A foundry can produce an impressive inspection package and still leave its customer with an unanswered question: Which records actually supported the decision to ship this part?

From disagreements over the right strategy to heated recriminations following a project failure, conflicts are a regular part of business life. But most leaders and teams view conflict as a negative that should be avoided at all costs.

The ongoing AI boom seems to permeate, and sometimes call into doubt, every aspect of almost everybody’s profession.

Ask a leadership team how many hours went into last quarter’s operating review. Then ask how many of those hours went into a problem the team had already solved once before. Watch how the room reacts to the second question.

“Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.”
—Michael Corleone, The Godfather: Part III

The recent multistate outbreak of cyclosporiasis is a powerful reminder that food quality involves more than appearance, consistency, and shelf life.

In industrial manufacturing, quality failures carry consequences far beyond the factory floor. A single defect can trigger warranty claims, production downtime for customers, costly recalls, and long-term damage to brand reputation.

Most manufacturing engineers have experienced some version of the same problem: A production process successfully completes validation. The production part approval process (PPAP) is approved.

Imagine running a race where every second counts and your competition is constantly breathing down your neck. That’s the magic (or madness) of cycle time.

Operations leaders usually have more maintenance data than they can use.