will affect supply chain performance. I think. I think these technologies have a huge impact on supply chain performance southeast.
So there the aspect like resilience or performance or availability, which aspect needs the most technological.;I.Right. So basically which? Which areas of supply chain do you mean require the impact of this technology? IIII would still think.
Waht are the specific requirements which are necessary to for the introduction of industry 4.0 technologies.;Supply the the kind of technologies which could impact supply chain processes is on technology, automation, data visibility, analytical capabilities, improved decision making, reduction in errors. Probably optimal use of judicial efficient use of these resources and so on so forth. These are the. Places where industry 4.0 tools could make an impact or affect. Yes, I think there are a variety of requirements which need to be met before these technologies can be properly integrated. One, I think realignment of processes because as I said, there are significant inefficiencies in existing supply chain processes and we cannot magically introduce an automation tool and expect that to perform well. Automation is not the only solution, that is.
So do you think that industry 4.0 technologies improve more the processes or they replace existing processes?;One before you automate a process. Obviously you need to. You know, consider impacting that you you need to actually look into the operational excellence or improved efficiency of the process before you automate it because we automate, it's like garbage in garbage out system, the automation could get faster that garbage out rather than just kind of improving or streamlining the process, right? So that's one. Two, the big challenge is that supply chain industry has evolved as although it has evolved over the last few decades. There is a big effect of. Lack of skilled workforce which understands these technologies because remember, these technologies are new and the availability of workforce which can kind of take these you know ideas and implement it or probably even understand the role and effect of these technologies is kind of growing as we speak . But it's not at a very mature stage and more important developing solutions on supply chain 4.0. Basically also means that you need to develop interoperable solutions because. There is no monolithic software or a solution which exists in, in supply chain and for that matter any industry. So you still have to understand how interoperability challenges can be bridged using these technologies would that make an impact? Would that actually have a say in the way industry 4.0 tools would impact supply chain performance?
Mmm. And what do you think how? How should the organizations ensure the readiness for change and technology acceptance within the organization?;No, I would say it would improve. I don't think it will. It is going to replace any redundancy in the performance or in existing processes could be impacted. But I don't think it's going to replace it is going to improve.
Mmm. And what do yes make sense for me and.;II think it is not by force but more of a choice because as and when we move towards a rapidly evolving world and more importantly, a globalized world. Things have to actually be taken into perspective. We have, I mean, we have moved from the 1950s and 60s when. Most of the decision processes were well based instincts with low mathematical explanation or logical implementation of these models. Today we are in a world which is highly automated in such a way that there is a lot of intelligence in the way decisions are made and these this requires us to embrace change in a big way, right? Obviously this is something which has to be taken into consideration. I don't think it is. It's going to be based on. Based on force, but more on embracing newer adaptation of newer technologies in, in looking at the positive things associated with those technologies. Does that make sense? And and and one major aspect as a challenge for supply chain or supply chain 4.0 I would say is that. Is the ink enhances security issue as well, so as since I did talk about globalization, we need to talk about, you know, increased data security capabilities. These are some of the challenges which may impact supply chain 4.0.
And what do you think? How should the organizations ensure that the technologies remain efficient in the future?;OK, so II think there's no one pathway for this. Typically there is no recipe for ensuring this, but I would start any implementation of supply chain for .0 at a single smaller scale. And and show the impact of that in a certain area or in a certain process. Define the objectives and the goals of improvement by implementing these technologies in supply chain and focus on how to actually show the impact of this. The broader impacts of this across the whole supply chain network. So I don't think you can, it's not a plug and shuck kind of an operation where literally you can go ahead and implement a certain technology and improve. Rapidly or so it is, it is going to take certain levels. I I'll, I'll you. I'll draw an interesting parallel. And Internet was evolving companies where a lot of skeptic about you know customers going online and placing their orders. And this was we are we I mean I was a big skeptic of it I said like I would never use my bank card or a credit card to order products online today it is more of a reality and we had to cross that big.
And do you think the same process or? You know, pathway is for the to ensure that the selected technology gave the organization and competitive advantage.;Jump leapfrog that approach. But it took some time in understanding, so the way it happened is probably you have an incremental improvement towards this adoption and I think technology adaptation in, in, in every industry has its own limitations and time bound effect which again is going to be the same thing here and and plus in 4.0 as well. And another major impact is the impact of leadership with any successful implementation of technology. I think the role of leadership is pivotal in this case because until or unless there is a full commitment to transitioning to a newer ways to do business and improved ways of actually transacting and and and and. Dealing with the situation leader, the role of leadership is very, very critical in. And ensuring successful adoption of supply chain for.
What do you think? What in your opinion, when, when, when is an implementation of technology successful for the organization?;When can you claim that there is a success due to the implementation of technology support this.
what do you think if you, if you were the person who is? Who is responsible for implementing supply chain 4.0 and then traditional supply chain which where the topics you would tackle first and what would a road map look like briefly?;Well, of course, any implementation of technology requires us to demonstrate efficiency of, you know, operations or improved performance or probably anything which can be measured and showed. Very important, a sustainability of that performance is very important. So meaning that, yes, adoption of a certain technology has improved the processes. But over a long period of time, if you are able to sustain and grow that performance. Only then I can claim that this is a successful, you know way forward because superficially many organizations kind of implement a certain technology and then probably for a short periods of time they can see the the quick impact, but they are not able to sustain after a year or maybe after a couple of years when you go back it is not the same level of impact which they envisioned and so I wouldn't claim that to be a success. So the success actually depends on the fact of. Sustainable performance over long periods of time in adapting and evolving over this implementation. In my organization, assuming so, I'm going to answer this question as you with with certain caveats and assumptions, one is basically assuming that if I'm planning to implement a host of new technologies to improve my supply chain processes, how would I go go about doing it? Or what is the road map for doing it as as I said earlier, implementation of these technologies do not have a clear definitive road map. Currently there is no road map. And it is kind of like what I call the Columbus approach. Every organization has its own peculiarities in terms of the challenges they have with their supply chain. For example, manufacturing organizations in a certain industry vertical might have a certain aspect relating to their transportation and logistics part. Maybe the production bill is very optimized, there is no. It's already highly automated in such a way that you don't need the impact of these technologies, right? And if you take the same example with another industry vertical, let's say for example in healthcare. You know the impact of supply chain 4.0 could be very different even within two organizations within the same industry vertical. It's going to be very, very different because. Each individual organization has its own unique challenges and depending on the capability, there is very difficult it. It is going to be very difficult to generalize and develop a broader framework for adaptation or adoption of supply chain 4.0. Basically what I mean to say is that each individual organization has to craft their own Rd maps in it is it is very difficult to kind of develop a generalized case for this. So if I were to do it in my organization, the first questions first is that I will go after the most painful, difficult pain processes and that basically gives me an advantage to show that if if I could solve the most potential difficult problems in the existing setup,then I could try other places where it could improve and show performance. There is no point in actually automating or improving an existing you know process which is already functioning well. And my impact of the implementation of the technology is going to bring in small delta improvements, incremental improvements. It's not gonna. It's not gonna make any difference for us or for any for that matter, that our organization. So I would always say go after the low hanging fruit, the most troublesome pain point problems, identify them and characterize them properly to see which technology will have an impact and why more importantly, why you have to. You know, look into these specific processes, the motivation and and the culture most importantly. Every industry vertical has a very different culture, so there is a lot of influence of how cultural interpretations also impact the implementation. Rd maps as well. For example, if in if you bring in automation in in Southeast Asian countries people assume that this automation is going to drive their workforce out of you know. Out of their working conditions, so there will be a lot of hostilities and resistance, but if you could bring about. The change by demonstrating the value proposition saying look it's not about displacing the Labor because this is again a big impact on explainable AI engine models. People assume that it's going to displace the labor force. Well, actually, that's not the case. In fact, it is going to enhance the performance rather than displace the workforce. I always say, you know, AI is not about just, you know. Making things faster or better. It's just about making sure that there is a level of human intelligence involved in this implementation. Otherwise it is. It is subjective, highly subjective in terms of implementation. So I think I think in broader sense. It's important for organizations to understand how to go about doing it. How does that meet customer goals? How does that improve my profitability? How does this impact overall performance of the supply chain? So I think they have to evaluate this across multiple dimensions before in, in them in the implementation technology implementation process.Every industry vertical has a very different culture, so there is a lot of influence of how cultural interpretations also impact the implementation. Rd maps as well. For example, if in if you bring in automation in in Southeast Asian countries people assume that this automation is going to drive their workforce out of you know. Out of their working conditions, so there will be a lot of hostilities and resistance, but if you could bring about. The change by demonstrating the value proposition saying look it's not about displacing the Labor because this is again a big impact on explainable AI engine models. People assume that it's going to displace the labor force. Well, actually, that's not the case. In fact, it is going to enhance the performance rather than displace the workforce. I always say, you know, AI is not about just, you know. Making things faster or better. It's just about making sure that there is a level of human intelligence involved in this implementation. Otherwise it is. It is subjective, highly subjective in terms of implementation. So I think I think in broader sense. It's important for organizations to understand how to go about doing it. How does that meet customer goals? How does that improve my profitability? How does this impact overall performance of the supply chain? So I think they have to evaluate this across multiple dimensions before in, in them in the implementation technology implementation process.Every industry vertical has a very different culture, so there is a lot of influence of how cultural interpretations also impact the implementation. Rd maps as well. For example, if in if you bring in automation in in Southeast Asian countries people assume that this automation is going to drive their workforce out of you know. Out of their working conditions, so there will be a lot of hostilities and resistance, but if you could bring about. The change by demonstrating the value proposition saying look it's not about displacing the Labor because this is again a big impact on explainable AI engine models. People assume that it's going to displace the labor force. Well, actually, that's not the case. In fact, it is going to enhance the performance rather than displace the workforce. I always say, you know, AI is not about just, you know. Making things faster or better. It's just about making sure that there is a level of human intelligence involved in this implementation. Otherwise it is. It is subjective, highly subjective in terms of implementation. So I think I think in broader sense. It's important for organizations to understand how to go about doing it. How does that meet customer goals? How does that improve my profitability? How does this impact overall performance of the supply chain? So I think they have to evaluate this across multiple dimensions before in, in them in the implementation technology implementation process.
Which Industry 4.0 technologies are currently being used in the supply chain?;So. Yes, we can do the same thing. Those are the three big blocks, classic AI applications from document recognition, which you have just mentioned, both delivery notes and order confirmations, are in use, right up to the fact that we also have our own, our own Big Data area, with which we develop our own algorithms. Large Language Models work, for example, we have voice bots in use, which provide assistance both internally and externally, for example as digital product advisors. That's just a very brief example, so also pricing. We have pricing, algorithms that find the ideal price for the purchase situation, right up to the fact that we use shipping or packing robots in the warehouse, logistics area, robotics, which we have, very 7 different boxes, sizes in the standard and a few robots that put the ideal on a pallet as a very simple application. We are now in the next step. Use picking robots, which practically pick and place the goods from certain picking areas into the package. Now just 2 use cases from logistics? Of course we now have, even if we are expanding the field further into IOT, we have recently also become manufacturers in the case of battery-powered machines and of course we now also have IoT modules that feed data from these machines into our ecosystem, so what torque is the cordless hammer drill currently running at? How often has it drilled? How often has it screwed? All this information that we naturally use as users in order to generate added value from customers, it is about the topic of early detection for maintenance, predictive maintenance and all of these topics are one area, but of course also to offer the customer added value, perhaps also to bill at some point. After how many holes has the machine drilled? And you pay for the boulecker and not for the machine, so that's always the case. The special spectrum io T - we are certainly still at the beginning, but... The greatest focus for these new technologies is clearly in the AI ​​area, if you can put it specifically on the data track Big Data, on algorithms, we are doing an incredible amount there, especially in the direction of the customer. Next best activity means I try to predict in advance which product which service the customer needs next?
Yes, perfect, thank you very much and for example with this, with the picking robot that you mentioned, is there perhaps also a bundling with AI, so that it can then learn how best to drive?;Yes, that's exactly where the great added value arises when you combine these new technologies. Now we're talking about quantum computing, but quantum computing is also a technology that will come at some point - for many people it's still a long way off, but combined with AI it's of course a huge option, but also a huge danger when you think about security issues, cyber security. The malicious ones naturally have an opportunity that they don't have today. You think of the encryption algorithms that can be cracked as a result, so yes, in robotics too, great added value arises when this highly complex control software is combined with AI and learns as a result.
When implementing these technologies, did you follow a certain order? Or did it just happen as the technology came along?;Well, the order now means whether we have systematically scanned the market. I would say, we'll start first, I would say so nicely. I would say that logistics has naturally placed a strong focus on robotics. In the internal organization, everything that has to do with sales, we have always done so. Actually, for 78 years now. Now we started in 2017, with the first big data data scientists, so we have been heavily involved in the AI ​​topic for 7 years. If we now understand AI as machine learning again. Yes, and of course we ran it in parallel and at some point we noticed that this technology can of course generate even more added value if you combine it, as you have just mentioned, and the same applies to IOT, of course, if I now add AI algorithms or machine learning to the data that comes in, so we now have the data lake in the background, where you bring this data together and recombine it or apply algorithms to it. That is where the real potential naturally unfolds, right, if you combine it. But it was only in the last 23 years that we realized that we needed to bring it all together again. Dissolving the data silos, I think that is also the challenge when you talk about these industrial technologies 4.0, as you said, in other words that we create the prerequisites for the company to be able to do so. This inevitably brings us to the topic of data and I think that is the biggest challenge: making these data worlds available, modeling these data streams, perhaps also taking data protection into account. We also have a few other issues, so it is a new world that we have to deal with.
Island solutions work really well, everything that already works for them. The fact that the bridges between the islands are there is still a big problem for many companies.;Exactly, and the panacea is not to hire as many data scientists or automation experts or robotics programmers as possible, but the art lies in having people - and that is a rare, how should I say, skill that is not that common on the market - who can think of and build these large data models, and it is not an explicit IT discipline either. You need people who can do both. Business Developing Understanding, developing the business model further, and people who understand IT infrastructure. Most of the time they don't speak the same language, and the art is to have people who are there or who can speak both. I say to myself, exactly people who understand the business model and IT, can speak the language, and on the other hand IT experts who also understand the business model, and that is the crux of the matter, developing or having these people.
what characteristics of your supply chain have now been improved by these technologies that we have just discussed?;So of course, we are currently working on it, I told you, this picking robot. It naturally speeds up the delivery of goods in our value chain towards the customer. It is a big move, it will be a big move, because it means we are decoupling ourselves. Today, you need a lot of human hands to get a package from the logistics area. And we are decoupling ourselves because it means we can automate a lot more with this robotics, with this technology, that helps us to scale there. Yes, you can now find it bad that we are no longer so dependent on people, but it also helps us to react much more to special situations. That is a bottleneck, robotics solves that, without me having to set up an extra shift or do a night shift or a Saturday shift, I have completely new options. Clearly for us towards the market, so our contracts Power is being supported by my Tuesday because we are sending digital impulses to our contact points. We have a branch organization, we have 600 branches in Germany that actually get impulses in real time from the other contact points, which are prioritized after being filtered by AI, and this is not the simple thing that you are probably familiar with from other companies, where I say that if someone has put something in their shopping cart, then someone will also see it in the shop, in Flensburg or in Target or wherever. No, these are things like this: if someone in our online shop has looked at the product for 4 minutes on a certain landing page and then turned left twice, then the AI ​​knows that this pattern, this click pattern, is highly relevant and that is of course an area that helps us generate revenue, i.e. sales opportunities. On the procurement side, we are not quite there yet, i.e. when it comes to running supplier screening or procurement algorithms. Today, there is also the possibility of conducting negotiations using AI, but we haven't yet found the right way for us, because at the end of the day, we are convinced that people still negotiate with people. But of course, scheduling already runs with AI using similar parameters, but it doesn't yet have the same penetration as it does now in the sales and marketing sector.
And how would you briefly define the word supply chain or the term Supply Chain 4.0?;Yes, I would go further - I don't know how you are, there are specialists like you who define supply chain, but for me it is the one that covers the entire value chain, which is not just on the supplier side, but I think also towards the customer from my point of view. The digitization of this broadly means increasing efficiency - for me that is Supply Chain 4.0 - without leaving people out, without taking people out, but rather the repetitive activities, the hard work that the machine can do better. Supply chain technology 40 can do better. Practically automating them and allowing people in this chain to concentrate on the value-creating activities, namely interaction with customers, interaction with suppliers.
Yes, so to speak, to relieve people of their burden so that they can concentrate on the crucial things that cannot be supported by technology,;Yes, because we live in a time in which people no longer want to do these activities in the long term. So some kind of data-collecting system, giving information over the phone, looking things up, maintaining Excel tables? I don't think that supports the employer brand in the long term, in fact people don't want to do that anymore and that's where supply chain technology in 4.0 will help us.
Yes How? Is that the case? How are opportunities for technological progress identified? So which technologies on the market are perhaps suitable for further digitalization?;Yes, it's still - how should I put it? Not as structured as I would like it to be - I'm already answering your question based on whether there is a clear, structured approach, which is what the business areas are doing these days. Now I'll put it quite bluntly, because at the end of the day it's like this: through contacts, by keeping things open, through conferences, through some kind of big thing - yes, there are external conferences that you go to and see what's available. But that's the way it's mainly driven today. From my point of view, however, it will make a difference in the future how companies manage to destructure things. I've just given an example with quantum technology - quantum computing - of course it's still a long way off today, but we have to think about what that means for our process landscapes when this technology is widely available. And that's exactly what we did 23 years ago with blockchain technology, for example, because at some point we said to ourselves, yes, what? Where are the areas of application? And we have come to the conclusion that we don't see any great leverage at the moment. There are isolated use cases where you can use a blockchain. We have decided for ourselves that there is currently no great added value in it, so we have put it on hold and I think that this is exactly the issue that every company needs to go through systematically in the coming years. So we are always scanning, constantly scanning. What is new? Assessment and then simply coming to the conclusion: should we go into the technology or does it not have any added value at the moment? I think that very few people today can put that into a real, structured approach - including us - we do the business on a drop-in basis.
With these Industry 4.0 technologies that are now available in the company, did it all arise from a problem analysis and we now need a picking robot or was it more the case that the picking robots were perhaps presented at a conference and then it was said, okay, we'll bring them into our company?;I think, at the end of the day, if we're honest, it's a mix of both, because if you look at the Jet GPT development in November 22 or whenever that was, we weren't actively looking for large language models, but they came along. It was such a big technological leap that it triggered a small disruption practically everywhere. Process landscapes were questioned because there was a technological disruption, which will keep reoccurring in the future. We can't look into a crystal ball, but it will happen somewhere, and I think something like quantum computing, when it's widely available, will also be a small disruption. But if you take a look, cloud computing and other technological leaps have led to new possibilities suddenly becoming available and people have actively tried to exchange ideas about these new possibilities in conferences to see what others are doing with AI. I think it's a mix of both, but now you can only say that you're going out there. And if you're honest, there's also the other side to the technological change that we're constantly subject to, that, as I said, we have a technological disruption and we have to react now. We have to evaluate, that means that for our business model.
Yes, and was there perhaps a trigger for now, a certain technology, that somehow there was a certain trigger, perhaps in the past?;There is the basic issue that we are in, as I say consciously, international competition in a globalized world, that we in Germany have certain location disadvantages when you look at personnel costs, I know and all entrepreneurs know that in order to remain competitive. Worldwide we have to make sure that we handle our processes more efficiently, perhaps like international competitors, out of this necessity I know that I need a digital transformation for many process landscapes and I said it earlier the art is to hand over recurring, simple activities to the machine and to rely on people for value-creating customer, supplier interaction or whatever, and out of necessity you are constantly in search mode you like to pick up everything you come across and that is a small example, like document recognition. There have been reliable models for maybe 34 years, and we were actively looking for them. The Large Language Model topic actually came up overnight with Jet Gbt and of course, we already had an intent-based chatbot back then, which we still have today, which I am practically training. There is a question and I have to explain to it, which answer fits? With Large Language Models I naturally have a completely different option, so that has practically enabled us overnight to do things that we couldn't do before. So that's why I think the need for this is how we come out of this topic of competitiveness - how are they changing our business models? Speed ​​- customers today often want real-time solutions. At the end of the day, a person can't always do that, so we have to make use of these technologies ourselves and have to look into them, so that's where these requirements come from and I think what I said before is also a good reason to take the people who work for us with us, not to scare them, not to arouse fears about AI and all other technologies, to say hey, we're expanding your workplace? We're enriching it with new activities that are actually much more fun for you, it's also a necessity to deal with these technologies. In competition and change, they will tell us at some point, well, I'm convinced that the talented people will choose the companies that have the best technological landscape. And not the companies that are currently lagging behind somewhere.
For example, we now have different robot systems that cost different amounts. The area of ​​application may be different, the implementation effort may be different, and how we decide which technological option or which improvement needs to be introduced may be different.;That's a good example, let's stick with robotics. Back then, for example, the two big providers - let's give an example - everyone knows Kuka and we decided on Phu because Kuka has a kinetic background. So there are sometimes data and security aspects too. Availability in this new globalized world is the basis, just as we have in the cloud environment and the debates about where the data is located? Should we go for European cloud systems, should we go for American ones, these are all issues that play a role, so this globalized world also has an influence on technology in many facets there are often only American solutions, to put it this way, so when you look at Large Language Models now, everyone is talking about Alev Alpha, but it is more or less obvious that they probably won't be able to keep up with this development, so we're looking at where there is security for our business model. In other words, data security, availability of this technology and of course we also have how we can adapt this to our company context? In other words, we want to operate this cloud system with a certain level of security. We don't want a large language model that uses the Internet and gives our data outwards, so these are key issues that we use to select our providers.
If we now move on to implementation, do you have a certain implementation scenario for the selected technologies?;So the implementation scenario is for us in this sense now, if I understand correctly. Today, we have our own IT department as a service provider, which of course also takes on many steps as a service provider, which means that in the implementation phase alone you have to choose a project approach between business people and IT - I am absolutely convinced of that. That only works with teamwork, if you only take business, you will probably have an isolated solution - at the end of the day, we will only take IT. Do you get a technically highly sophisticated solution that ignores use cases? Both are very important and then of course, now that is of course an overused word - I don't want to use Scrum now either. But agile approaches, where you fail again and again in a certain rhythm, as iteratively as possible, because traditional project approaches with a milestone plan over 5 months don't help them, because with these technologies the wheel turns so fast that you have to stop again and again, sometimes even have to ask questions, I do make-up myself, where you were still at the beginning with make, the wheel could be turning again in the next 2 months, because the world out there is faster, so those are the challenges for me, teamwork, business IT and. Does an agile project essay have to be?
and what were the requirements in your company so that Industry 4.0 could be introduced at all.;Well, you need people who deal with it, it doesn't happen on the side in operational business. That is an important prerequisite, I'll give you the example again in 2017 we set up a big data team in Berlin without it we wouldn't be in AI today, in algorithms as far as necessary, i.e. with a medium budget. Anyone who thinks they can do that with the normal IT budget is mistaken. That also means making investments. It's not just costs, they have to invest in systems, for example, that they didn't even have on their radar before a data lake, that was for our organization 8 years ago, you could do something with data and lake but of course no one knew what a data lake was. So in robotics, a robot that can pick? It costs a bit more money than maybe a pack of robots, so you have to invest, you have to release, you have to be prepared to accept that technology is a dead end, so saying OK, we've invested, we've stopped, we've looked into it, that doesn't help us, it was a nice way, but do we have to stop again? So be prepared to invest money that perhaps doesn't immediately bring added value and have the patience to see that the return on investment (ROI) is traditionally there or also the time to market, i.e. when will I notice it in our market or when will I feel it? Patience is needed, because not every technology, i.e. the path until we were able to use machine learning, took four years.
Have the technologies in your company replaced the existing processes or rather improved them?;Hehe good question. These processes, technologies, whatever you want to call it. So I'll take the example of a picking robot, which will replace human beings to a certain extent. You call it human, I'll take the technology of a machine learning algorithm that helps us serve customers better. It will improve processes, but it won't replace the actors involved. I'll take document software that reads incoming order emails and translates the SAP. This activity tends to replace not people, but this activity. That's very important because the people who type in there today are worried about losing their jobs. Do you always have to tell the story correctly? The activity is replaced, not the person. Then we use a different function to qualify in order to be able to do customer interaction better. What is a really big problem with these technologies is that I feel that in my organization. Is that the case with our voice bot, which today naturally leads to the internal sales department receiving fewer calls in internal communication with the sales department because the voice pod takes over many tasks like sending me another delivery confirmation, sending the customer another confirmation or something like that, and as a result there is less traffic coming after them? Today that leads to people simply perceiving it more as a comfort zone. Oh, I have made things a bit simpler, I'm not so scheduled anymore, but they are not using this time for new activities that create added value and that is exactly the crux of the matter, as I have to fight with my organization today, to be consistent when a new technology takes over a task. In the previous world and to say, well, we're not going to do that anymore. I still have parallel worlds like this today, both ways are possible, so I can still call a person and say please send me the delivery confirmation, then the person does it, then maybe says please use the voice bot next time, but the consequence is not there and that is a very important point, when we use these new technologies, we naturally have to be careful to remain consistent. Don't allow any duplication of work.
Yes, that would be the next question and one of the next questions then, how do they ensure the use of the sustainable use principle, so to speak?;So, what we are doing today is of course - I can give you an example of Pico, our voice bot, which has been in use for over two years now. In Germany we have around 3,000 salespeople and one and a half thousand employees in the branches, so 4,500 people who are now from outside, who are not at the Knzelsau location and are part of the headquarters. The question from outside, of course, keeps coming up: help me, I have an issue here where he has to support me. He currently has 60,000 interactions (conversations) a month, so one interaction in a conversation, that's what our employee replaces, so that's a lot, but what have we made of it? Voice pod, yes, and that's a lot, and we know for every activity that he does, we've recorded how much time this saves in office work, so we know that he actually replaces 5 entire employees every month. That's exactly the point, that's my story that I've already told you, we are very transparent about what the technologies can do and how they support us. But we still lack the consequence of translating that into new value creation, because of course we admit that there are probably still 40,000 interactions over the phone that can actually do that, so, so, we'll keep this activity in the activity profile, actually I could take it out, but no, people are workers, people with each other and they know Wilhelm, Karl and they want to call Karl and not talk to the show-off and we still have to work on that. Then we have to convince people, tell stories, take them on the journey, get the mindset right.
What does change management look like for you?;Yes, that is an exciting area because people naturally have a lot of anxieties and insecurities and there is only one thing that helps - we have to go to the workplace with them and discuss the new way of working. And training - that is the only way that is currently emerging for us. I told you, we are only really getting started on this. To raise more awareness or attention to this issue at the beginning? At the beginning you could really say that we made the error in thinking: yes, it is actually logical, no, if I have a bot it is logical that it will call, no, it is not, and you really have to answer the phone with the sales person, with our sales team, with Nitras, with our inside staff, spokespeople and say, people, that only works if I show added value. I can then say, hey, you no longer need this annoying Excel table and you no longer need to make two clicks and send out files, and that five or 50 times a day - let's be honest - we're going to enter into dialogue, that's what you're satisfied with. You're doing the work, and then we'll get people excited about it. To open up and say, OK, I'm working with you - and we like to talk about enthusiasm networks, because two people in the team do it and suddenly they say, that's cool, that works, or I'm not going to do that anymore - so we try to get the others on board. So, it's a laborious process, but it only works with leadership, with leadership getting involved directly on site, helping to shape things and immersing themselves in the processes.
When can you consider a technology to have been successfully introduced?;I think that the example of robotics makes it very clear, I mean, it is directly measurable, I told you if I don't need a late shift because the robots keep running and pecking at night, is that OK? Of course it gets more difficult with something like what I have just described to you with the voice bot Pico, from my point of view it is successful. It works with sixty thousand interactions a month or seven hundred thousand conversations a year, which it has, so you need a few people to take over that otherwise. On the other hand, I am missing the last step and that is why I would say, in the sense of my experience today, it is successful when we then also generate activities, freedom, new added value and not only efficiency, but new added value is created by having more capacity in customer interaction, by being able to look after customers better and in a more value-adding way. Then really, then we have these technologies really helped us one step, so if you want to put it that way, are there two ways of creating value, efficient efficiency on the one hand, generating added value, expanding the business model on the other?
If you had a supply chain in front of you, completely detached from all the issues, and this was a typical supply chain with the typical problems that arise today, what would be the first problems that you would tackle with the help of Industry 4.0?;From my point of view. Transparency, information flow, data modeling, that means, it's a bit nebulous now, maybe described in a roundabout way, but you have to get clear process data flows and I deliberately say data flows because without data flows you can't use the technologies we've talked about and today, no matter which company you go to, you find historically grown data silos? I don't speak to each other and it will be first, depending on what the supply chain looks like. From which perspective you focus, then lay basic data modeling behind it and then in the second step you can set up technologies.
Which resources do you consider essential for the implementation of Supply Chain 4.0?;AT-related resources and teamwork, I would say IT people who understand business and business people who understand IT, and teamwork is the best prerequisite without these resources. I can't just rely on external sources and say, eh, I'll get a few consultants and a few IT service providers in-house. That misses the point. The topic is far too important and valuable for that, I have to immerse myself in the team and I need people who understand a business model and who understand your own IT infrastructure, that's it. OK, I would say that a certain level of competence is required, I don't want to say that you have to buy in some technologies, but your own people are best at adapting them.
Yes, yes, and the last question: which skills would you say are essential for supply chain 4.0 implementation?;A certain ability to translate - what do I mean by that, if I am an IT fool working in an IT-related environment, then I always have to know when I see the emergence of new technologies, what does that mean for the business model of my parent company or my participating companies? Conversely, when I am out and about in business and have use cases that pose challenges for me, I keep making cross-references, aren't there ways of solving this better in terms of data or technology? That means we need a great deal of curiosity, openness, these are skills that I need and I need people who don't just make change, but who are willing to get involved in transformation processes - difference chains. For me, change is about optimizing what already exists. For me, transformation is about being able to think in new ways - beyond today's solutions.
Which Industry 4.0 technologies are currently being used in your supply chain?;We have many, many examples. For example, our entire production supply chain is of course controlled entirely by SAP, our ERP system, but we also have, for example, what I would see under Industry 40. Our work instructions, our employees on the production line all have a screen where they see their work instructions more or less in a video. That means they work in a 3D model, where you can see the screws flying in, then I press next step, then I see, okay, now comes the next sheet of metal that I have to screw on. I can rotate the whole thing in three dimensions and the whole thing is linked to SAP. That also means that the sheets of metal in there, for example, or screws or motors or whatever are linked to SAP, have SAP numbers, and if I replace a screw in our SAP, for example, because it has a different hardness and has a different SAP number, there is an automatic comparison in the work instructions. They are automatically swapped plus a CAD comparison is made. Whether the dimensions are correct, so that I have not changed the screw, for example? We use that a lot, then for operational data collection - that is, how long do employees need to produce certain assemblies - we have a shopfloor management tool, which is an app that we wrote ourselves, where employees enter data. Okay, this is the order I am currently producing - this is my start page, this is my end time, and the whole thing flows back into a dashboard where I can then see at the end - okay. A system needs no idea 1000 hours - how many hours did it take for me to attach the monitor to the system? How many hours did it take for me to calibrate the laser - do all such topics flow back with it? We are currently working on it, we have a very, very large amount of information flows and information that our employees on the line need, and we are currently working on providing them with a chatbot that can access a certain data pool in order to find information more quickly. That means, for example, I, who has little knowledge, go into the line and say okay, I have to screw on pump XY now but I have no idea where, I don't know straight away where in which work instructions I should look and which version and whatever, and the chatbot takes over this question and says, this is your pump, you have to do this with it and this is the source we are taking it from, is currently being implemented. These are actually the main 4.0 topics. We are not so closely linked to machines because we are purely a final assembly, or we are purely an assembly. We assemble around 17,000 parts for a system, but we don't have any CNC milling machines here, for example. There are no lathes here, no welding robots or anything else,For example, they are not linked now. Previously in my area, where we manufactured parts, the systems themselves that produced them were linked to a database and in this way they received commands from the database and also transmitted statuses to a database. The systems themselves were then really linked.
Yes, that definitely sounds very exciting, as you mentioned with the 3D construction documents, so to speak, and then these changes and then also the chatbot, which can be included later on, you have other bundling of Industry 4.0, where perhaps these are two technologies, so to speak, that are used together.;Yes, I would say in the supply chain. Not more specifically. We have it. Even in parts manufacturing, where we otherwise have Industry 4.0, we haven't made much progress.
  Did you follow a specific order when implementing the technologies? And if so, what criteria did you use to make that decision?;Sure, SAP and what else? And the work instructions? But I wouldn't say that he directly followed certain sequences and there is no principle behind it. It's where is the need, where is the vision, where do we want to go and what steps are necessary to achieve this and how can they be implemented?
And which features in the supply chain have been most improved by these technologies?;So what comes out best or most is of course the flow of information and as a result the speed of production has been increased and efficiency has been increased. Employees no longer have to search for so long until they have the information. And the production times per system have therefore gone down.
That means you can concentrate more on putting things together than on research, so to speak. And what challenges do you have right now in the supply chain in production that require a technological solution in the future?;Correct. As I said, the chatbot, which we are now going to include, we have a lot. I would say a lot of documents, a lot of data and a lot of data that is also recorded twice. This can be simplified automatically. For example, I don't have to write a serial number on each test report, it's enough if I write it once and then it is transferred, rather than doing it individually on 26 test reports. There are also challenges because we have employees from up to those who are about to retire. I would say trainees in their twenties, i.e. those who are not even in their twenties, and of course there is the acceptance and the connection, how do I make that acceptance or do I have the acceptance for all employees that they use a chatbot, for example? It won't be a big issue for 20-year-olds, but for 60-year-olds, I really have to convince them to use it, or we try to make it as simple as possible. Now we use Teams a lot. For example, when we integrate the chatbot into Teams, it's like another employee that doesn't actually exist.
How would you define supply chain 4.0 for yourself? In very brief terms.;Put very briefly from my perspective of controlling and managing the supply chain. If I imagine a picture, it is the big control center: I am at a control center and can see the status of production in detail on the screen. I have digitally mirrored production, I can see everywhere how far I have come, what my delivery times are, where are the problems? I can fully record all of this digitally.
How do you recognize the opportunity for technological progress?;Good question. We are a very, very young company, we are more like a startup, a startup that has grown up, anyone who has an idea and has technological progress can implement it more or less? They are allowed to implement it, there are of course regulations, but a very, very high degree of freedom is allowed, so that you say, OK, most of the time the paths show that your idea or your technological progress offers an advantage for the company. Do a small flagship project and then it will be implemented if it is worthwhile for the company.
Cool, and did your Industry 4.0 initiatives arise from problem analyses or was it more of a case of once a solution was found and then looking to see whether there were any problems with this solution.;Mainly to solve problems, of course, but we also look at the market a lot. We go to a lot of trade fairs and since our technology is already in a very digital format - I just want to say that we build our systems ourselves using 3D printers - many topics naturally come up very quickly for us when we see, OK, there's a solution on the market where we were perhaps not aware of a problem, and we really say, hey, we could be better at that.
   and how do you recognize the need for technological progress?;We notice that if we want to scale, we grow very, very strongly. And when I look at the company where I started with 70 employees, I knew everyone by name and all the information flowed very easily. Now we have 700 employees instead of 70 and I no longer know everyone by name and we have to adhere to processes and it is precisely with these processes that we see, okay, this is where the problem lies, we need technological advances. Advances really have to be made manually, a status update cannot be fully automatic. An example of this comes from my old area, we worked on components. We manufactured components and they reached a certain status and we simply attached more or less like GPS trackers to them. And when they passed a door, we knew that they had to go into quality control and the person responsible for quality control automatically received an email because this component had just passed the door. Yes, said someone sat down and told people 20 times a day to come over, look at the component, do a quality check, can now be done fully automated because they simply set up a geofence where this component then moved to.
Do you have processes that carry out regular technology scouting, outside of what we're doing here for dinner?;We have a Continuous Improvement department here in the company, or rather not in the company, that is responsible for really tackling problems and dealing with them on an ongoing basis. How can we develop further, from small things, there are new versions of SAP to all the initiatives. How can we train employees, for example, we use a lot of Power Apps Power BI from Microsoft, how can we train employees to generate dashboards themselves? How do we bring new technology into the company, especially to optimize processes? This entire department takes care of that.
Yes, and who else is involved in the decision or responsible for what will now be implemented?;Mostly the finance department. Because it usually costs a certain amount of money, and then the question will arise: OK, when will I get my return on investment? And if I can credibly prove it? Is the final decision financially made?
Was there ever a specific trigger for you to implement a certain technology?;More for conversion, I would say. I know, in the past. For example, we implemented a CRM, a customer relations management system, because in the past in sales did you work more or less with cells? And at some point, even with 5,600 customers who are actual customers and maybe three times as many potential customers, it becomes very, very difficult to keep track of everything. And what are the connections and which customer already has a system from us? And at what location does he actually already have this system? That was actually a trigger where we said OK, this is no longer manageable. And we need a CM system where we can see, OK, customer XY has a system in Italy, Spain and the USA and they should perhaps know about each other.
Do you work with partners? Whether it's other companies or consultants on the topic of Industry 4.0.;Mainly with other companies, who then usually provide us with software solutions.
Yes, and do you also look at competitors and what they are doing in this area?;Of course, we are always involved. Especially when it goes external, for example digital service or digital training. And what else? What do we look at the competitors, where do they stand, how do they implement the whole thing and do we also look at it in that area?
And if we come back to the technologies that are now to be introduced, how do you decide which technological possibilities are to be introduced and/or what improvements are needed?;Most of the time, the whole thing starts with a requirement - we are dealing with a problem, which at some point develops into a list of requirements. Then we look, OK, what solution is there? We find providers on the market who can give us a solution. Then purchasing usually gets involved, and there is always scouting. We have the obligation to look at at least three suppliers. Three solution providers with us, and they are then weighed against each other using various criteria, price, implementation, speed - all of these topics. And then a decision is made, OK, which supplier can supply us with the next solution - software solutions - Industry 40 solution?
  And which aspects of the supply chain would you say require the most technological improvements?;Currently the missing part tracking. We have our suppliers to know when which component is coming? And that is valid too. That is tracked in SAP. But is currently my one of my biggest issues to know? OK, despite the fact that the delivery date was said to be next Friday, to find out OK, it didn't come on Friday, maybe to know that early on and to work more closely with our suppliers and get information earlier.
Yes, and who is involved in the decision or responsible for it? Which problems will be addressed first?;That will be the Continuous Improvement department.
Yes, and would you say that is more of a results-oriented approach or an opportunity-oriented one?;Results-oriented.
And what? There are other motives besides the fact that the ROI should be as high as possible when selecting the technology.;Yes, in some cases the ROI is simply unbeatable most of the time. When is the money returned? That is really one of the biggest drivers, but we also look at what fits with the company culture, where the companies are located, where there is information security? All of that is taken into account.
Then I would now come to the part where it is a bit about implementation and the first question would be how do you implement the technologies you previously selected?;In terms of the process, an implementation plan is generally drawn up first so that you can see which horizon we are going into. We usually go into a test phase which is not in an environment with a selected group who can then test it. Then it goes to the initial users, it depends on how big it is, we say OK, we will train the users, who will then use it. Sometimes it can happen, if it is a very large piece of software or affects a lot of areas, that we train key accounts, we say OK, there is someone very well trained in each area who can then train them, then the employees are trained and can try it out in the test system and then the whole thing works somehow, once it is fully prepared, the whole thing goes live and is then usually supported by continuous improvement.
And who is involved in the decisions? What happens where exactly? Testing is involved and responsibility is also taken.;Is it really the Continuous Improvement Team?
What specific requirements were necessary in your company for the implementation of Industry 4.0?;Data creates everything that is in someone's head or written on some paper, has to be in some form in a database, even if it is an Excel table or something else, that information is available digitally somewhere. That is actually always the main requirement. Then there are usually interfaces, is the data available in some form? SAP, for example, is not always the easiest candidate. To really simply have data first, as I said, and to make data available.
Yes, and would you say that for you it is more the case that Industry 4.0 technologies improve existing processes or that these technologies replace the existing processes?;Ideally, replace. In reality, mainly improve.
Yes Do you have certain processes or systems that support implementation?;Not that I know of.
OK, and how do you deal with resources and capacities during implementation, in terms of technology and employees? And also financially.;This is usually planned in advance in the budget process, when we see that we have a very high potential for implementation in the CRM system, for example. New production planning tools or something else? So of course we have planned what the implementation will cost, what the license will cost? But also how many employees, how many hours will be spent on training, which PCS do we have to keep on hand, how long, how much time will we lose until the employee is as able to work as before? And only then does it become more efficient - we map this out in the budget process, where we simply say what topics are on the agenda for a whole year? For example, one year is our main business, we manufacture systems, but then we come up with the implementation of a certain software - we have just now also implemented 2 or 3 employees in total for this. And then we always plan the resources there too.
And no, just a quick change, how do you, as you mentioned earlier, demonstrate the willingness to change and the acceptance of technology? So how do you ensure that?;Mostly because we have a small lighthouse project - everything has to show somehow that we - that we show that it works and that it brings added value - that the employee understands it themselves. I can do my work faster and more efficiently and I benefit from it. We also try then. It doesn't always work, but that the employee also benefits from it. If he used to have to write something on a piece of paper, then at some point he has to hand the paper in. And now it is allowed - you have to enter it into the system. Does it make him faster, for example, or can he save himself time by trying to generate a benefit, that we have acceptance in this way - as I said, it doesn't always work sometimes or always in all areas - it is always an advantage for the company. But that means some areas have to work a little harder and some are relieved as a result. That can happen, but then we try to simply present the overall benefit better and that really helps if you have a small lighthouse project and say, look, this is where it worked, we took a look at this process chain and optimized it here. Why don't we want to do it like that everywhere?
Yes, how do you ensure that the technology you have used will remain efficient in the future?;A good question. Normally, this should be questioned regularly. I haven't really seen that this is ensured yet. So, of course, the problem occurs when something is slower than you would imagine, but there is no systematic check to see whether it is still efficient?
Yes, OK, and when it comes to employees, if you introduce a new technology, do you rely more on training existing employees or on hiring employees who perhaps already have the knowledge?;Training of existing employees plus yes, in individual areas, then we also hire for that, so if, for example, we need someone in development who has to know about CFD, i.e. fleet, dynamics or something else and they calculate that very clearly, we hire someone for that and not directly. That doesn't always work, but I would say 90% is through training.
And we have already talked about technology acceptance, but are there any other challenges you face when implementing Industry 4.0 technologies, outside of the financial one.;Well, financially of course, acceptance. Information security is a very, very high point that comes into play for us, because we also supply customer data to many critical industries. Where can this customer data go? How safe are we against cyber attacks? What happens to this data? That means everything that is information security and also IP security. Where do our patents go, where are some of them? Information is in there. This is a very, very high point that is being considered here.
Yes, and when it comes to implementing a technology, when would you say it is successful for you?;the moment it is implemented and maps a process more efficiently than it was before, i.e. at the point where we cross this apex and say we are no longer at the point where it takes a little longer but it will get better in the future, but we see it has become more efficient than before.
  OK, do you have a roadmap or are you using roadmapping techniques to implement your digitalization strategy?;Yes, there are certain roadmaps that are currently being implemented in large systems. This is not the case everywhere, but also this topic that I just mentioned with work instructions. The implementation takes 3 to 4 years until all production lines have really been covered by it.
And have you already planned something along the lines of improving or supporting an existing Industry 4.0 technology in the future with another Industry 4.0 technology?;I don't know right now, so it's very hypothetical. I can't think of an explicit case.
And if you were to start again in a company that does not yet have Industry 4.0 technologies and you were tasked with equipping the supply chain with these technologies, so to speak, and the supply chain has the usual supply chain problems, where would you start first?;Because that's where my focus is a little more. To present production digitally. To see what's happening in production and to make it analyzable. How long do we need, what are the quantities, what can we know, when are the employees overloaded, when are they underloaded? Making that visible is the very first point where I see OK, because I can increase employee satisfaction a lot with it. It's not good to leave it to them, not to leave it alone and to see exactly the same thing with machines. Where are the limits, what doesn't work? That would be the very first step to get an overview.
What resources are specifically needed for Industry 4.0? Are monetary resources essential, specifically in the area of ​​technology, IT employees?;Yes, and plus what you just mentioned, plus. Also employees who simply have a vision, those who say I want to drive this forward. If everyone is in their comfort zone and doesn't want to develop further and everything is fine as it is, nothing will happen. There have to be some and there have to be employees who want to drive this forward?
Yes, and how do you ensure this or how do you acquire this ability?;Because we have a relatively young team and we get to know a lot of students through their master's theses and also hire many directly from university, they often already have this with them. We see whether we have ambitious employees who want to move forward themselves, and we usually find that out in the interview.
Which Industry 4.0 technologies are currently being used in the supply chain in your company?;Yes, a few, now we have to see what we can include, what, what comes to mind at all. If I put it specifically. That is really, I think it is very manageable. I think we have. Not really what, ... Yes, because if you look now, as a consultant in the automotive industry I can definitely tell you that automation of assembly line delivery processes via driverless transport systems has become very widespread in recent years. That is also very widespread, now then. Is it Porsche in particular? You can also read about it. I think they have now gone back to a bit more internal warehousing in Leipzig. After a lot of outsourcing and then it was completely automated, so both an automatic small parts warehouse and an automatic pallet warehouse in at Porsche in Leipzig is certainly relatively good, which is widespread. Now there has been a bit of a change, well then it was about man, about automation, about automated layers, but where you still have man, about the goods, you actually have a lot of different pick by x technologies, whereby the one that works best is pick by light, which is either really stationary lamps, as we knew from 20 years ago or something like that, or now with laser pointers that then move along the ceiling, but what hasn't been established is that in all concepts, which are now more pick by boys or with shine or something like that, because with the glasses, it was the case that people simply got really dizzy and sick after a while. In the test - at least that was the status that I now have, I can tell you that it was like 2020 from 4 years ago, with me and at Porsche, Big By Boys is simply much harder to process cognitively than the light signal because they have longer article numbers. Yes, you have that, whatever. It is widespread that parts are received automatically via RFID from the supplier. Yes, I think these are the most important concepts that are now being used in the automotive industry. So if you can throw in some specific ones, then I can say yes, there is no such thing,or as is common practice but the RFID was already the most important thing I have to say, is now also implemented at Hanse with suppliers simply in a so that our Kanban We have containers can be sent directly to the supplier from the for standard parts via RFID?
And would you also say that certain bundling or combinations of certain technologies have occurred more frequently?;We use that too. I think. Yes, not really, you're more in a use case for use case implementation simply because of the. Yes, because I've never accompanied a greenfield factory, you would because many, many car manufacturers and suppliers already have lots of factories and you hear with the current sales figures that they've been overcapacity for a few years. In a brownfield factory they always have to do it bit by bit, simply to be able to implement the ongoing operation. And that's why it was more like use case for use case one after the other. The individuals, the individual technologies or the whole use cases in a greenfield factory. And now Tesla, what is putting it up there, is it different then? There is then of course the combination of all the use cases, which of course is ground in the implementation.
And? And when you build on this, where you implement things one after the other, is there a certain order that you could always observe or that you followed?;Yes, the sequence is normal, really, so you say what doesn't benefit from it? So normal, no, no, optimization? According to lean principles, you would normally do line back. That means you go from the point of consumption, from the construction site, on the assembly line, further down the supply chain, to the supermarket, to the warehouse, to the supplier, but that's not the case with the implementation of iPod 0 topics, instead it's actually the classic way. What has the fastest implementation speed and the highest impact, according to this matrix? What's at the top right and then in descending order?
Which features would you say are most improved by these technologies? So what are the first things we might look at and what should be improved?;"Yes, the main motivator is typically costs with most concepts now, especially when it comes to automation, it is of course personnel costs that are the main motivation. Then you try, I think another important point is simply stability in the processes; when you have automated something, yes, it does break down now and then, but that happens much less often than employees getting sick. Yes, that means you really do have stable, repetitive processes and process reliability. The second biggest motivator is adapting something like that and often speed and higher availability of processes - you wouldn't be able to do that with a manual process. Simply because you get spades with a typical, for example, typical automated warehouse, even during peak periods."
What challenges would you say are still there in the near future? That require technological solutions now.;Yes, I think what no company has managed to do so far, what I have seen and what I have read in the press, is the big challenge. These islands that you have made up of automated and digitalized processes in a digital strategy or in a completely networked system, yes, I think you are there. The first step would be complete networking and then a certain degree of autonomy of systems and at least the manufacturing companies. The ones that I have seen in the automotive sector, as I said, and in any case far from how they fail, is to link everything up sensibly and to make the systems easy to control and then to prepare them for such systems to control themselves, so that is certainly the biggest challenge. The second is certainly somehow. There is a lot of talk about artificial intelligence in the supply chain sector, but I have not seen much of it implemented in concrete terms, so that is for sure what the second challenge will be to use the potential of AI sensibly there, I would have said.
Yes, OK, and how would you then define a Supply Chain 4.0 in that sense.;Yes, for me a Supply Chain 4.0 has to be digitally networked and autonomous. Those would be the three most important criteria for me.
OK, then let's move on to the next part. How do you identify opportunities for technological advancement? So what's new on the market? Where?;Yes, now I personally subscribe to the relevant channels, right? Reading is the case, especially online formats, logimat is also what I know from the logistics colleagues, so logistics trade fairs are always important if you can really go into them in more detail. I was often in touch with experts on individual topics during the Daimler era, yes, that's how it is and of course the colleagues, well that's not the case for me personally in my role, but they also attend the relevant conferences, the 3 most important sources of information, I would say yes, wait and then of course ours too, really, when you have specific enquiries from suppliers, that they present concepts,
Yes, yes, and then? Building on this, the Industry 4.0 initiatives that you have always been able to observe up to now have arisen more from problem analyses. Or was it also the case that the technology came into the company and then we looked at where we could attack it now?;Both are really certain, both are things you come from, simply from a process perspective, it is a process that can be automated and then with ideas that you have seen, there is no good use case for us, but now companies like the OEMs had a very clear digitization mandate, the mindset was we want to digitize as much as possible and then the problem was that the technology is not yet mature or it is too expensive, that is really an economic use case, so Bern. Actually, clearly digitization for the sake of digitization itself, a bit like that, but I think it is aimed at the future? That is correct and even if you look at past examples, it has paid off for Tesla, for example, and that was definitely adopted there, and then it failed because we said, okay, that is going to be so expensive. The payback period is simply too long, that's why we are not doing it yet.
"If you look beyond the idea of ​​""we want to digitize everything,"" how would you say the need for this technological progress is determined? So where is the problem, where can we bring in technology?";So we do it through process analyses, through joint workshops, and we've now done something like that with us, and we've selected our next topics, which is where it's best? It simply makes the most sense to digitize, to automate, from a cost-effective and process perspective.
Yes, and then when these problems arise, do you have specific processes for tag scouting or how does it work? Which technology is selected?;No, there. That. I have to say that. We are probably at the point where it is not yet so process-oriented, it really runs through. Really lists that the department writes, which suppliers it can think of, which potential suppliers and our purchasing department supplements this with a market research. In the with their resources and that is how the text routing is actually done.
And who else is involved in the decisions and in the decisions or is responsible for what is now introduced and what is not.;In the classic cascade, this really goes through the specialist department and purchasing in the tried and tested way. We will calculate a use case and then a business case and then it goes to controlling and into the relevant company into management and there, depending on the value limit, then via the normal processes, so that means that with our size, many decisions really do end up in the yes, either with the plant manager of the respective plant or then also with the routing board outside of the top management level.
. Was there such a good thing? Putzmeister doesn't have that many technologies yet. But maybe there were triggers in the past for certain technology implementations? Something that made a big impact and then it was said, now we have to get started.;Oh, I see. We didn't bang, but we now have certain. Certain, for example, what we are currently introducing is digital monitoring of rotation angle torque in non-automated screwdriving processes. Yes, really with digital wrenches that send the signals via Bluetooth, that is what comes from quality considerations, because you simply say, okay, you can then improve the quality in the field. Sometimes we really do have the problem that certain screws are not tightened to the correct torque, and we can't prove that, and we try to capture that. The other topics come more from an economic point of view, so now what we are planning is a certain degree of automation, and that is then based on economic considerations.
Yes, and do you work now or in the past with consultants or other companies regarding Industry 4.0?;We are currently working, yes, we are working on these topics mostly directly with the suppliers, but it could also be companies that buy it in and are just implementation partners. But we don't have a management consultancy that can advise us on this and yes, we are already doing that ourselves and then working directly with the technology partners.
To what extent do you observe competitors, perhaps from the same industry? How far along are they now?;Well. Yes, in the industry. Those are probably the worse examples when it comes to industrialization, so we probably still compare well because as the world market leader we are one of the largest companies, but I think there are two important things. We tend to look at comparable industries, for example agricultural machinery technology or something like that, which are more advanced, which also generate more sales and therefore have more financial means to implement concepts. That is certainly important, so more related industries but not exactly ours and the second topic is our Chinese parent company, the Sani Corporation, which is the fifth largest construction machinery manufacturer in the world and they are much further ahead when it comes to digitization and Industry 40 in China and some concepts are at least being tested from there.
Yes, we have already touched on it a little bit, what are the problems that are being tackled. But are there other factors? Perhaps why and where? How are decisions made about technological possibilities and the need for improvement.;Not quite understood, can you make a mistake?
So how is a decision made at Putzmeister? Or maybe in the past? Which technological options are suitable now and where there is room for improvement. You've already touched on something similar, but again in more depth and again in a little more depth.;Triangle I would say triangle C quality cost, delivery service and at least one of the dimensions I then have to improve by using technology. The improvement has to, if I somehow, I then try to evaluate this improvement in monetary terms and I have to, then I have to calculate it from an economic point of view, so that is definitely the side for me, everything that is internal. Of course I try to show my customer. What digitization options do I offer my customer? Yes, now on the machine or in the service or something like that. There, there is the case that we naturally want to keep up with the times and simply offer what makes sense for the customer benefit, without having to prove that it is profitable. Yes, but of course everything that is available in terms of digitization, we already offer a lot of digitization on the machine, on the product, and of course that has to be paid for by the customer at some point. But of course you also try to be more experimental and with the internal Industry 4.0 technologies in the factory, it's based on the criteria of cost, quality or improvement of the delivery service, so improvements in speed are of course also worth something, that would also be a case where you would invest.
If we now move towards implementation, what is the situation? Perhaps now at Putzmeister? A way in which the selected technology is then implemented.;We will try, we will try as quickly as possible. To get into testing quickly, we really try to find a way to test on a small scale with our partner as quickly as possible. Certainly something that we will definitely pursue. Then we will try to work well with SAP and with our EFP system. Good cooperation is certainly an important direction that is always discussed when it comes to Industry 4.0 technologies and then, yes, whoever tests for a workstation or a line, rolls it out to the factory and then rolls it out to the other factories around the world. So those would be the two stages that you typically take.
Who is involved and responsible for the decision as to how it is done now?;That is then the respective operations department, so depending on what you are talking about, always sure, so we have project managers from the production or logistics department, then the respective logistics manager or assembly manager and then the plant manager. These are the most important people for us who drive things like that and, as I said, support a project, then for example also me from corporate development, if there are strategically important topics, yes in the topic of project management, in the technology selection.
What are the requirements in the company? Or is there a company that needs to have a moment? What requirements must be in place in the company so that Industry 40 can be introduced at all? Where are you perhaps currently working on so that it can be introduced better?;What I notice is that it doesn't apply to all technologies? But for many there is a critical number. We fail at that too. That applies above all to automation or more specific solutions. Yes, because then it simply doesn't pay off beyond the number of units. That is an important point, then the mindset and openness to technology of the workforce is certainly important. It is an important factor when we talk about it. And financial resources, so they will always implement such topics more easily in companies that have the appropriate financial resources. They can create the appropriate budgets and then accompany such technological change more quickly and to a greater extent. Yes, those are the most important points. And of course, sorry, more important point, I forgot data, so the availability of uniform availability of data sets that can then really be used, is also something that we would simply fail at in some tests, for example.
Yes, would you rather say that Industry 4.0 technologies should support existing processes or even partially replace them?;Yes, it's both, so we have, as described, some things where digitalization really helps to achieve better quality. But we are also thinking about automating warehouse processes or something like that, like automated warehouses, for example, where manual work is really replaced and in the indirect area the aim is to really replace routine processes.
Yes, and how do you ensure that people are willing to change? And also that they accept technology.;Whether we can ensure that and no longer we try to promote it. Yes, really through communication. Yes, clearly communicating that we want to go in a certain direction, that we want to modernize, it is also really the case that you can feel it, that people want it too. So it is no longer the case, as perhaps at the beginning of digitization, Industry 4.0 or something like that, that people resisted it, but the workforce is demanding it and wants it to be modernized. So what else do we do? The second thing is really testing. We are trying to create something as quickly as possible where we can then tackle it on a small scale, so to speak.
And what are the employees' motives? Why are they now saying yes, Industry 4.0 will bring this forward.;Yes, I think it's because employees realise that if we don't do anything about it, and perhaps we as a society or Germany continue to sleep on it, then in the end more jobs are at risk of being lost than if we automate a few processes and then certain positions are not filled or something like that. I think a lot of people have realised that this small cut. That certain processes are being eliminated, yes, other things are being added and so much automation then of course, then you need a few fewer operational employees but you also need three more maintenance staff. There is a certain connection somewhere and it's not just jobs that are being lost, there are also some being created elsewhere, but that's the smaller, the lesser evil and you don't really want to stand still, people just want to work in a company that is modern, we're noticing that here too.
And how do you go about it? So if, as you just said, or sorry, as you just said, some people are falling in the way of operations, but we may need more maintenance staff, do you then rely on retraining or do you then hire new people and?;Well, if possible, of course the latter. I have to be honest and say that we haven't had that happen with others, like Daimler or something like that, but we always try. The first option is to keep the existing people, retrain them or simply transfer them to other areas and continue to use them in the company. If that doesn't work, then we hire accordingly, i.e. meet the new requirements, and of course we try to create social growth for the employees who are being let go. That would be effective, we try, of course. We try to speed up the change so that it fits in with the natural fluctuation within the company. That means, especially now, when we talk about us, i.e. every company I've been in. In recent years, job security has actually been anchored in the collective agreement. That means there was no way to reduce staff faster than natural fluctuation plus perhaps a voluntary severance program. That means you always have to keep an eye on personnel planning anyway, you want to see what is possible? That has to be included in the business case: what kind of automation can really be implemented so that it remains profitable? And that should always be at a rate that you can then of course manage, without having to fill vacancies, i.e. over retirement age and so on.
Yes, and how would you say it was? In the past, not really at Putzmeister or now. The use of technology or ensuring that the use of technology simply remains efficient in the future.;If you try to keep developing, I think it has been checked regularly, including through trade fair visits. Through discussions with partners, if there is something newer or better that could be implemented, then you naturally try to ensure from the outset that technologies can be expanded. Yes, that you plan certain, ideally always certain, stage concepts. That means that you design areas or other things in such a way that you can add further automation levels or technology levels. Yes, I think those are the most important points as to how you ensure that.
And how would you consider a technology to be successfully implemented or when would you consider it to be successfully implemented?;"So successful in a limited sense. I definitely believe it will, if it does what it's supposed to do later on. At the planned costs. And I would make concessions there; if it's not quite what was expected, but still a clear improvement on the previous state, then I would also call it successful. That's what the economic dimension is. Of course, something can be successful that is perhaps economically pointless, that is, that doesn't bring any real advantages, but that simply inspires people and creates exactly that spirit that I was talking about, that you notice that the employer cares about our future as a company, the employer is prepared to invest, that they think in a modern way, the company thinks in a modern way, they drive innovations forward. That is certainly a big benefit that really shouldn't be neglected in the whole process."
Yes or maybe health if employees?;Simply this feeling, this yes, the feeling that something has happened, I believe is also an important signal to the workforce and I believe it will be even more important in the future when we talk about the shortage of skilled workers, about the fact that it is becoming more difficult to find and retain good talent, then it is certainly an advantage if you, as an employee, feel that something is going on in the company - for us, this was really an important motive for investing here in order to implement certain topics - stay tuned for a moment.
   Yes, if you have used roadmapping techniques to show a digitalization roadmap;, so we typically plan 3 to 5 years ahead, both in terms of our digitalization of our products and the digitalization of internal processes. Yes, there is a technology roadmap
Yes, OK, and if you were to help develop and build a supply chain for Tesla on a greenfield site like the one mentioned, what would a roadmap look like when it comes to the usual supply chain problems? So what technologies would you implement first?;I. Sure, I'm not sure right now whether I'm trying to think about why I wouldn't implement everything at the beginning in Greenfield, what speaks against that, I can't think of the reason right now, because I have the topic now when I talk about. Maybe with the indirect processes it makes sense, because if I talk about direct topics now, yes about everything that is intralogistics or something like that, then in a Greenfield, if I do it one after the other, I would always have to invest first in the manual process, which is also a lot of hardware, and then again in the automated process. And there, I don't really see any great advantage, so if I can manage it financially, then I would plan as boldly and as progressively as possible in Greenfield. And and implement accordingly and then there is actually the expansion stage, which then typically goes I have to take into account that where I know that it will perhaps be like that in a few years, not yet. But I see more of a focus on freedom of space, that is, when you are typically really operational in production, when you are planning manual processes that require significantly less space than a robot (sensitive robots are definitely possible here and collaborative robots are definitely possible), where it is then similar, but normally still with fencing and so on, when there are certain processes that require significantly more space, that means you then keep space free in the layout planning (that is a very important point when it comes to later automation and then of course the volume). That means they look to choose a building layout, where they can add on and so on? I think that everything that is digitization can be added to and added on later anyway, but I would always try to implement everything that is financially viable and technically possible in the Greenfield approach immediately, today. Yes, and then as I said, I think this whole topic. Future expansion is especially important in the actual physical layout of the hall and lines and so on.
If you now see an existing supply chain that has not yet implemented anything and has not yet implemented anything technically in Industry 4.0, where could you or where would you most likely attack?;So. They will always draw up a matrix like the one I mentioned earlier, that is, which use cases come to mind? What do they have? We did it that way in a workshop, what kind of implementation time and effort do they have? And what kind of impact do they have? Certainly, economically, financially, but also simply with soft factors like how can the technology be experienced, how how how? How well do the employees see it? Does it have an impact on motivation and so on, that's how I would always do it and if you ask for concrete examples I would always think that a really hot candidate is certainly anything that is covered long distances with some kind of industrial truck to be automated - an automated warehouse. It always pays off to automate the small parts areas faster than the large pallets - wait a minute, that's the small parts warehouse first step, the pallet warehouse second step. What is very important to me is that so-called Manufacturing Execution Systems are used to digitize the entire production or assembly process via a data acquisition system, then all the machines that exist in the company are connected via BDE so that they start automatically. Reporting back is certainly the first step, then switching to digital or preventive maintenance. I think these are the hottest candidates and then of course the entire production control system. To automate this in modern software or to create the best possible options for the people who control it manually.
And what resources and skills would you say are essential for the implementation of Supply Chain 4.0, or rather specific skills that are only needed for that purpose.;Well I think the most important skill and where there are big bottlenecks in many companies is software development and programming. In most cases there is of course the problem that the technology particles have a defined interface but they actually always have to be programmed. To the existing Manufacturing Execution System or to the ERP for data exchange so that the systems are then optimally linked, for example they now have an automated warehouse that can run with their own software, they can also access it directly with SAP modules. But something like that has to be programmed and especially when you go into SAP, when you dock there, it quickly becomes complex and then there aren't many people who can do it. And yes, yes, is IT interface programming definitely the most important skill? Yes, the second thing is that companies like ours or car manufacturers traditionally have a lot of locksmiths and the like in maintenance and too few electricians, so the previous competency profile doesn't match the future one, i.e. electrical, electronics, mechatronics. Skill what causes it to fail? And then? The third thing is in the implementation of the people who then accompany it as a project, simply agile project management, so then people often think in terms of traditional, too long horizons, instead of going in with a modern, agile mentality and really creating an MVP first and then moving on to a prototype implementation as quickly as possible.
Were these skills developed directly within the company or were they procured externally or purchased, so to speak?;When you realise that you need whole people in the long term, then it usually makes sense and that's what was done, those who build up the resources internally. Ah, whether they were existing people or new people, that comes from all over the place, everything that is more of a one-off thing, where you don't know whether you need something for a longer period of time or something like that, that was bought in, oh dear.
And when it comes to technologies, are there technologies that interact with each other or have been introduced in a bundle, so to speak?;Yes, at the beginning we defined solution sets where we said, but then also strongly in the RFID area, where we said certain solutions IFRD technology are enablers and you can then build on them to introduce other technologies. Those were the connections, but I mean with RFID in particular you noticed pretty quickly that the costs are then relatively high, even if you try to integrate it into the entire supply chain, because we have to equip both customers and suppliers with the appropriate tags and other devices, which is why I would say we are going back and trying to work more with other technologies and networking is taking place. But it is not always that easy.
And you said that as an enabler you used a lot of RFID technology? What criteria did you use to make this decision?;Availability of the technology standards that we have set. Have they standardized the hardware very well? We have our own internal catalog where we standardize different devices. With RFID technology, for example, there are different frequencies that must be adhered to, right? We also compare different manufacturers with each other and we chose exactly that technology because it was very easy to introduce across the board. At least, I would say, in the European area. If you think globally, there are of course probably technologies that are currently being used very heavily in Asia or the Asia Pacific, where we are also currently trying to understand how they work, because market conditions are completely different.
And what are the characteristics that have been improved in your supply chain as a result? Yes, first of all.;Yes, I mean, the driving force behind it was always automation. To have as little human interaction as possible in order to reduce errors. So no matter where you tried to introduce this technology, as I said with a transport Kanban, for example, internally or when booking incoming goods, it was all about having as little interaction or human contact as possible in order to automate the whole thing and then ultimately have the process available digitally.
Yes, how would you define Supply Chain 4.0 for yourself?;Supply Chain 4.0. I think the first step is to digitize information in the first place, because we also see that some of the information is not yet available digitally? And we are probably still in the process of doing that. That is why I would say that we have not quite reached supply chain or industry 40 or supply chain 40 yet, but I would say that with industry 40 or supply chain 40 I will then have the entire flow of information available digitally, so that I can then start with automation. For me, supply chain 40 is the networking of suppliers or third-party suppliers to suppliers and then to the customer, where all the information is available digitally and I can then start with automation.
Yes, and? You say that the connection is not there yet, so you would also say that there are still many isolated solutions, so to speak, and the bridges have not yet been built to enable this data flow.;Yes, there are still processes that are paper-based. This also has something to do with the connection to the suppliers. Of course, a supplier who is larger and perhaps has its own funds available to use different technologies has an easier time than a smaller supplier for whom this is simply not a focus issue - and I mentioned this earlier about RFID - the barriers to entry are of course higher now than if you have a technology that means the entire process is digital from the start.
Yes, how is it with you? How do you recognize opportunities for technological progress in your area?;Always from the use case, and that is also the case when we are looking at completely new - what I mean new - technologies such as AI or JANAI. Are we always concerned with looking at the use case and then, based on the use case, deciding what the right technology is? And in this respect, try not to always take advantage of the big boom. For example, I briefly mentioned Robotic Process Automation earlier. Was it used excessively in our company and we saw that certain processes were then automated as a result, for example via GOI automation? But in the long term I think you can do something like that, or can you only digitize processes like that, if you really exchange information via interfaces, for example, and not via small solutions such as Robotic Process Automation? It depends on the use case and then you actually decide which one. Technology is the right one and yes, we try, I think that's probably the case where the company I work for comes from, that you don't try to take the hives with you, but really work out if I use the technology for the different use cases, what ROI do I get? What profitability do I see in it? And not just try to use a technology at all costs, because... Suggest it in some article.
Yes, would you say that in your case, the initiatives for different technologies arise from problem analyses or also a little from the technology? Push.;As I have just described, it would be nice if it were only the first, but of course there is also the second and that comes more strongly from certain organizations or from management, where of course they try to get behind new technologies, and often have expectations behind them. Efficiency expectations, improvements of 30 etc. and then there are often queries where you say if we were to introduce this energy, what use cases do you see and can we really achieve these efficiency gains? That's why it's probably a mix of both, so bottom comes, I think more from the problems, I have a problem, I have a use case that I want to deal with and then I look for a solution and then there is the technology, which is initially irrelevant or I have the whole top down, then I have a technology and then I ask around. What use cases do I have that could perhaps be improved with the technology?
And how do you recognize the need for the introduction of technologies now?;Difficult, because in my position I am very global and sometimes the requirements are controlled by the organization via processes. We have END to end processes for these end to end processes there are process owners and below that there are also different process levels and actually the requirements are always fed directly from the values ​​and organizations into the process world and that is where the match between problem recognition and between the technology that I want to introduce comes in, in the best case scenario and then there are certain organizations that deal with the technologies and these service units can then help with the implementation of the right technology. Let me give you an example. For both of us sticking with the example of Robotic Process Automation, there is then a shipping process in the process world for warehouses or in the factories where the problems are reported directly from the warehouses and factories to the process managers and they can then in turn select service units within the organization that have already dealt with different providers. So they usually have license agreements with third party providers. They provide the software for this technology and then help to implement these technologies in the process world. Does that answer your question? Or OK, you can
And to what extent? When it comes to the technologies, you won't be inventing everything yourself, so to speak. So to what extent are you likely to work with the suppliers of the technologies? But maybe also with other parties who help with the implementation. And maybe other consultants or universities in that direction.;Yes, that is also very heterogeneous. Of course there are central offices that try to pool the knowledge and the technologies, and I, in my role as owner of this platform, try to spread these technologies or solutions to the technologies. I am very interested in using this pooled knowledge, but then there is also cooperation with universities in regions, for example, where you mentioned it, which then try to introduce the technologies, and then other solutions arise, which we then try to take up and partly scale. For example, last year we had a solution that was also camera technology for object recognition and package structure recognition. It was a cooperation with a university that created this solution. And we then tried to scale it across the whole company. On the other hand, as I said, there is also support because it is a large company. Service organizations within the company that do nothing other than roll out different tools into the organization and... These are basically the consultants, i.e. internal consultants who conduct workshops, automation workshops and then advise our own locations. What kind of technologies or automation technology they can use, they have of course probably also consulted external consultants beforehand or have gained external knowledge in order to do that.
Yes, and when it comes to the technologies that you introduce, how do you decide beforehand which technology will be used and who is involved in making that decision?;Ultimately, it is always the locations that decide, because they are always responsible for the budget and of course they also have to decide what they are going to spend on it when it comes to introducing the solution. That means they give the order and. Yes, they are also interested in solving the use case or the problem regardless of the technology. On the other hand, there are organizations within the business area or now also me that are interested in doing a global rollout of different tools. So we simply decide now, as I said a few years ago RFID or is it still the case that it is not fully developed, that we plan roadmaps, rollouts and rollouts with the locations every year. To introduce certain solutions, so that is ultimately managed or controlled centrally in order to be able to ultimately use economies of scale and not to have too many isolated solutions.
With RFID it was easy to implement and then what?;Exactly, and also be available, so what we often have is that we have pilot projects that are in development for a long time and then you are always faced with the decision of whether you take something like that up straight away or do you start other projects that have the same objective or do you wait for the one pilot project to be successful and then try to scale it up into the organization? So, that is always a bit of a trade-off, we also use the platform that I talked about, where we present the projects early on and show that they are in development and where they are being used, including with the corresponding technologies. And yes, then, if it is a successful pilot, you see whether you can ultimately scale it up completely.
And if we now look towards implementation and this pilot project as you said, do you have a location where the pilots are always carried out? Or does it vary depending on where the problem was the greatest, that you start the pilot there and then roll it out to the whole organization?;Yes, there are a few preferred locations, it's simply based on... Yes, partly also on budget, well there are larger locations that have more budget to do pilot projects like this or the proximity to the company headquarters. But then there are often pilots in the regions that are started there because the conditions there are different and you can see these projects in the start-up and then a solution can emerge from the regions, but of course above all the projects and pilots that we start from Germany are either in a German location or in another European country.
Wait a minute. What would you say were the main prerequisites for you to be able to introduce these Industry 4.0 technologies into your company?;Digital skills? A lot. Skills and knowledge management. I mean, we also have very large organizations that only focus on the topic of enabling, getting employees on board, so that employees understand what you are doing, how you can use it. And understand the advantages of it. That's why it's a lot about people skills and people management and actually the change management process that happens with the introduction of Industry 40 and digital solutions. And we've seen that very often, if you don't offer enough information material or get people on board, then the introduction of digital tools doesn't help because we sometimes differentiate between tools that have been introduced and tools that are already in use. If you don't get people started properly and get them to that point and show them the advantages, then it often happens that you do a rollout and an introduction, but then the tool isn't used at all later on and people always fall back on the fallback solution. A major change management and enabling process.
And did I understand correctly that you have a team for change management that you send out, so to speak, who then do this change work, right?;So for large products or solutions that we have, there are individual consultancies, i.e. consulting organizations and they are only responsible for introducing the tools. There are workshops where it is presented, the processes are then gone through, before and after, and then it is set up and the people are taken along and prepared for this process, the process changes.
Well, of course, something like that only works for companies of a certain size, but it is certainly interesting.;Yes, yes, yes, well, we also have, we also have internal consulting, but that is more firefighting, so they go and look at their own projects and then it is. But similar but of course, so if, for example, we have a very large tool for production planning. And that has its own organization, which then also supports the rollout,
Yes, how do you ensure that the technologies you are introducing now will continue to work efficiently in the future?;Difficult from a central perspective. Ultimately, the individual business areas and locations are always responsible because they are the operators of the tools or the technologies. I'm probably too far removed from that, but ultimately. The users of these introduced technologies must then also reflect the central organizations. To what extent does that work? Unfortunately, it's difficult for me to answer.
It's good and has already touched on it a little bit: there is a difference between technology being introduced and technology being used. And when would you define for yourself that the technology has been successfully implemented? At what point in time?;Only if I can measure any measurable process improvement or overall improvement - and it can of course be a cost improvement, but it can also be improved use, or in the case of the technology also leading to certain information that was previously opaque and perhaps there were only a few people who had this information, if I can then make this information understandable to a wider audience, then I have actually already achieved a positive effect with the technology introduction, but of course, especially at the present time and with the current prospects, the ROI value is also clearly at the forefront when introducing technology, as is a hard ROI value and a profitability calculation for every type of rollout that we are currently conducting.
And do you have specific roadmaps in place that will bring these Industry 4.0 technologies into the company? You said RFID is the enabler. Then came a few other things. How far does that go for you?;So now, especially in the logistics sector and in internal logistics, as I said, camera technology is actually the next thing and we are currently working a lot on AI and Jenni and are looking to make improvements there, but clearly for camera technology because it has already reached a similar level of mercury as other technologies that we have introduced before. Are there clear roadmaps for AI and even newer technologies? Not yet. Yes, at the moment it is more like everything that is used in the non-productive or production area than in the office areas. LPAS and chatbots in particular. They are on a very steep path at the moment, so we are looking to make the use of these tools even more widespread?
And when you introduce a technology, for example like the cameras, do you also think about whether you can perhaps supplement it? With AI, for example, or does it simply arise from the ongoing process?;We are definitely thinking about that. In part, it is already connected to the hardware and software, so especially with the cameras, I know that I would rely on a manufacturer who is already very good at integrating AI and who already has it in their hardware and software package, so it is basically out of the box and there is a combination of different technologies that then come with the introduction.
OK, and if you were responsible for a supply chain that doesn't yet have Industry 4.0, but has the usual problems, so to speak. Where would you start with which topic in terms of digitalization?;Complete supply chain, i.e. transport. Probably even in transport, i.e. if I were to divide it up into processes, then because we have that too, but that is a solution that we have been using for a long time in the track and trace area. And this is already very good from Muturity and has actually already been introduced across the board in our company. Because with this track and trace solution you can influence most of the most important KPIS in logistics. And that is actually about having reliable shipping. And ultimately also impacts on customer satisfaction. And that is why I think the first step would be to see that this process can be mapped digitally and that I am meaningful there and then all the subsequent processes in inbound and outbound.
And what resources would you say are essential for implementing Industry 4.0 or Supply Chain 4.0 in the company?;Well, ultimately experts, but I think even more. Process experts, right? People. People who have been working in the role for a long time, who also have the know-how to say I can really make an improvement here, in order to then come up with the necessary technology. I would even say that this always comes from the use case and. From the business, the need comes from the business, it is more important than having the know-how for the technology, because now it may be a bit hard, but I think this know-how is easier to buy in, so it is easier to then say I have a problem and I can then get help from a company that I may not have the skills to solve myself. They can then help me to introduce this technology accordingly.
  I have one last question, what would you say? What skills are essential for a company to successfully implement Supply Chain 4.0?;. Is that also a bit of a password? But I think that we have already introduced it and it is very good. So agility is being able to react agilely to different market requirements, because that also runs through our production systems and our production technologies, where we also try to make the production cycles as short as possible in order to be able to react to different markets, changing market requirements, and I actually need this agility. In all areas and especially in supply chain management, because what has happened in the last few years in the field of technology, Industry 40 or Supply Chain 40 is actually already an outdated term, there is already 5.0 and it builds on that. That is why the company actually has to be able to react agilely to changing, different market requirements.
Where would you say that Industry 4.0 is already being successfully implemented in companies?;Well, we have a conscience, but as I said at the beginning, I don't think we're quite there yet and yes, I know from various studies that the ideas are already moving forward. And? I actually think that they could be higher, but yes, there are probably too many barriers, especially in Germany, which mean that it hasn't quite reached the level of maturity that we would actually like.
Do you only dream about it, yes, it's really insane, and then you come to the Hannover Messe and everyone talks about Industry 4.0 and 5.0 and yes, or is that somehow very different in reality?;, well. And I think we are still relatively far along in comparison and? Well, for a medium-sized company it probably looks completely different because of course you don't have the resources to do all that. Yes, that's why the perspective or the same interview if you ask a medium-sized company would probably be completely different. They will probably say what resources do you need for capital?
Yes, definitely. Yes, definitely, that is the answer that comes from them, definitely, so it is also exciting to see the difference, so for me it is perfect that I can show it like that.;  I have to say, though, that things have changed a lot, particularly now because of the economic situation, and I started five years ago in the innovation department, and then... Did you try harder to enable the different plants and locations, or in a certain way encourage and motivate them to introduce their own innovations and solutions and technologies? And now? In the last five years, OK, I've changed roles, but we're looking to standardise a lot more. Because you've noticed the cost pressure, and you've noticed that if each location has its own IT solution and its own technology, you're not getting the right added value, and before? And I was still there at 23, I thought that was pretty cool. We did workshops, met at different locations, everything within the company, but across business areas, because we really do have very different production processes, from series production. Up to production on demand and then you simply looked at where what works and what can perhaps be adapted at some point and yes, now there are more standard solutions when they have to be implemented and there shouldn't be any more isolated solutions. And. Exactly, yes, but that is the company problem, because in the company you always have budget planning and that started in Q3 Q4. The budgets for next year have to be approved and then you need a roadmap. My strength is in product development for this IT platform that I am responsible for, we actually have an agile setup, but in terms of budget you are not agile, because that's just how it is.
Which industry 4.0 technologies do you currently use in your supply chain?;For main products, the enter barrier is very high. You may want one specific product to like. Flexible pipes that have lots of technological. Components that are very. Complex materials and and expensive materials in that we have free suppliers in the world or just this product and some main components of the service infrastructure for instance, so. In the end, we have some kind of narrowing. A big suppliers cause not all splash can provide everything for the product. No. Well, I think that. Although this part is still ongoing, changing there's already some parts of IoT being used. Think a little bit. We we already have some parts of digital twin modeling from suppliers like the FSCO suppliers we the the process is partially digital the the models that we see it's less document centered. Refinery tool has some part of that. That's what I think. The level that we get is more. These efforts in engineering installation. Subside apartment. It's not a red. Red to get to that level, but we are working on more advanced that, I think vision about getting. I IoT in real time installing AI supporting and evaluating if the in real. I will teach you. All right. We we, we've all suppliers we I think that's there's some users already of AI and some parts too.
What do you think? What features have mainly been improved by 4.0 technologies?;But in I think the TG manufacturing's a little bit shaky and yet, but we have some things. With some suppliers too. Items that are there are less critical. And that can have some impact in maintenance. So. Overall for the big prospects, I think that we are moving towards this change, but the industry's not totally ready to for that. So we are gradually fostering changing tools with our partners and suppliers. And I think that's nowadays it's maybe the most difficult part to change the suppliers and not just to change our internal process suppliers are not totally ready to this change. I think in the industry and they are not.
What features of the supply chain have been improved by these technologies, like the supply chain is more agile or more resilient or?;More totally in those 4.0 ready to the industry, but there's some big players there that may have some service that go in this direct direction. I think manufacturing is an example that I think the industry is a kind of old way of doing. Not so much. Using. The level of control, as like sensors that they could have and not using more intelligent process too, but they have of course with automation with process and they they deliver the things that they have modern installations. But I think it's not as evolved as some industry like it maybe. Petrochemicals in Germany, that's.
How would you define supply chain 4.0 for yourself?;Maintenance and in the overall you have more efficiency in. The the process. We are a commodity seller, so you don't have that much problem with selling your products. It's that maybe induce for helps. But see in the. Stability of production, stability of getting the parts from suppliers. I think it can play a major role in the overall. Evolution and environment of the. Of the supply chain. In our internal process too. That's a good question. My perspective and I'm working with that some for some time is that. One thing the idea is that besides, we have different companies. The first thing we are starting to do is to have like one company in terms of management of the resource. So we have conflicts with our suppliers. We have some. Time of the resource related with the projects. Or maybe it's a new project or a maintenance project. But we can't manage digitally. And have the same level of information about what's happening, their plans. Our decision, because we need to have better information from our suppliers like almost they were ourselves. Of course they're not the same company, but we need to have a depth of information, real time information, what's happening there with them. This goes for agile agility. This goes for resilience also in display chain. To have this level of formation and to build that more autonomy. Of course, this evolution, but to have more? Fast decisions according to this whole. Big ecosystem of companies that works towards objects in our case, like new energy projects or maintaining the infrastructure that we have already had. So. I think that the first part is this reduction of the. Distance from our suppliers. To have a more strategically. Management integrated management that. And the second part I think it's. Agility of decision that can force and that will have to have. A more structured. Information to understand and make decision. That's a part that I think lots of managers don't get that in nowadays. I think that with more easy things like. Other things people think that all things always fast. You just get there like that. But to make this kind of automation you have to get a solid ground in terms of how we're structuring information. To actually intelligent can reason that. In a secure Safeway and an efficient way to so II think the the the the construction of this base, this base of how you're structuring information and I my experience with and I just behind of investing in IFC too is about getting. A faster way of getting this information in a structured way. Two concerts in the future. The idea of ​​windows for at all. The brides, part of the that it's very easy, like great efficiency. Autonomous process intelligent process mark process but. For this tool to happen. Working directly with the foundation. Structuring for that to get this in the future, working in a in. A more.Evolving autonomous way.
What do you say? How do you recognize opportunities for technological progress? Like you mentioned. The the conversation and and Marrakesh or something like this by the Congress. Sorry.;Or autonomy. More autonomy. Indeed, it's because of taking decisions faster, safely and in all the information that we get can gather from the all ecosystems that we were ecosystem. I mean, not just environmental system but customers. Suppliers and everything related to the supply chain in the process that we are implementing. I don't know if I maybe got too much broads the idea but. This the main thing with supply chain. The first point II will go for this narrower integration with them in the level of engineering.
But how do you recognize opportunities for technological progress?;Because that is supply chain management in. It's all the red, some kind of digital integration. But for complex projects that we do. The engineering integration is paramount. It we lost, we lose lots of times and and have lots of problems in decision because we don't have this integration. So the engineer integration company is the first step to build the business integration logistics integration all in this common. Engineering. Basis for for the. Process.
How do you get your knowledge about new technologies? Development in industry 4.0.;I it's it's not. Is it a question with the lottery is answer because The thing is we have , I was involved with lots of projects and that our in my time was not so much open to see everything that's possible and to explore. A lot in the past, I want them. Research centers a little bit different, but in the test I think that. I had some opportunities in terms of. Academy here. II when I did the the master I it was interesting to. Look for information, understand what's happening in the world in the terms of. There that II learned about the industry for at all studying my masters. I didn't know the term there and I think that. II started to look for opportunities to have projects related to that in my company after that. So II think the the. You know that. How they say it's like. Studying. Continuing studying, I don't know if they got the term. Machinery studies important for that reason. We can get some information. II think there's some specialized media there, but. The thing is, that's you have to philtre a little because it's it's a kind of commercial tool normally. So you see like a company's selling their product, but OK the the product may help something but but. You have to understand what's behind that. What's what's really happening. And I think the academic part is important for that. And of course, in terms of work II now I have lots of contacts with companies that have had companies institutional institutions that have. Some input in what to do? New technology, new ideas and I think my work now in the research center is kind of more easy to get new ideas of what's happening because I have meetings with. It seems these friends, for example I had meeting with people from Intel. They do some kind of free work, free work for us to get some. Their ships work better in some advanced solutions. They do that's just because they want to sell more ships, but people don't know how to use them in the better ways their ships. So they do the consults but they do not just that they ask for Ag others because they know projects that happen in Israel that happens in other place of the world. So you get the idea that things that well maybe this can be. Something that you have to help other problems that you have here. That's it. I think the the location that you are in terms of business open your organization. It's helps you to have more information. I think in the past I was not so much I had access to lots of things too, but not so much privilege to have these more. Aspects or views of what's happening in terms of innovation. That I had now. So I think the academic, the, the, your own position in terms of organization. It's the other important part, and if you have time to research yourself. To-to-to. I think you know. Peter Drucker. I've heard about him.
How your organization. Decide which. Technologies should be implemented in the supply chain.;How decides what technology should be implemented? We have. It's very related to the area that I work now. There's lots of. The search and and patents and things that we are. Studying. Mostly things that have business indicators like the impacting NPV, the impacting.
And what is the process behind implementing a new technology? In your company.;Risk reduction. For workers like this, these aspects are the main drivers of innovation. And some of. Thesis. Vision persons, they have the need of working with within the supply chain. And as a result of that, that's the involvement of the supply chain. But the main drive is the initiative itself that is approved to develop. New technology, new metallurgy. And to and ask that we need to deploy in our partners. Of course, there is an ongoing contracts with the Spartan, so this part of negotiation like a new addition to this contract or a new contract or something like that. But I think the main drive is the internal company results. And index like environmental impacts, etc. There's another index. Too, but II think the financial. Point of view is very important in our internal process too. The process behind the technology. Is it? This is a very that's a whole. Standard internal standard of that to to define that, but I'll talk to. I'll try to summarize you.
And now when you when we talked about how to implement these technologies, how do you ensure that there is the readiness for change and technology acceptance in the organization?;I think this is the process we have to establish. As it the level of maturity, first of that technology and of the commercial aspect of the like. The level of commercial access like it's it's ready to implement to have companies supporting it's, you know things like that evolution in that direction and the technology parks, the maturity of the technology involved. So there is an evaluation of that first. And these sets the kind of innovation projects that we will do if it's a project that is already going to focus on our value appropriation. Some more major projects if it's a potential valuation, so it's a little bit more explorative projects. It's don't have the all the comparison of gets implemented the value because it's still less mature or if it's a total experimentation project. So I have so much. We're not so much compromised with objectively getting the value of that. Had last need for that, so it's of course easier to get budgets for better projects and so on. We have to experiment, normally experiment. Smaller projects. And these the different kind of pyramids of kind of projects that we have and the level of. Maturity in the maturity of the business case, the evaluation. Two, they have this. Separation. Segmentation like that. And. With this project approved. We. Also select partners if you're going to do yourself alone or have partners. That can be working with us. Sometimes we select this part and we've an open invitation selects the best proposal that we get. Sometimes we can work with a direct partner because they have some. Singularity respecting with that technology. Then after that we we we get some there's some kinds of. Contracts that can go in Brazil, that's. A corporation project. So we have aa formally. Ownership of the results. We can hire a technology deployment, so it's Petrobras ownership and that's this model. It's also. Are integrated with Brazilian. Innovation ecosystem for oil and gas. In general. They have some kind of government. You know, incentives for Duane, that helps to invest in developing developments of research institutions in Brazil. It's more or less what you would like to list.
And what do you think are other requirements outward the acceptance? Which aren't necessary for the organization to implement these technologies.;. The first the the project. Has kind of targets of evolving that. Technological aspects and commercial aspects. So these targets are part of the project. We have the compromise of the direct internal client, so he has a role to ensure that. The redness in respect of the the the the suppliers that will will be working the not that the technical partners but the suppliers that will have used will use this technology. It's kind of a bigger project, there is the technical research projects, but we have kind of a bigger project that will seek the implementation. And. Uh, these responsibilities for implementation is normally not associated with the research center, but with the business itself as the client and the owner of the assets of the contracts, etcetera. And so it's part of. Implementation we have. We have very big company, we have some internal governance, but it's not. It's just one. Methodology of cool governance. It depends on the area, but there are. There is also a governance for that some projects have. Controlled and I think that they have a kind of committee to see if it's getting all the attention and getting the results that they proposed and seeing management who has to. Be responsible for getting the implementation. Which depends on the projects depends on the governance that it will be. Allocated. But. I think if that does a general way of saying that, but the normally the the research if they are value centered, they define what's the values ​​that they are pursuing.
And one last question would be. When do you consider the implementation of technology as successful?;As to get the technical requirements that the technical specification that we need. There's. I think there's a qualification process we have, it's very dense. I think in terms of the list, the all energy industry, the oil and gas industry because you have very high requirements in terms of qualification for technology to be used to production. II think that the industries tend to be in a more safe and direction in terms of using technology. General. So. The requirements in qualification testing is very high normally. To assure that what you are getting to production at least seeing in. I'm sorry, someone. Someone's calling me. I will stop him. No, stop the phone, not our talk. The I forgot what I was saying, so they find the high. There's lots of qualification and for the using production for things that may have. Impact in the safety in the process, etcetera. Things have to go. On lots of tests. Comparing with I saw some panels with construction industry. I think they have fewer requirements in terms of. Material information, material qualification and fiscalization we are very. We demand a lot of that in our industry because we cannot have the option to not do not know what is installed exactly. No. Well, not the head of. Well, the treatments, the materials, it's not an option. 'cause. We have high risk and relative that. I consider the implementation of technology successful when. It's. That's the real really gets the value that we are proposing originally. So that's the targets that we set. Maybe not the whole target because there's more risk with innovation. If you have some variation, but to have a reasonable. Part of the result that we aimed for. I cannot say that what would be as acceptable if I have a feeling at least 50 of NPV, for instance. But innovation projects are acceptable. The painting of the level of maturity that we start. And also. We have some, you know. How to say we put some hedge cap negative hedge cap in the NPV related to the maturities too so more or less it's it's. You know. We calibrate to the risk involved in the technology, the NPD. So the the the focus on the results that we we set is for me the the main thing, but we have also maybe we don't get fully what we intend for, but we can get a part. But for this to work we have to implement eventually in the supply chain.
You don't use the technologies for intensive or Industry 4.0 technologies yourself, but basically sell them, what would you say? Is that so? Mostly represented in your company now, when you go into it.;Within the supply chain, Industry 4.0 is of course very common in the area of ​​automation. Conveyor belts, automated high-bay systems, which are then controlled. What is actually not our environment? Industry 4.0 is more found in automation technology? Normalization technology is not what we do. But looking at my past, you come across it in companies. Logically, digital control but you come across it more on the latest machines, so IOT, the topic of edge computing is very intensive, especially in the finished industry, where a lot of the topic of predictive maintenance is also involved, and predictive logistics is now also a buzzword that is becoming more and more popular. So we hope to find out a lot about the topic of AI, too, how will my positional movements change, and even what will happen next? How can AI help me not to replace skilled workers but to complement them, because skilled workers are becoming increasingly rare, especially for such stupid work in the warehouse. You just can't find the people who want to do that or can do it anymore and there are now high hopes for computer vision. Camera-based techniques, yes, those are the topics.
Would you say that there are already bundling of technologies, perhaps AI bundled with another technology, so that is already being used?;Yes, as I said, AI and computer vision, yes, so camera technology or automation and AI everywhere where data can be generated. I process the data and can now have it evaluated with AI. In the past, I had to do all of this via edge computing and had to think of algorithms to generate predictive maintenance. Today, with the use of AI, I can add intelligence to it, which I have to respond to promptly, but which thinks independently to a certain extent.
Yes, and? When implementing these technologies, there is a certain order in which companies start.;Well, in Germany we have the challenge that we have a very, very high level of education, also through our... What is our training system called? It has a special name, what it is called, so school and practice. And 3 years of training to become the technical term for... I can't think of it right now, that is very unique in the world, so we have a very, very good level of training. We use technologies that are also at the upper end of the scale, what we often don't do is combine these things. Instead, incredibly expensive people stand at incredibly expensive machines and actually do things that are already fully automated in other parts of the world, I have seen this very often in medium-sized companies in particular. So the networking of these... Pillars, I'll call them, that is the first thing that needs to happen - the openness to it. Collecting data, having the data evaluated, then using the data to make decisions - we find that difficult across the board. Well, that was really, really shocking to see on a regular basis when I was at Siemens. Well-known large companies - you stand up there in the production manager's office, next to the meeting room and you look down at the plant. I still see it like a machine park today, especially the same ones - there was a lot of money there and then? Afterwards we went downstairs. To production and walked through. And then I spoke to the production manager about how it works here and I asked, well, who, who actually decides which parts and when? How are parts manufactured, well, SAP dictates that. So let's agree on that, SAP is actually an EAP system, more of a commercial tool, but it contains the orders, yes, our customers' orders, aha, yes, and based on these orders we know what has to go out first. OK, so I summed it up and I remember how I said it to him, so he gives him a business management tool, how they work here in technology. XDL thought about it for me and then said, yes, look, yes, well, you can do it like that. What about the set-up times of your machines? Yes, they are very immense. And how do you actually rate good? And bad parts? Yes, well, we have a student who goes through it in the morning and counts the parts that have fallen out of the machine left and right. Whether they were good or bad and then, yes, then we put it back into SAP, yes, OK, so these are incredibly expensive machines, they could do almost everything themselves, there are tools for, there is software for, there is hardware for, there is everything. We have the knowledge, but we don't use it, we do, we don't do it, and that is also the case and our problem in my opinion, what we have in our society,which is why we are in the economic situation we are in now, we just do that.
the combination of knowledge and technology then sit;Exactly, and if you don't have the knowledge, then just buy it. Then, whoosh, some technically minded executive goes over to Asia again.
What would you say are the characteristics of the supply chain that will be improved by technology? I think that has already been touched upon a little.;The technologies we use make us more efficient. Yes, I experience processes every day where I say to myself, wow, that's how you do it, but it's extremely inefficient. Now imagine if you did it efficiently, how much could you gain? And it would also counteract demographic change. We now have the situation that the boomer generation is going into retirement, so we have to think about how things will continue and we don't have that many people available to retire again, we don't have to link the technologies together. That's the challenge.
Yes, and at the beginning you asked me, now I would like to ask you again how would you define Supply Chain 4.0?;"No, Supply Chain 4.0 is basically such that a warehouse no longer consists of just a hall with shelves in it, and there is now something there and the knowledge is in people's heads, but people have thought about how this knowledge can be represented digitally? In industry, people now talk very often about the digital twin - digital to twin of the product, digital to twin, the factory digital twin, the control system and so on and so on and these digital twins are then networked with one another and can be simulated in advance and this simulation provides the data basis. A data basis on which you can then make decisions - in the warehouse it is often still the case that the data basis is somewhere up here and it just works somehow. And if it doesn't work out that way, you just have to make a bit more effort and then it will work. And then a clean one. Creating a clear basis for standardized warehousing, identifying storage locations and then scanning them in the picking process - this is not yet common practice in many medium-sized and larger companies. This is done when things get really tough or the customer demands it, then you do it, but by then you've been throwing away money every year and we're in a constant cycle of ""yes, we're not doing so well right now"", ""yes, we don't have enough orders now"". But now things have picked up and we've got no time for it. And then you lack the courage to try new things. Sure, there may be a lack of financial resources in one place or another, but then there is also the possibility in the 21st century of software as a service, software in the cloud, paper use, everything is offered but it is not used because everything is evil and we don't do this decadence that we are still displaying, no, we buy it all ourselves, yes, that's just how it works, but that's just how it works."
The supply chain area in relation to the other areas. How has digitalization progressed in the other areas? Or how in the supply chain, so to speak?;Yes, it always depends on what you perceive as digitalization. I just mean, because we now have a digital control system in a machine tool, is that then digitalized? Technically yes, but I think digitalization for us is more about networking. If you look at the machine park, they are further ahead than the logistics departments and if you look at engineering, then engineering is more digitalized. You could say that the most effort is put into engineering at the front and so on at the back.
Yes, and now that technology has come in and we have done a few things, how would you say that you have caught up in terms of digitalization in supply chain management over the last few years or are you still lagging behind?;Well, well, on the one hand, I haven't been working in the field of supply chain digitization long enough to be able to pass judgment. Yes, but what I have noticed is that the topic of Corona has had a big impact on it. Yes, it just wasn't very sustainable. You think you've already done something and you're already scanning. Yes, there is so much potential that we as a society could leverage. But that's a question of mindset, yes, that's simply a question of mindset in the industry. I also think that the industry is a bit more dusty than the others mentioned. I don't know where that is different, but I'm also hoping a little that as a result of social change, as a result of the loss of the boomer generation, more people will come along who also want to change things, because another interesting point is the Puma generation, they grew up in a completely different environment, grew up, worked and are now facing it. Let me say not this spoon they do not die, but the spoon pointer to hand over.
Yes, what I also noticed in other interviews is also a bit of what you mentioned, the simple work, nobody wants to do that anymore and that's why they are often forced to digitize it, so to speak, in a certain sense and I think departments like engineering and things like that are even more interesting for young people than they are now in the warehouse.;Oh, I don't know, I mean in the engineering environment you could still work on the drawing board. It used to be possible, well, well. I have to say, you can also put yourself down in an area like that, well, I wouldn't be interested in that, constantly frantically searching for stuff in the warehouse and not having a plan, I would be more interested in designing and simulating somewhere in the engineering department with fancy design tools, yes, do it, I also know companies in warehouse logistics that have understood that, they usually don't have any problems, but the topic of digitization is pathetic in all areas. Is that also the case in sales?
What new technologies are there? Where can we continue?;Well, we are now a member of I Pay in Heilbronn. I Pay is a group of several companies, led by the Schwarz Group, that are committed to the topic of AI. AI is of course a topic. It can be used in all topics and this is where the new products and new innovations come from. The new products and innovations almost come about by themselves, you just have to combine them.
OK, and what would you say about the companies themselves? How do they recognize their needs in a certain place? Do they need technology or technological progress?;Yes, either through someone new coming into the company and knowing it differently. And then doing something. Or out of pain my customer is demanding this from me now, we have that very often. Because the customer does it better than his supplier. Up to the point that they can no longer find employees and the employees or the employees are highly highly. People are unhappy with the current situation - I experience this above all in medium-sized companies with up to 200 employees - that this is becoming an increasingly big issue, that you can no longer nod it off and smile it off, but that you have to start in the warehouse now too. Yes, that's actually the case. These 3 courses of action
Yes, why would you say that Industry 4.0 is the tool to overcome these problems.;There is no alternative. I mean, let's look at Asia, they have the same technological possibilities as we do, they can buy the same machines, they drive the same cars, they can get the same things as the West. They get the same jobs as in the West, but the wage costs are much lower and if you don't work, Jan, there are enough others, someone else will take your place. So you have a huge issue there. Yes, in terms of productivity, efficiency, how do I use my human and machine resources, right?
How would you say the decision is made? Perhaps what you recommend or how do companies decide which solution is the right one for them? So what are the factors that are taken into account?;Currently, the factors that are being looked at are the same as they always have been: the easier the sales process feels for you, Jan, the more likely you are to make a decision. Because you can only compare to a certain extent. Everyone should be able to do more or less the same thing, otherwise you're mixing apples and oranges. Yes, you don't do that, but you just buy from where you have the best feeling. That's why the job of sales is more relevant than ever before. It's changing, it's changing in the sense that it has to become more digital. I'm talking about direct and indirect sales - I'm direct sales, but there aren't hundreds of them, but I just have to make sure that those who sit in front of their computers and google warehouse management systems or Industry 4.0 logistics get to a page where they can find me at the end of the channel, yes, where they can talk to me. Pre-qualification of indirect sales has to work well there. From the landing page, from marketing, funnels, etc., etc. The companies that have understood this are very, very successful, those that have not understood it are always lagging behind the market.
Does that mean that this is the way that is of course easiest for the customer, so to speak, but if you really look at the motives? When choosing the technology, what would you say? The motives are that costs are the biggest factor, right?;"No. No, not really. As I said, the motivation ""I have to change something"" is often born out of somewhere - either someone is caught off guard, started somewhere and realizes that nothing is going on here, it's all a mess, isn't it? The customer demands it - you have to do this or that - or the employees who are currently working in the warehouse are dissatisfied. So you have the motivation ""I have to change something"" and then you start looking around the market yourself to see what options there are. You can then fall into a trap where those who do particularly good marketing are particularly good at it. It has to be adapted like this or you come to a company - that's how I would classify us too - who don't have any ready-made products in the drawer and could say ""you can do this, that and that, but you don't have to take it like that"", but they say ""yes, in principle we can, but let's take a look at your process, how do you work today"", because my slogan is always ""I'd like to sell the customer software that serves them"". Not ""sell them software that they have to serve"". SAP, for example, has finished products - SAP Son, for example, they have a wonderful ERP system, great, great, it just doesn't work the way it is for anyone - that's their business model, too. Because a lot of people break their fingers over it. Also very strong in the SAP environment, SAP is introduced because it is the best and if you know that, then you can, then it fits, but unfortunately it doesn't fit your company, your employees and your processes and if it is introduced anyway, then you have a huge software that doesn't fit you. The process doesn't fit the software, the employee doesn't fit the software and everyone is unhappy, then the SAP product is suddenly bad too because it just doesn't work, because it doesn't deliver added value and companies have already gone bankrupt because of that."
, definitely, no, it was a good deal, I think, when it came to implementing the technology. What is it? Do you give the customer a process or do you also guide the process or does it happen on your own?;Implementation is like the whole sales process. You have to lead, you have to generate trust by giving the feeling that you know how it works and that you are moving forward. Of course, you can't run away when moving forward, but you have to stay close and give the customer the feeling and actually do it in such a way that they have an influence on it, and that's what you do if you have an interest in the software fitting in with the customer's process.
Re: And do you give the customer, so to speak, what needs to happen in the company before you start implementing it? What are the requirements that the company needs to meet?;Yes, every digitization project should always start with a workshop. Without a workshop there is no detailed offer, because without measurements, no custom-made suit, how old is how? And in the process you get to know the company and learn, and then you make a project outline or an offer, where the next steps are also explained. But now I have forgotten the question Jan, what was the question?
So, you say there should be prerequisites and then the follow-up question that I would ask is, what are the prerequisites that most companies have to work on?;Of course, defining responsibilities within the company Who is the project manager on the company's side? Does he have the necessary capacity for this or was he just hired because he shouted the loudest or didn't run away fast enough? Then he was saddled with it. Yes, people always say that they already had a job before, so they can't just add another digitization project to the mix, they also need decision-making powers. You also have to be able to talk to people who can make decisions, because if I talk to a project manager and he then has to take it somewhere else and pick up his problems there, then it becomes an endless game of ping pong that degenerates into a game of Chinese whispers, because in the end, the result is not what I said.
We already had a bit of that, so you said that either we companies don't have any money or they don't have any time to digitize because they think they have too much to do. So you would also say that you really have to take the time and it just doesn't work out that way in daily business with a digitization project like that.;Exactly, .
What about other resources and capacities? What do you get with them? So is it really so common that it is difficult to release the resources, or have companies now also realized that they have to release resources for these digitization projects?;If you now in time money.
And from your experience, if you were in the company's eyes, how would you initiate change management? And ensure that your company is willing to change and accepts technology.;I would definitely include the departments involved. It should never be a decision made purely by IT, should it? It should never be a decision made purely by the specialist department, it should always be a joint decision and you have to work out internally what our processes actually are? Why do we do them like this? Will we continue to do them like this in the future? And what do we need for this in the digital environment? A surprising number of people are doing that now, I'm experiencing it more and more, that customers actually come up with a specification and say, we've already sat down together and have something done? That's a positive development that I'm seeing. Often it's torpedoed by somewhere else, either from IT we have an SAP-only strategy or from the final decision-maker who then says yes, we're not going to do that now, but. There is a development right now where I say that gives me a little hope.
And do you have something that you can give to customers to ensure that the technology remains efficient in the future? Audits, so to speak, that check the technology again after a certain period of time.;Well, we often have a senior level agreement together, which is about keeping the software running and then it is also the job of the sales department to continue upselling and to stay on top of things. And yes, that. To develop the customer further, to expand further, that is actually the right approach for it.
Yes, and why? When expanding, so to speak, but also perhaps beforehand, how do you ensure that this technology or how does the customer ensure that it gives them a competitive advantage?;By having the software serve him and not he serving the software.
OK, and moving on to implementation, is there perhaps a point where you could say, these are the challenges in implementation, apart from what we've just talked about a bit, or are these the main points?;Yes, the current challenge is actually that for many people. The switch from SAPR 3 to S 4 Hana is something that so many people are currently facing that it is really paralyzing. I always ask what has changed for you, customers? What has changed for you in the specialist department? Yes, nothing, they are doing a project so that it is exactly the same as before.
How do you define a technology or when do you define a technology as being successfully implemented?;If it is accepted in the company and is used, then I know it serves the process? And the employee has recognized it for himself, that it seems to help them, maybe not everyone. It doesn't sound like that either, but in the end it is
And in principle, if you were to look at it from a business perspective, would you deviate from that statement a little?;Of course the subject of return on investment is a relevant subject. The question is always how do you want to measure it? Jan, how do you measure whether online banking is of any use to you? Yes, how do you want to measure it? Do you want to calculate what it would have cost if you took the transfer slip to the bank? I don't know. Yes, but that results in so much more - I also have my share portfolio in online banking. I see my development of my share prices digitally and don't have to wait until the newspaper in the morning and then look in the huge table to see if I can find my price there? How do you want to put that into euros? Yes, that's why the subject of return on investment has actually disappeared from the scene somewhat, thank God. Is it not asked about so often anymore? Eroi consideration. Because the pain is apparently big enough.
, so it's a good metaphor that says, do it well, it makes absolute sense.;Online banking, I just thought of that
In any case, it is clear that you cannot measure it. Yes, but you have to do it somewhere and it makes everything a lot easier.;Yes, but where Jan, where it was possible, it was possible differently in the past.
Exactly, it could have been done differently, but now I have more time to devote myself to the important things.;Yes, fine, but surely you can stop by the savings bank in the morning when you drive to work and throw in your transfer slip? Oh, the transfer slip then takes 3 days to be processed, oh, OK, then maybe it's stupid after all, yes, and I can't manage standing orders with it either, oh, yes, that's right, but that's what I have my bank advisor for, he's supposed to do something too. What do you want to discuss with someone like that, then no, well, you can't do that. About return and investment, yes, if you tell me what it will cost you to go there and do this and that and the other, I'll work it out for you, OK, but then we have to sit down and do that, do we want to do that? No, OK, then let's leave it.
Really, really good, definitely. When you implement technologies, do you pay attention to it or does the customer pay attention to it or is it the same in this whole process that you say that another technology can be built on top of it? Like we had at the beginning with bundling AI and cameras or and so on, a roadmap a bit like that.;No, well. Yes, yes. No, I mean, once you start and generate data, you can of course continue to use it, yes, logically. But most people are still at the very beginning. Yes, at the beginning, which is why they are not even thinking about what will actually come next, once they have a warehouse management system? How do we proceed from there? Every train of thought is based on predictive logistics. That is the next thing, but is AI already that advanced?
Would you say these technologies are more likely to replace processes or are they more likely to support processes?;Do you want to replace processes? I'm not a fan of that. Because there's usually a very good reason why the process in the company is the way it is. Of course you have to look at these processes themselves, whether it's still the way it is done or whether there's a more efficient way or instead, but that technology is now replacing a process? I can now see clearly that if I now have a predictive maintenance process, I no longer have to service my machine every 2 weeks, but as needed and usually after 3 or 4 weeks, have you replaced the process? Yes, the two-week process
Yes, and if you now imagine that you are responsible for Supply Chain 4.0 in a company that has a standard supply chain with the typical problems that exist today. What would be the first point that you would bring into this supply chain that has not yet experienced digitization?;Yes, that's a very rough estimate. It depends on what kind of company it is? Do they label it, do they scan it? How do they do it? Let's just assume what is a healthy average? Do they have it? They already have a certain amount of warehousing, have identified storage locations, but still do everything with slips of paper and paper. I often come across this, that they get picking lists on the slip of paper and then start working with them, that you create an interface between the actual scan engine and the business tool SAP, which creates the picking order. Warehouse management system creates it in order to find out what movements you actually have to make with this picking list? In order to optimize routes and also to make it as pleasant as possible for the employee - not that he first goes from, I don't know, from shelf 8 to shelf 1 and then from 1 to 9 and from 9 back to 4 - that it happens in a sensible way so that it is pleasant for the employee, because if I make his life easier, he will also be more open to future topics and will be faster, more efficient, more cost-effective. I would like to start with that.
Yes, and now I have two final questions: what resources would you say are essential for the implementation of Supply Chain 4.0?;Questions. I think you've asked that before in Time and Money was my question.
Yes, that was a bit like that. What prerequisites do we need?;OK, and what resources do you need now?
Exactly what resources does it need? It is essential. Without this resource I don't even need to start, so to speak, if I want to do something.;Are we now talking about digitalization in general? Are we talking about digitalization in the logistics sector? Where? How?
In general, I would say digitalization, I think that applies to everything.;I need specific specialist know-how for the area that I would like to digitize. The specialist know-how for that too - I need the specialist department, an open specialist department that wants to change something - in other words, I need the workforce, I need people to change something - it's always like that when something wants to change, I have to meet the person where they are. That doesn't work with everyone, not everyone wants that - now you could think again, OK, what do I actually need most? Actually, I need the backing of the company most of all, because... Either I want to do something as a company or I want to leave everything as it is. If I want to do something as an entrepreneur, then I have to be clear that this change will also create friction, which I have to endure. If I don't want to or can't endure, then I should let this change go. But whether these are change processes in the area of ​​digitization or general change processes in the company? It's always the same, as the saying goes, the fish stinks from the head.
What would you say are most of the Industry 4.0 technologies currently being used in the supply chain?;Yes, I think you have to differentiate between intralogistics and transport logistics, well I can speak of intralogistics because it is actually quite strong here. The topic of partially automated and partial automation, full automation and is currently a mega trend, the question is always whether this can really be assigned to an industrial method or whether it actually existed before, but the classic trend is mainly intralogistics transport. That is now AG vs. Do you think the classic? In addition to fully automated order picking systems, automated incoming goods receipt, for example automated outgoing goods, so fully automated factories, then there are also intelligent storage technologies, so high-bay trail systems, we have a lot of automatic delivery machines and so on, so system is I think one point, so intralogistics I would say. The topic of automation paired but then of course also with AI, that is also a huge topic at the moment, especially around this topic and most companies have giants. We already have relatively big problems with stocks and that's the topic, inventory and inventory management. Because it's getting more and more complex with a clear forecast, you try to reduce understanding or just keep it as optimal. It usually has the advantage of lower capital commitment, which is better for your balance sheet in the end and expenditure will also be reduced in the future and also have relatively many problems. I think we always look in the direction of transport, so for us too, transport and network optimization is, as I would say, always our bread and butter business, because regardless of any crises or economic situations, consulting is always optimized and there is now also the use of artificial intelligence or whatever intelligence systems that are able to optimally realign your network, for example in the forecast for 25 years' time. But also to intelligently manage and orchestrate your transports, I would say, I think AI is like the huge point and intralogistics automation.
, then you would say that there are certain bundles or combinations of technologies that are often found.;Yes, I would say, quite clearly in intralogistics it would be automation in the sense of how you can get an intelligent material flow with some kind of intelligence background, because you also need an intelligent material flow, you need an intelligent information flow and yes, that is usually also when you say OK, you need either a very good EAP system or WMS or whatever (there is also MBS), so that always has to be cleanly coupled with the processes and also accordingly with the technology, yes, and in terms of transport time it is exactly the same. You usually have some kind of hardware in the background. That means the truck driver, who is somehow able to pass on his location to the cloud via GPS or whatever and then is able to perhaps couple that with AI and then get optimal boot management, so usually always hardware linked with software intelligent solution, then docked.
Yes, and when implementing these technologies, do you make sure that a certain order is followed, for example, according to what specifications or how?;Yes, it would be more or less - I have to say, we implement very, very little, actually nothing at all. We only do the conceptual implementation, so I don't think I can make a reliable statement there, that's fine.
What would you say? What features in supply chains are most improved by technology? Or substantially improved?;I also believe that the password is the topic of residency, i.e. resilience. There are various disruptive factors within the supply chain that can cause the supply chain not to function as it should, and once you are in a position to do so - I mean, show you forecasting - or a certain flexibility that you can react to at short notice. Make your supply chain resident so that you don't run into bottlenecks, but also don't have excess stocks, because then it always hurts.
And how would you define Supply Chain 4.0 for yourself?;So I want to say, be personally detached and detached from Industry 4.0, that is, you say OK, you have this high degree of collectivity and this totally autonomous, quasi self-controlling factory or self-controlling supply chain and you can simply call it supply chain 40. A Zoom cluster of that is that, you say OK, the supply chain is also completely autonomous, is intelligent and can also react intelligently at any time to avoid corresponding disruptive factors.
And when you say you're basically making conceptual models, how do you see the opportunity for technological progress? That there are new technologies on the market that can now perhaps be incorporated into the next conceptual model.;Yes, well, we have - I'm not responsible for that - we have lots and lots of colleagues who are always in touch. Do we have our own colleagues who only do AI, data science colleagues who I also research, lots of research colleagues who work directly with universities? And of course I'm always looking to see what we can do. We also have our own software division. For example, you can embed AI software, can you create intelligent UX UI? Exactly, we have all the colleagues from the intralogistics department who always go to the relevant trade fairs, exactly, and what we always do is basically in a consulting context. We have a variation of this framework. If you see the matrix, what does it say? I think it was created back then with Industry Type 0, or you see the individual dimensions and then the expression of the dimension, and then, ideally, together with the customer you can always say to a certain extent, OK, where are you at the moment and where do you want to go? Party high-end solution, but usually a relatively simple solution is sufficient.
And would you say from practice? Most of the initiatives for Industry 4.0 come from a problem. Or is it more the case that the technology is being introduced into companies with a push like this?;So with us it's always the case that there is always a specific problem, of course it can also be the case that if the relevant companies are enthusiastic about innovation they do it proactively, but most of the time it's OK with us, there is a specific problem, or things aren't running as they should. The numbers don't fit into the warehouse logistics figures and then we look and see if we can turn things around with the appropriate technology and an intelligent solution? And that's usually where I come in, but I think there is of course the other case, in that there are various companies that are absolute pioneers in this area.
What would you say? These are the key figures that occur most frequently with you, so they come to you and say this and that bothers us, what is the most common problem?;They said, depending on how you define the key figures, well, I can still say it, I was with a large food retailer for a long time and they check, for example, their intralogistics performance by the so-called pallet performance, which basically divides the number of eyebound pallets. Of course, you have the working hours used by the employees, and when you see this number continually goes down, so on vacation you are always bad, which means you have to employ more employees to handle the same number of other pallets. They are actually really simple key figures. You know, okay, you have to counteract this at some point, because it is getting more and more complex, or do you know about stocks, bottlenecks and so on? And there is, for example, one, you know, of course, you have an extremely large number of other key figures, when you have a wide range, your reach explodes, so the reach is the reach should be, these are such classic things, you can do countless artists.
And how do you decide which technologies are introduced into companies? Are there any parameters that you use to weigh things up?;Yes and no, most of the time I can also speak to colleagues, usually in such a way that you always get an idea first and then very, very experienced colleagues come, not me but people who have been doing it for 1015 years. Glass and incident is called a data model, from which you can then roughly derive what makes sense, especially when it comes to inventory optimisation, you know, OK, some kind of inventory optimisation solution is needed, when it comes to intralogistics, you have to get an idea on site, so if you say you want to transfer manually to a partially organised automated process, then you can generally say, I'm using AG vs, because that doesn't make sense, you have tons of different types, for example intralogistics transport, and then you usually have people with us who then look, OK, what makes sense? And then we always have to do a relatively detailed economic analysis, so that we then say OK, we now have 55 alternatives for partially automated transport, each alternative has a corresponding payback period. Then we look at normal economics versus what makes sense from a technological point of view? That's how we know, the things are selected.
Yes OK, so the motive would be first and foremost cost efficiency and then come here;Is always number 1 three times, so exactly economic efficiency is always at least 3.1
And what? Well, you don't have much to do with the implementation, you said, but what? Do I have to look again? The best ones drive which ones? What are the concrete requirements for a company? Would you say this is what is needed before it can really introduce Industry 4.0 technology?;Well, it's always that way, then you were there, your starting point is, I think you first need a high level of process transparency and also data transparency, otherwise it will usually be difficult. Yes, and? And ideally you just have to manage it that way, because many always make the mistake of introducing the appropriate technology or some kind of system, but that is only ever applied to a certain part of the warehouse or the factory, whatever, and you have basically implemented a kind of isolated solution and the goal should really be to get from industry 50 to bankruptcy 50, that is to achieve it holistically, that is. Exactly, we say an absolute paint is always these these these data silos and that is really the case, you know, there is data, suppliers and also suppliers to the purchasing department, whatever, then you have sales data, you usually have the production and logistics data inside and these are usually never linked, especially in our large companies, so and the first requirement is always, especially if you are somehow optimizing the network or doing network optimization or intralogistics optimization, that you manage to transfer it to a common basis, which can then be correlated accordingly, because otherwise you have a chance to somehow get an intelligent flow of information and to align the processes accordingly in this tableau with the system, which can ultimately be implemented there, is usually the case. When introducing, if it is perhaps not supply chain 40, but S 4 Hana, for example, you have to spend a long time or sometimes it takes years until you have aligned your processes with the system and that is a basic requirement, otherwise you can forget about it.
You would say the islands are there, but the bridges to get from island to island are still the Achilles heel.;Yes, yes, yes, sometimes an isolated solution is enough, I think a lot of companies want to say Industry 50 and then there's an article in the newspaper or something, but mostly it's the case that, I don't know, if you need a solution of any kind, the transport from the production chain from the production line to the goods issue is enough, that you implement a 2 LGV, for example, then the question is whether it is Supply Hand 4.0. I would say no, or whether it is simply a technical solution, which is sometimes enough to solve the problem.
. Yes, and would you say? Well, when you talk about AGBS, then you can probably say that pretty precisely. The technologies that solve certain processes completely or do they rather support the processes.;Yes, we can see that something is being interpreted, so if you say you are now using NAGV to supply your production line? Then it would certainly be a supporting process if you said OK, you have a kind of supermarket principle or something where the production targets are automatically supplied, but we simply have enough use cases if you say OK, you have now basically finished producing or picking your things and normally an employee in an AGV would then drive your things 100 meters from the storage area to your goods issue lane or a truck would then dock and an AGV would take over, it can do this just as well, then you would have a replacement of the process, so that is always under.
With the concepts that he creates, do you also create a change management solution for the companies or is that still the responsibility of the companies?;It usually depends on the scope. I can also give you some indication of how big the effort is, so if it's a small change in the warehouse, then there's usually no major change management, or most of the time we get to it when a warehouse is initially planned, then you don't need it at all, of course when it's a large network project where you have a complete transformation of the network and let's say 12 locations are closed and two new locations are added. That's a huge change, of course, and it's usually carried out by the entire organization. But then the company itself is usually responsible for that, as it's usually very extensive.
, exactly OK, and how do you then ensure that this technology, which you may then recommend in this use case, remains efficient in the future?;Well, efficiency is always a big topic. We can only look at it from the point in time when the profitability analysis was drawn up, so when you have a warehouse plan for 2035, which is totally common practice, you can only make a phone call in 10 years' time, compare the prices from today and also the prices as they stand today. Because you can include inflation areas, which look at the prices in inflation terms. Of course you try to include efficiency, that is, lead times, maintenance costs, investment costs, these are also things that you try to take into account today. Will it still be like this in 10 years' time and do I know how long the depreciation period is? From an LGV of 89 years to 10 years, it is of course extremely difficult to determine that it will be just as efficient over this period compared to other technologies as it was back then.
OK, but do you somehow give the customer something directly where the technologies are then checked a bit afterwards, so that you suggest regular audits or something like that?;Well, I think you personally have to do that anyway, so you always have a certain amount of maintenance work, upkeep work and testing to do anyway. Yes, and of course you also tell the customer that this technology was only recommended for this one process or for this process with the respective circumstances at time x, if of course the circumstances now change, that means the throughput, for example, shoots up dramatically or you think about it, okay, does an AGV still make sense if you always have 100 LG PS table bales instead of 20, then you can think about whether it makes sense to change?
and how would you define that a technology has been successfully introduced into a company?;Yes, well, it is also important to look at the issue retrospectively after implementation. Most of the time they are already gone. Yes, I think that in the best case scenario it is when the. The Feinvest, well you usually already know what you are being given in terms of costs, but if you reinvest, you don't get out of hand. Most of the time I somehow have the remaining costs, then the maintenance and the start-up costs are absolutely in proportion, so just as expected, because if your system doesn't always fail, do you automatically have bottlenecks? Yes, and that the corresponding purpose was simply fulfilled. And accordingly the performance indicators that we have just talked about also increased, because otherwise, if I got worse or stayed the same, they could have saved money in the end.
Yes, and with these conceptual models you also do it in such a way that you might recommend technologies like the AGVS and then say OK, because you have introduced it now, it would be smart to then in the next step, when you have money again or whatever, introduce the technology that complements it and then also provide roadmaps, right?;Yes, we sometimes go along with roadmaps that say OK, today you're at point a. Now we're aiming for something short-term, maybe the step to point B, for example partial automation, whatever, and then point C, point d would be OK, an automation or an intelligent transport chain and your entire intralogistics material flow, for example, and then we give, so if that was the appropriate scope of advice, because it was requested, that we create a roadmap like that. The implementation again after the question is usually not included.
Yes, yes, and if you now imagine that you have a supply chain that does not yet have Industry 4.0, does not have digitization, but has the usual supply chain problems, that is the issue that you would tackle first.;Yes, well, you can generally say that I'm always bad, I'm bad, I'm definitely looking into it. With transport and network because transport and network, even if you think intralogistics is important, but that's a drop in the ocean. In contrast to transport costs, especially if you have a lot of outbound bound feed, that many warning voices are distributed around it, then of course it makes a lot of sense to look at that in order to optimize your transport, so that you have as few empty runs as possible and as high a capacity as possible. Trucks, good, intelligent route connections, then? That's why the first point is that in terms of intralogistics you have to look very closely at the throughput you have, because in general I am of the opinion that automation needs a certain throughput, otherwise it doesn't make sense if you only have 20 pallets going in and out a day, then you might as well put an employee there, you don't need a whole fleet of LG vs or intelligence systems, you'll never get that amortised. You'll probably need 120 years for that, but if you have an extremely high throughput, let's say 1,000,000 pallets coming in and out per year and you're able to work 24 hours a day, then of course it makes sense, then you can of course look and see what exactly am I doing? What are the requirements? Then you need the best system.
So a data overview and data transparency is right, yes, OK, then I have two final questions, the first would be what would you say are essential resources for introducing Industry 4.0?;"That is always the first step. Well, I don't think the most important resource is probably money, because the whole thing is of course expensive. I think you also need - I can only say from my own experience - I also worked a bit as a working student or intern. I think you just need the internal resources of employees who have the appropriate skills, otherwise I can say from my own experience that that is also difficult. Because there is an incredible amount of complexity behind it. And you also have to - I don't think you know - resources are a prerequisite; the entire company has to have an understanding of this, from start to finish, from purchasing to sales and also the supporting processes such as logistics. We are now in karaoke to support one. The quality management process has to have exactly the same understanding of this."
OK, and which explicit skills, independent of perhaps the understanding of it, would you say, are still essential.;Whole staff related or what do you mean like?
Yes, maybe employee-related, but also maybe culturally related within the company, maybe something like that, so what are the skills that a company should have?;OK, yes, I think you first need a certain openness to new technologies or whatever, a certain spirit of innovation, otherwise it will be difficult. In the best case scenario, you'll manage it before then. It is difficult, however, to simply anchor a certain flexibility within your processes. And of course to have flexibility in your thinking right from the start, because if you think so incredibly strongly and align your processes and topics accordingly, it will be very difficult in my opinion. That as a skill, at least if that is what they are, say OK, OK, way of thinking and on the skill side, OK, the hard skills that you have to bring with you, I think it is essential that everyone, everyone with an engineering background or every logistician needs a certain skill set in my opinion. Yes, information technology, so IT industry type 0, it doesn't even have to be that you necessarily have to be able to program, but you do need a certain understanding of it, simply because otherwise it will be extremely difficult.
OK, great, that's already a very good classification. Well, then we can start with the real part of the interview, so to speak, and I would first like to ask a few questions about the current status: which Industry 4.0 technologies are you currently using in the supply chain?;So we have an important point with our hazardous substances, that is, we have automation, so to speak, or we call it AKLS for short, yes, automatic sorting systems, which also carry out certain checks using robotics. That means, so if it is damaged on the outside, there are very specific I can explain to you very well, it's a bit simpler, a Coke can is bent, then it depends on how it is actually just a dent, then it's fine. If it is a sharp-edged bend, then this product can no longer be stored, sold or transported. This can be determined using 360-degree scans. And goods are sorted out, that basically means an automated level of incoming goods inspection. We have that and we currently also have multi-carrier software, which automatically uses, so basically the goods are picked, brought to a transfer point and automatically taken over by systems, packed. And then it is assessed by an AI using 360-degree scanning and weighing technology, and the AI ​​then decides which provider makes the most sense and is the cheapest and most environmentally friendly way to get the whole thing to the customer. Yes, because it is important because there is a bit of a risk of sustainability being a big deal. If, for example, I hand things over to DHL in Berlin, it makes little sense to go to the Brandenburg area, for example from Berlin to Ahrensfelde. It has to be UPS because UPS is nearby, which means it has a shorter journey and a shorter delivery route. While a lot of DHL items are only delivered to the other side of Berlin, towards Dahlewitz, which means we have much longer journeys, the AI ​​determines which service provider makes the most sense.
OK, does that mean that you have a bundling of several Industry 4.0 technologies in this case, so with scanning with AI, yes, okay.;Right now we are working on a new software for tour planning, so that is my next project, that is what I started with us for. That means, we currently have PTV, I don't know if that means anything to you and that is a slightly more well-known tool for tour planning and Couplink as a telematics solution for drivers. Basically we want to consolidate this into one system and we are looking at AI-based learning, that will be our next step. That means that at the moment the tour planners have to do a lot themselves. That is the position how long does the customer have to wait simply based on experience? Demographic change many tour planners are leaving many truck drivers are leaving. I need for the young staff who simply do not have the decades of experience. With our customers I need an AI that supports them and says yes, be careful at the hospital when we deliver. That always takes half an hour and not 10 minutes, that will be AI-supported in the future.
Yes, OK, did you follow a certain order when implementing the technologies? So was there something that was implemented first and then built upon, right?;Exactly, the very first thing we have is basically what we call the hardware, which means first of all what concerns the warehouse, the hard stuff, the hard logistics so to speak, that is always introduced first from the warehouse and then the artificial intelligence is brought in. That means first the human comes in as an intermediate step and then we try to run them in parallel, so to speak, because the AI ​​always has to learn at the beginning. Oh, I can teach you a lot at first, but it is best if I always see it in comparison and then? v
Yes, definitely. What features have been improved in your supply chain thanks to these technologies?;"Efficiency in terms of sustainability and cost savings because we select the most sensible service provider, for example with the multi-carrier software, we automatically get the cheapest prices because it takes a certain amount of work off their hands. They don't have to shuttle a lot of overnight trains, but can sometimes transship directly at the same point where the goods arrive from us. This means we get cheaper prices and reduce costs. We also need less packaging material; the longer the route, the more stable the packaging has to be. This means we have a lot of experience in environmental and, above all, cost terms."
And are there still other challenges, for example in your supply chain, that still require technological solutions?;In any case, the customer's requirement for sustainability - that means we have to be much more transparent with the data - is not always that easy to find out because... Describing AI in quotation marks - that also means developing dashboards that customers can understand - is a challenge. The customer requests certain data - not just how much CO2 I emitted, but also how fast my delivery was, how many failures I had with this delivery - we have to see what other errors we find in the AI? That means, for example, that the AI ​​has decided that it is under 50 kilos that can be shipped with a parcel, and that it is over 50 kilos that can be shipped with a pallet, and suddenly the parcel service and truck are at the customer's door. And then there are errors, which are of course teething problems that still occur, those are things. Customers want this data, and these are basically KPIS that we cannot yet provide. Well, you first have technology and then you have to create this KPIS because it is only then that these KPIS develop. What does the customer want to know? And of course, we have chemistry, we have a lot of chemistry, we are a large company for cleaning and pharmaceutical products and the like, and of course also the transport of hazardous goods, so we cannot use EKI at the moment. That means we have to take a lot of manual countermeasures. That is a challenge, but above all we have a challenge. Due to the demographic change that is coming our way, we have a lot of staff who have an incredible amount of knowledge that I simply cannot get into a computer at that speed. And then? Apart from the soft skills that you first have to get into someone, there is of course also the problem of young talent, i.e. someone who wants to tackle this and we actually need more artificial intelligence that stores knowledge and passes it on as suggestions - we don't have that yet.
Must also be in the form of experiences and so on, what you save up with the 30 minutes wait and not 10 minutes, that is of course this yes this experience that you can't actually write down on a piece of paper, because then nobody will understand it, but the so;Exactly. Those are exactly the things, for example. We are of course planning a new warehouse location, for example, and we know from experience when will the peaks be? What kind of customers will be connected there? Because we generate them in advance and otherwise we couldn't plan a new warehouse and that is something an AI needs experience that is already available in a computer program and that is not yet, let's say, it's a green field where am I supposed to get that from? And typing it down by hand in quotation marks, that won't work and of course I need a lot of manpower at the beginning and on the other hand I then have the problem of employing a lot of people who are important. I get this location up and running 5 years later I have an AI that can do it really well, what do I do with the people, right, these are the kinds of things that will lead me to an ethical question at some point.
How would you roughly define Supply Chain 4.0 for yourself?;For me, this includes the fact that we have absolutely AI-based learning, which means in all our processes, that the processes can be digitally mapped, that I have a kind of digital twin of the company and of the entire supply chain and that, especially with regard to process changes, process management - when I touch something, I have to be able to see in a system what kind of dominoes can fall - as well as partially automated warehouse and delivery processes, which means working less towards certain manual processes. For me, that's 4.0 - I want to work towards being able to use the existing human resources as effectively as possible. Because when I grow, I have the problem that I don't grow as fast as I do. Human, if I get resources behind it, and I have to compensate for that with AI.
OK, and what would you say about your company when you started? With Industry 4.0, in supply chain management, what was the technological status of the entire company? Regarding Industry 4.0.;Excel. So we were at the point where we started saying that we urgently need to jump on the digital world bandwagon. It was very rudimentary, we were very basic. That. Did you notice that faxes and letters were still being sent back and forth? That has all been abolished. So a small example company-wide, that applies to all areas and divisions, for example, we no longer have any landline phones lying around, everything is mainly MS Teams based and communication is limited to that. The servers are consolidated, which means I no longer have loads of servers and caches lying around somewhere. A lot of cloud-based work and therefore real-time work.
Yes, OK, very good, then let's move on to the next part. How do you recognize opportunities for technological progress?;This means that we sometimes work in a presentation, for example with several people at the same time. Kp is are collected automatically. This has already made a big leap forward, it wasn't like that before - before we were really just using paper, pen, Excel, tables. We have the same idea as people, we ourselves. We regularly carry out employee surveys, we have a kind of digital ideas box where you can write an email - whether privately or from the company email address - and send it there - anonymously or with your name, depending on how you want it. And you can make concrete suggestions there, because those who have it in their hands and have to work with it every day know best, otherwise we regularly have audits through our regional management of all possible processes and locations, where we specifically look at where Harpards is lagging behind - where could we add something using new technology?
And the OK? And you get the technologies through consulting firms, for example, or through your staff, who already have the relevant know-how?;Of course, we also sometimes bring in consultants. Exactly, we support ourselves very strongly. This interest in trade fairs and specialist conferences and we train our employees specifically for this.
Have the initiatives in Industry 4.0 so far been more of a problem analysis or have solutions been brought into the company and then the problems also been applied.;We have e-learning, of course, and we can do that at any time, for example, if I think there's something missing in e-learning, something needs to be added, then we can add that in, and this strengthening of the know-how automatically brings back feedback, where you say, well, I could use this and that here too, and that then comes into project management, where we then have concrete project approaches to use 4.0 technology. Both, but mainly it is actually through problem analysis, because of course you become blind to what's going on at some point, like employees who are in their department. Yes, I've been doing it like that for 40 years, it works, it could be better, but well, mainly through problem analysis. The problem analyses were often triggered by, for example, we looked at a storage location for a sound planning system, and when you start something there, that's what I meant, the dominoes fall left and right, yes, but then it doesn't work anymore, if you take the program away from me, then the process no longer works.
And who is, who is involved in the decision for now? Which technology, so to speak, or in which areas needs to be looked at, who is involved or responsible?;So, let's say, you often come across these problems, so problem analysis is the main part.
Yes, you just mentioned the lack of staff and so on and the fact that there is a bit of a loss of know-how and the complexity of passing it on, but were there other triggers that have now driven these technology implementations forward?;Exactly, so we have a team of project managers in every division and they are specifically responsible for the project proposals that we evaluate. As I said, this ticket system, which is where you can also see the suggestions from employees. We then have to look at it too. When we receive a problem report or when we discover something through another project, then we have to analyze it, get the relevant departments involved and then work on appropriate suggestions to the board, specifically the project and IT managers. They are responsible for this. We also have an OPEX department that is connected to us and they are basically the main drivers of these changes.
Was there a specific trigger for Industry 4.0 technologies?;Corona. Well, it's simple. That was the classic: we're a 365-day operation, so of course we don't deliver on weekends, that's not correct, but that's how it is. We supply hospitals, we supply industrial sectors from every small doctor's office to every building cleaner that you somehow know, they have to be supplied, every Christmas market, all the disposable items that are delivered there are delivered through us and because of Corona in particular, we've literally hit a wall. Many processes had to be presented differently because they simply couldn't be done manually at all. Because these manual processes always went from person to person, it no longer worked and that made you realize, oops, we're still standing with one foot in the 1990s, we really need to get into the 2000s too, and that's why that was the biggest impetus for us, even in the years after Corona, we came together to form IGVSE and said, OK, if I giva SE. We would be a group and we would be a group for the future. That's how it came about, that was the main driver. Other drivers are simply we hire a lot of young staff, they also have certain requirements of their employers, not just for their own jobs, but they want you to identify with your company. I would also like to be proud to work for a company like this, and that is precisely the point - the young people, I'll say, who are coming in at 20 - the young people, it sounds like Steiner, I'm 32, sorry. But let me put it this way: when they come in at 20, or our trainees in particular, they have certain requirements as to how they imagine the world, and that must be guaranteed. It's little things like there have to be terminals where anyone, even those who don't have a computer, can go and look around the intranet without having to use an app or anything else - it has to be as simple as possible, simply informative. Digital and networked, and these are certain requirements that must first be implemented.
Yes, OK, you just said that you work a bit with management consultancies and so on, but do you also work with other companies that are also implementing Industry 4.0?;Above all, our suppliers, of course, and we, for example, are not competitors, which is why I can say that DM is a very well-known brand and the DM drugstore, for example, has opened one of the most modern logistics centers in Wustermark near Berlin. So fully automated, robot technology and the like are a good fit and we have made a specific agreement with them that our entire supply chain project managers, including me, can look at this in November and exchange ideas with their project managers to see what we can do, because we are very heterogeneous in our product range, and we are also someone who is basically, yes, the end customer of the building cleaners, he gets 3 rags and not 25, so full automation is not possible, but what can we learn from? Specifically from companies that have already invented the wheel. These are exactly the kind of collaborations that we enter into with other companies, for example.
Yes, great, OK, then on to the next part, how do you decide on the technological possibility or the need for improvement, which you go into first, so to speak.;So the prioritization basically depends on the benefit - this benefit should definitely be the customer view at the moment, that is our company strategy. A lot has to be done for the customer, not just to say look what we have done, but it simply has to run as smoothly as possible. We have a marketing strategy called the agiva effect, which means that the customer should get an all-round carefree package, so they have to worry about everything as little as possible and that of course includes the supply chain and the second driver of prioritization is of course the costs, which means that we also have to make sure that we - it is very cost-intensive, these projects - things like this are very cost-intensive and we have 28 locations, which means that we also have to consider so-called logistics compasses that we have created for the region, which use an analysis to determine which locations are the most... Sometimes they are the most backward and they are the focus, those who are furthest behind have to be dealt with first because they are the most inefficient and of course also the most comparable for the customer with system catering, which is not very easy to compare. So I would say now to compare a location like Magdeburg Erfurt with Berlin would not be fair and that brings us to the point that I don't know, if I can't compare them it's no use. That's why these logistics compasses are used, a consulting firm was involved, for example, and our supply chain managers, who then specifically said in a categorization red, yellow, green, green are our most modern locations. Central Neumünster, for example, and? Red are the ones that definitely have to have all projects implemented immediately, no matter what they are.
OK, and who is, who decides and who is involved? And responsible for these decisions as to what is implemented first.;Status, that means we currently have a CEO and 3 other board members? And they then ultimately decide together with the advisory board on financing and approval. We always plan, so to speak, in September of this year for the entire planning for next year, and because we know that specific projects will suddenly appear in the middle of the year, we plan so-called project costs without specifying them. So that means we have already budgeted for additional funds, although we don't yet know what they are for, simply so that we can act quickly, but in concrete terms this is always decided by the board together with the advisory board based on the presentation we have made and of course the decision from the logistics compasses.
. . Yes OK and would you say that you are pursuing a more results-oriented approach or a more opportunity-oriented one?;Very opportunity-oriented - we have also had a new chairman since July and Matthias Rucker is very opportunity-oriented, he really wants to - let's put it this way. The IG is running well, we have good sales. We have growth, which means that there is nothing where we can say we urgently need to increase sales, we urgently need to win more customers. That is of course something that every company should strive for, but... In itself, that is not a red flag, I would say, but rather opportunities must be seized now, when financial means are available and, of course, the employees are there, because I still have 56 years, where I come from the region. I have a lot of employees and at the same time, that these, where you now have meetings with people who have just left university and this mix of knowledge, I have to take advantage of that now, because in 5 years' time, 6 years, this exact period of time will be gone. This opportunity for them to exchange ideas, specifically these employees, has been missed.
Yes, yes and then the experience has to be collected again, so to speak, yes;Correct, correct, then I have to fall on my face again to learn
Yes, OK, I understand, when selecting technologies, what motives do you pursue most?;The motives are very specifically based on sustainability - sustainability is not just about the environment for us, but also about sustainability in terms of processes. That means I have to have a sustainable process, either circular or I have to have something that brings a lot to the customer and the company at the same time. That means that attention is paid to whether it is just a customer aspect, then the first thing that is evaluated is whether this technology really makes sense if I just put money into it? From the supply chain, for example. It has to have a certain effect for both and the motto is not FTES, i.e. saving on workers, but keeping the ones we have. And those are the selection criteria, so to speak, because that is also an important aspect that is not and many are afraid of AI and of technology 40. The best way to deal with that is to communicate openly and say that this technology should not take away your place, but rather it should fill a place that has never been occupied before. So to speak, occupying them to make your work easier so that you are freed up for other things, because as we have learned, the most important thing is not the workforce itself, but the know-how, the knowledge of the employee who basically has to monitor that the AI ​​does not draw any wrong conclusions, for example from incorrect data sets, an internet interruption or or or or that is why people are important to us and that is what they should do and that is where we have to get to and we have to take away people's fear.
How do you implement these selected technologies? So what is your approach?;So the approach is exactly that before we start to implement something, there is first a large-scale information exchange via various channels. That means that the whole company is informed about what we are planning and then there are town halls, for example, where employees can ask questions and maybe even raise concerns. If you want to raise concerns again, just to take that into account when we then move on to actual implementation, we always use what I would call a Test One procedure, which means that we choose a location where we specifically want to try out this technology and which also has the best conditions for it. But it always has to be a location that is also in so-called problem areas. By problem areas I mean, if something works in Berlin, for example, I can definitely get it to work in Hamburg. That's simply the experience that the company has that we select specific locations and test them in a test environment - that means that normal operations continue in that area and, for example, a track is replaced or part of the warehouse is replaced or supplemented. And that runs in parallel at the beginning of the implementation so that we can make a comparison. What is it like before and after? We don't just turn the lights off somewhere and say, fine, that's it, now do it here, we let it run in parallel so that we can specifically identify problems in terms of the process and when we then say that we are safe with it, then it is rolled out to that location and only then is a concrete rollout plan for other locations planned - not beforehand.
OK, and who is instrumental in deciding what will be done and where?;That's exactly when we're already in this project phase, that is, after projects have been approved, i.e. when the board of directors and the advisory board have agreed, then we are in the process of becoming the project leader, so to speak, that's basically the respective project manager.
OK, what would you say were the prerequisites in your company that first had to be met so that Industry 4.0 technologies could be introduced at all?;He then has the upper hand. He decides which location is used where and how the implementation works is also decided more by the steering. In other words, we have a steering committee, which is made up of the chairman of the board in each division, i.e. a member of the board is responsible. We have someone specifically who is responsible for this. We have someone for finance, for supply chain and so on, and then there is our FK 1, so that's the manager 1, who is the person who thinks over the entire area of ​​the supply chain for projects, systems and things like that. The respective project manager sits there, and the three then decide by majority. Sometimes it's 2 against 1, in an emergency we'll do it or we won't.
Which ones had to be taken?;When were they made, right? Which ones? The most classic are data connections, well, let me put it this way: we had locations of course, where we introduced really great software, like inventory management software, ordering software, etc., but then they were down every other day because the data connection simply wasn't sufficient. So we had to create the conditions for all 40 technologies: electricity and data connections, and these two are incredibly poorly distributed in Germany, while in certain regions they are incredibly well connected. We also have our locations in regions that, although they are very centrally located or in big cities, have almost no supply at all. In practical terms, we can't even put a charging station for e-cars in there as a comparison, because then the lights would immediately go out in the area, which means they are really poorly connected, and that is an example, for example, Ahrensfelde near Berlin. So practically I just need to cross the bridge and I'm in Berlin and yet the data connection is so bad that our automatic small parts warehouse regularly crashes and that's just the way it is. We have to approach the communities and talk to them and sometimes also co-finance them so that we get certain connections, that's our biggest challenge with all the current projects that are in the pipeline for them, let me just say that our locations in rural areas - which locations are always rural. They are never in the city center and they are not well connected to anything. Sometimes we have to set up photovoltaic systems to have enough power, then we have too much. Do we have to feed it in? But we have to make sure that our locations have enough supply in the first place.
Yes, OK, do you have certain processes or systems that can help with implementation?;We have, let's say, a very classic control mechanism in the implementation, which means that we work with a ticket system. Are there specific control members in project teams who deal with project controlling? And do we always have someone from IT who specifically monitors data? That means that they also monitor whether the right data is available at the right time, and that is also very simple data such as the elevator has risen. That means that when a technology like this stops, you have to know exactly where to look and that is why you have to think not only about data that is relevant to delivery, but also about the data for managing this technology and that is a big challenge. That is something we definitely have to work on. That means that we don't have anyone anywhere who actually uses the computer and has some kind of remote monitoring of this technology. We definitely need to introduce someone who can say, OK, it actually depends on 4 robots, 3, and so on.
How do you deal with resources and capacities during implementation? You said it's IT? But also employees and financial resources, so how much do you have available, what is actually available for implementation?;That's what's missing in our moments, that's exactly the point we want to look at at DM, for example, because they have a really great monitoring system. The framework for this budget is set at the beginning, so to speak. But with us it's not rigid at the start. That means we establish within a project that we definitely need to do more in one area, then we suggest it to the board or the advisory board and we have to justify it. That means they're flexible, but we always have a 20 rule from the start - are we on that? That means if I say I actually need 1,000,000, I'll just plan 1.2 so that I'm flexible and the goal is then to only spend 800,000, just like that. Exactly. Then you're always on the move with resources. I would say that the bottleneck is always IT. I never have enough IT. I have never experienced this at any company, although there are so many in the world, but there are never enough because there are just so many issues to be addressed, because in Germany in particular we are going through this extreme upheaval and it's just like, I'm programming something. That's why our IT is already trying to use AI to check, let's say, simple programming. That doesn't mean to write it, but simply to check for errors. Do we sometimes let an AI look over it? And then it checks, okay, there will definitely be a problem and then our IT can start there, but how do we plan that? We have our FK 1, so to speak, which always reports who has how much capacity in the various work areas. But IT is always behind. Those who are - I wouldn't want to swap places with my colleagues, they are really busy too, I have resources left over everywhere, I'll say now, I know, I always have someone everywhere because we have so many locations, I always have a location somewhere where I say it has the capacity to become a test location in order to introduce it. But we always have to address andie.at, that is our absolute bottleneck and we plan that specifically via the FK 1, which accordingly has a ticket and can you see exactly who is doing what in the system?
How do you generally ensure the willingness to change in the company? And also the acceptance of technology, especially in the warehouse, sometimes it is not so easy. As you already mentioned, we don't want to take your job away, so how do you do that?;"Specifically through information campaigns, which means that our board members are also involved in this, which means that all board members are constantly on the move at the locations. We also have a tool like ""ask the board"" where you can set up specific painting sessions over the Internet and get rid of all your worries and concerns. The willingness to change is incredibly high, which is extraordinary, I have to say that I have never had that in any other company before. It is not ubiquitous, but it is very, very high, the willingness to change simply because a lot of people are now in the light. Doing some things by hand, no, it is easy to do, no, so the work is getting more and the support is getting less and less, fewer and fewer people are coming. It is getting more difficult to find trainees etc. and that is why people are fed up with certain types of work, which automatically increases awareness and education. We provide a lot of things free of charge, many paid magazines, online, access and so on are made available to all employees free of charge so that they can inform themselves and this is also incredibly gratefully received because they are very curious and this automatically reduces the fear of this technology and the fear of being replaced by this technology. Many people are only now learning through this information and the fact that we are also specifically dealing with other companies, with whole groups of people - not just the managers, but also the warehouse employee can go along and look at it, well, for example now at DM, I'll say again, it's not just the project managers who go there. We also have specific systems. IT people, warehouse employees, they can watch it too, just to see that the same employee who was driving a forklift before is still there, waiting for the robot to bring him the goods and making sure that the process runs smoothly and that increases the willingness to take part enormously and this word of mouth in the company is the most important thing - much more important than all the good stories and newspaper articles."
How do you ensure that the technologies you use will continue to work efficiently in the future and remain sustainable?;Exactly, so we always say to ourselves, we will monitor this system for a year in the sense that we will have project reporting afterwards. Does that mean that a project is not simply over then? Cut Ente Schön, congratulations now please, but we monitor it specifically as project managers, we always look at the data facts. How is it going? Are there failures, if so, how many and what is the reason? And we specifically roll out projects again if we say there is some catching up to do. And then it is the case that the companies get specific agreements from us in their contracts. For example, with the new companies that we are looking for for our tour planning sound, hearing software and telematics, they are given very specific instructions to keep us up to date at all times. About the latest products and changes and we also offer ourselves as a test, which means that the Igfa itself offers companies, when they have invented something new, the opportunity to test it with us. At one location, for example? That's why we have, for example, our headquarters in Neumnster, where we currently have various suppliers who deliver trucks. E Fools and electric trucks are being tested by the companies themselves.
Yes, definitely and you also know what is good and what is not, without perhaps having spent a lot of money, of course;And someone said, a bit angrily, that you always have the newest one in the house.
Exactly right, so if you have introduced something, how do you ensure that it is OK, this really gives us a competitive advantage, i.e. we have a higher margin or we are faster or we are more sustainable. So how do you determine this afterwards?;Exactly, there are those who have the hard facts, the hard facts, where we say OK, these are very clear figures that give us this, and then of course we also have the point of doing surveys again, which means there is a lot. We do a lot of surveys. Whether it is about IT or something similar, we specifically question employees and our customers. Our greatest asset is of course our field staff, who are always very close to the customer and give us honest feedback on whether the customer thinks it is good or annoying, and we are not above reversing something, so we said we have had that, for example at the location in Leipzig, and simply said OK, that did not go down well with the customer. That was too detailed. Do you need something completely different? And then we switched it off and it went back to the status quo and then said OK, let's do it again, we need something completely new. These are the concrete problems. Sustainability is basically collected in soft facts, so you have to chase after a lot of things, I'll say, and ask questions. In concrete terms, we have our own team for this, the sustainability team. We have an e-business development team, which means that they actually collect this data. Surveys are carried out in an advisory capacity, and of course through very simple seals and certifications. You can save yourself a lot of internal work by getting a certification company for certain areas and saying, OK, I think I am now sustainable for this location xy, there are now 100 seals, then these audit companies come in and they ask the right questions and demand certain KPIs, which you might say, oh yes, I can't deliver that yet, I have to see how I do it first. This makes you reflect on yourself and then you get a pass or fail. And this is how you then determine whether something makes sense or not. So, sometimes there is no need to reinvent the wheel.
Are you using roadmapping techniques now to plan the future? Regarding Industry 4.0.;That is exactly what is currently being worked on. Collaboration with the board - this is where our FK 1 in particular are of course needed, they are waiting for our input, where we then worked out these suggestions this year and submitted them, how we envisage the GFA 40, so to speak. That is now at the top - we always like to say at the top, because they really are at the top - the board, those up there, yes, they are very approachable, you have to say all doors are always open and so, they are not at all aloof. Thank God, it is sometimes different but. They are now working specifically with their FK 1 on making a roadmap out of it and saying what is our Agenda 28, our Agenda 3035 - an example of this is our own fleet policy, that is, we have company car policies etc., which are now, for example, totally outdated, there is nothing in it about real estate etc. and there is a lot of shouting and everything has been completely stopped. First of all, they completely stopped everything and said, OK, now we're going to take rental cars for everyone who needs one right now or is getting a new one and we're going to revise all of these guidelines. No, and that will be included in this roadmap. By when do we want to have implemented what? And that is expected for the end of January, beginning of February and we all want to stick to this strategy.
If we were to think about it, you had to go into a new company that doesn't yet have Industry 4.0 technologies in supply chain management but of course has the usual supply chain problems, what would you tackle first? Problems with Industry 4.0, so how would you set it up in broad terms?;Very roughly, I can even make a comparison, I can say back then at Berliner Schrauben, they had nothing at all, an Excel table with the shelves in it, we had to get a coefficient from that. In the morning the drivers went through a stack of delivery notes and sorted them according to where the customers were best placed. There was nothing at all, it was all paper, it was just like you know it from the nineties. Even the picking is checked off with a packing list in pencil and then signed, so the most important thing that I would start with would be an AI-based inventory management system. So that you definitely have an overview and this, I'm telling you, there are non-AI-based, there are AI, based, non-AI-based are something like Devas, for example. They are very dry programs. I just type in the inventory, I book the goods receipt which makes a plus or minus and that's it, they don't do anything useful for me, AI is what happens, I have a logically thinking AI behind it which tells me exactly at what peak I should buy which products and when not. When should I store them in and out and introduce chaotic storage? Very often, many people stick to their very fixed places, which is very typical for Lega and logistics locations. Yes, that is the picking station. Undercarriage is simply much more efficient and for that I definitely need an AI-based way of thinking which then specifically always looks nearby and shortens walking routes and I would definitely follow on from that next - that means this logical thinking of the procedure, automation of invoices and orders, but also this factor of bundling - I don't know how else to explain it. That means, for example, we have the system saying yes, order now, yes, I'll order now, now I'm selling something, then it says order again, no, that means it has to be able to bundle in a certain rhythm, logically be able to send it out, okay. Now I've reached the free house limit, send it out automatically, regardless of whether it's full or not and things like that and I don't need a human for that, I need an AI, that's very important. The last thing is, for me that would actually be to convert physical processes into robotics, that would be the very last thing for me, for me the software and AI-based learning would be in the foreground.
   very good, then we come to the last part and that is about what would you say are the specific resources? Which are essential in any case, without which we cannot implement Supply Chain 4.0, so something like which technology do we definitely need? What kind of employees do we definitely need and how should we be financially positioned to be able to go in that direction at all?;Yes, for me technology would be the basic supply, that's what I touched on earlier. That is the most important factor, this basic supply from a logistics location, from a supply chain location, regardless of whether that is purchasing or, as I said, sales and the supply chain itself, i.e. delivery, all of that needs a reasonable basic supply, a network. I can, it's great if I put an electric truck there and it has to drive 100 kilometers to refuel, that's not possible. I need the appropriate basic resources for a location, that's the most important thing, everything else I can build on from that. From a human perspective. Now, apart from the fact that there are always too few IT specialists, I need above all - I'll say specialist knowledge - I can always build on it, I need a lot more people who want to change something, and there are actually fewer of them. So many people expect a lot, give a lot, but get relatively little in return. And this is the most important resource, that is, finding people who not only have specialist knowledge but also the motivation, this intrinsic motivation from the outset - I want to get started. I am someone who definitely wants to get started, and that is missing. I actually think the most important resource is that we need communicative employees. Not every employee who wants to get started and, let's say, is willing to learn is a good communicator. In the future, we should have key communication positions in every team that specifically manages or drives forward communication between specialist departments, management boards and external companies, because communication is currently what I need, no matter where I have been in my career up to now. The K in the name always stands for communication and none of the companies with a K have always been very, very bad. Communication is the key factor for all the technology that we have to introduce. The most important resource is communication, and for that I need people who are keen to sell it. That means that if a team has an idea, it has to be sold to another team, and we have to create this internal sales department, because there is hardly any. There are hardly any key, so-called staff positions, that are specifically responsible for communication. There is always one for external PR, but internal PR is always bad, it is always poorly covered and that is the most important key factor in introducing 40 technologies across the board in Germany. Because many companies are already hit by crises, they are afraid to spend money, then we come to the resource of money. Yes, there are products that are the same 1000,000 area for me, but I think that with Technology 4.0 in particular, you should perhaps start small, a practical one.which automatically determines the size, weight and everything, which is fed into an ERP system and automatically selects the right service provider and no longer selects a label. These are web-based, cloud-based programs which are relatively inexpensive for a few license fees a month and a packing table costs a few thousand, which means we can start small and have the confidence to use this technology. Many locations always want to have an automatic warehouse with fully automated processes and they always imagine that, but I'll say it, the little robot which drives down the aisle and automatically collects and wipes up rubbish, that that is also a 40 technology, that that is underestimated.
, yes, that would have been my next question too: what skills do we still need or which are essential?;That's why I think sometimes you have to stop thinking in these huge building blocks and start saying what can I change specifically at my workstation, at my desk, at my computer, to get there? And there is a lack of information here too. Financially, I have to say that a medium-sized company can do it just as well as a large corporation, although it is of course easier for corporations in terms of financing. What is more difficult for corporations is communication.