The "Re" Factor in Green Product Development
Shorter life cycles, time to market, product proliferations are some of the terms one associates with any product development across industries. A lot has been said, written and discussed and yet it leaves a room for further discussions. The basic question one asks is WHY?
Coming back to the answer of the question, why there is still room for further discussions?
The answer is simple : It’s innovation. The evolution of product life cycle has also changed the way organizations work today. Innovation has became the key differentiation and the one who is not vigilant and innovative, will be crushed by the competition.
Being innovative does not mean that one has to bring out innovative products every time. Innovation is not limited to the product but it is also about process, tools and methodologies which go into the development of product or enable product development.
A same product which takes 12- 15 months of development , if can be brought to market, say in 6-7 months what it would reflect? It would reflect that even with the same product and reducing development time one can still expect to gain higher market share. This reduction is only possible if one finds innovative ways of working.
Having said all this, the products of today are facing another challenge which requires strong innovation. Yes, the impact on environment. "The impact of and on Green".
Someone in the offce was discussing that green regulations are more inclined towards discrete manufacturers and are not well suited for retail manufacturers especially in the textile industry. The opinion was from the various regislations like WEEE, RoHS being very prevalent and impacting strongly discrete manufacturers. All was well till the time EU brought out REACH. With REACH in place now, even textile industries have come under radar as well. Retailers, in europe, have been advised to have certifications for their products to ensure that they do not contain restricted substances as advised by REACH.
Had a chance to look at some of the certifications for textile industry. The one which is very prevalent is Oeko-Tex® certificateand the other one which is picking the pace is from Bureau Veritas, known as "C-Mark" certification.
Some of the European private labels have recently started incorporating certification marks on their clothes. US manufacturers still have to catch up or at least start thinking on those lines. I know REACH is still not very prevalent in US at the moment but sooner or later it will be adopted.
Well, the only reason for doing all this is because it is need of today, for better tomorrow. Not only the final product needs to be environment friendly but also the whole process needs to green enabled. Which means the paradigm shift from “cradle to grave” to “cradle – Re(recycle, remanufacture, redesign, rethink)- grave”.
“Re” is what is forcing us to think differently , think innovative and think Green.



Comments
Very stimulating piece of writing, I especially liked the article buildup, starting from the traditional product development and then reaching the green aspect of it through the introduction of various regulatory frameworks.
One more addition to your "Re" list could be Reducing the amount of energy used. It is central to any business's green product development strategy. I believe if we can't reduce the current energy consumption, it will be difficult to introduce new green-centric processes without adding significant energy load to the organization. If we don't consider this aspect, this excess energy utilization may neutralize the positive impact of our green focus.
Posted by: Robins Tomar | June 19, 2009 06:44 AM
This is superb writing. It is very thought provoking. Real innovation involves a lot of thinking in every aspect of the product development. Would like to see more such writing on this Re topic.
Posted by: awatar singh | June 19, 2009 10:45 AM
@ Robins
Yes, it is a very valid point. In fact, it is one of the governing factors in our proposed framework.
However, it is imperative to note that energy is both an implicit and explicit trait when it comes to Green Product Development.
Let me try to explain it with an example:
A designer, working in the car industry, while designing a component has choices on material selection. With regulations in place, he is bound to select a green compliant material. However, while selecting the green material, he also has to give considerations to look into aspects like components which could be built in shorter time / components that use efficient production process / less labour.
Now, energy is being saved in all the aspects, however it is an implicit statement.
Short manufacturing time / efficient production process / less labour implies less consumption of energy.
The explicit statement of energy would be specifically focussing on low energy process thereby ignoring other governing factors like material and environment. It is preferred to have a mix 'n' match approach.
My recommendation would be that you must read Infosys GreenPLM framework which clearly advocates the same which is:
"Produce products using green compliant material which require less energy and have significantly low impact on environment"
http://www.infosys.com/industries/retail/white-papers/default.asp
Posted by: Jagmeet Singh | June 22, 2009 09:19 AM