The Underlying Problems at AerotechThe underlying problems at AeroTech are: the laser systems engineering group is not producing products within its own projections of cycle time and budget, the team has the lowest productivity as compared to other similar teams in the division. Possible interpretations of these problems are that either Todd is making inaccurate unrealistic projections or the team is not able to work cohesively to attain the set goals within set time and budget. In the second problem the possible interpretation for the problem is that Todd’s team come up with fewer product developments in a given time period or that the number of product delays experienced in the team are higher than in other teams, or that the team is not working together cohesively to meet the team objectives within the set constraints.
[block:c59f14e]
The Underlying Problems at Aerotech is: the laser sensors industry is getting ahead of itself. Aerotech, which was born in 1959 and is based in San Francisco has been doing great for years, and there is no end in sight for a fully integrated laser sensor with very high resolution and low price. At current costs Aerotech would produce a comparable sensor to a commercial machine but this is not as fast and will not be as robust as the SELSA sensor. Although the price of the sensor will almost certainly reach $1,000 USD or more, it is still well over $3,000 to $5,000 below the SELSA industry-standard of $6,000 USD for a sensor that can be used at the $10,000 level (though I believe this is far below the $10,000 to $20,000 price). Given the short end of the market, it is hard to get a comparable sensor that can be purchased in this price level without significant cost increases. At high end sensors prices, this is quite expensive. On the low end of the market, it is highly likely that the next SELSA or other laser sensor to market will not make comparable, and in some places worse quality, sensor components at $10,000 to $20,000.
[block:4fce40b]
The Underlying Problems at Aerotech are: the Laser and sensor manufacturing group is currently pursuing a wide range of technologies that could potentially revolutionize optical manufacturing. At present the laser and sensor manufacturers are all competing with each other to develop this new technology. There is more to it than just trying to build an amazing laser that isn’t based on a single chip. Aerotech has had a few failures before, but the current approach to manufacturing laser parts for a large-scale fabrication process seems to be that the problem is not with the manufacturing methods, but with the technology being considered more generally. For these manufacturing problems there would be a large group (or even entire group) that is interested in building a laser that will be used for manufacturing, but with less effort. It is not a bad combination to have a laser that is a lot more compact like the ATHENS CZ-C laser but which is much more powerful. This combination would not be in the price range of the first chip but would be very affordable for the second step and should produce a far cheaper laser. There are not enough lasers in the world right now which will be capable of doing that. There are other problems with this group such as a lack of an appropriate price tier for each of them, the overall cost of building, the fact that many of them tend to fall outside the cost of that group of products, which would be expensive per unit, and some of the technical issues with the laser (especially in the development phase of the design). These are the issues we are seeing at Aerotech right now.
[block:d55b6c8]
The Underlying Problems at Aerotech is: there are a majority of laser parts available for sale at no additional cost. There are products currently out there like the CR-20 and the NGC-3C which will be able to
[block:c59f14e]
The Underlying Problems at Aerotech is: the laser sensors industry is getting ahead of itself. Aerotech, which was born in 1959 and is based in San Francisco has been doing great for years, and there is no end in sight for a fully integrated laser sensor with very high resolution and low price. At current costs Aerotech would produce a comparable sensor to a commercial machine but this is not as fast and will not be as robust as the SELSA sensor. Although the price of the sensor will almost certainly reach $1,000 USD or more, it is still well over $3,000 to $5,000 below the SELSA industry-standard of $6,000 USD for a sensor that can be used at the $10,000 level (though I believe this is far below the $10,000 to $20,000 price). Given the short end of the market, it is hard to get a comparable sensor that can be purchased in this price level without significant cost increases. At high end sensors prices, this is quite expensive. On the low end of the market, it is highly likely that the next SELSA or other laser sensor to market will not make comparable, and in some places worse quality, sensor components at $10,000 to $20,000.
[block:4fce40b]
The Underlying Problems at Aerotech are: the Laser and sensor manufacturing group is currently pursuing a wide range of technologies that could potentially revolutionize optical manufacturing. At present the laser and sensor manufacturers are all competing with each other to develop this new technology. There is more to it than just trying to build an amazing laser that isn’t based on a single chip. Aerotech has had a few failures before, but the current approach to manufacturing laser parts for a large-scale fabrication process seems to be that the problem is not with the manufacturing methods, but with the technology being considered more generally. For these manufacturing problems there would be a large group (or even entire group) that is interested in building a laser that will be used for manufacturing, but with less effort. It is not a bad combination to have a laser that is a lot more compact like the ATHENS CZ-C laser but which is much more powerful. This combination would not be in the price range of the first chip but would be very affordable for the second step and should produce a far cheaper laser. There are not enough lasers in the world right now which will be capable of doing that. There are other problems with this group such as a lack of an appropriate price tier for each of them, the overall cost of building, the fact that many of them tend to fall outside the cost of that group of products, which would be expensive per unit, and some of the technical issues with the laser (especially in the development phase of the design). These are the issues we are seeing at Aerotech right now.
[block:d55b6c8]
The Underlying Problems at Aerotech is: there are a majority of laser parts available for sale at no additional cost. There are products currently out there like the CR-20 and the NGC-3C which will be able to
[block:c59f14e]
The Underlying Problems at Aerotech is: the laser sensors industry is getting ahead of itself. Aerotech, which was born in 1959 and is based in San Francisco has been doing great for years, and there is no end in sight for a fully integrated laser sensor with very high resolution and low price. At current costs Aerotech would produce a comparable sensor to a commercial machine but this is not as fast and will not be as robust as the SELSA sensor. Although the price of the sensor will almost certainly reach $1,000 USD or more, it is still well over $3,000 to $5,000 below the SELSA industry-standard of $6,000 USD for a sensor that can be used at the $10,000 level (though I believe this is far below the $10,000 to $20,000 price). Given the short end of the market, it is hard to get a comparable sensor that can be purchased in this price level without significant cost increases. At high end sensors prices, this is quite expensive. On the low end of the market, it is highly likely that the next SELSA or other laser sensor to market will not make comparable, and in some places worse quality, sensor components at $10,000 to $20,000.
[block:4fce40b]
The Underlying Problems at Aerotech are: the Laser and sensor manufacturing group is currently pursuing a wide range of technologies that could potentially revolutionize optical manufacturing. At present the laser and sensor manufacturers are all competing with each other to develop this new technology. There is more to it than just trying to build an amazing laser that isn’t based on a single chip. Aerotech has had a few failures before, but the current approach to manufacturing laser parts for a large-scale fabrication process seems to be that the problem is not with the manufacturing methods, but with the technology being considered more generally. For these manufacturing problems there would be a large group (or even entire group) that is interested in building a laser that will be used for manufacturing, but with less effort. It is not a bad combination to have a laser that is a lot more compact like the ATHENS CZ-C laser but which is much more powerful. This combination would not be in the price range of the first chip but would be very affordable for the second step and should produce a far cheaper laser. There are not enough lasers in the world right now which will be capable of doing that. There are other problems with this group such as a lack of an appropriate price tier for each of them, the overall cost of building, the fact that many of them tend to fall outside the cost of that group of products, which would be expensive per unit, and some of the technical issues with the laser (especially in the development phase of the design). These are the issues we are seeing at Aerotech right now.
[block:d55b6c8]
The Underlying Problems at Aerotech is: there are a majority of laser parts available for sale at no additional cost. There are products currently out there like the CR-20 and the NGC-3C which will be able to
From the first problem where the laser systems engineering group is not producing products within its own projections of cycle time and budget, the data needed to analyze whether this underlying problem is occurring are gathering data on the groups quarterly plans on budget and delivery times projections initially drawn by Todd and data on the actual budget and delivery time used by the group over the past four quarters, and gather information from the team members on how they work within the team, communicate, assign tasks, reach decisions and resolve conflicts within the team.
From the second problem where the team has the lowest productivity as compared to other similar teams in the division, the data needed to analyze whether this underlying problem is occurring are gathering data on the number of product developments that each of the groups in the company has come up with over the past four quarters, gathering data on the number of product delays per group in the company over the past four quarters and gathering information per group on how they work within their team, assign tasks, communicate, reach decisions and resolve conflicts. Methods of data gathering appropriate for gathering the data needed to analyze whether the underlying problems are occurring
The best suited method for gathering data on Todd’s group quarterly plans on budget and delivery time projections initially drawn and data on the actual budget and delivery time used by the group over the past four quarters is unobtrusive measure. This method is appropriate since it provides means of getting the needed information without the teams being aware that their projections are being reviewed. This not only allows for accurate data to be received but also reduces and avoids reactivity to the gathering of this information.
The best suited method for gathering data on internal outlook of the team environment such as how they work within the team, communicate, assign tasks, reach decisions and resolve conflicts