1.1 The current setting of process industry
âWe cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.â
(Albert Einstein, 1879â1955)
The current chemical process industry (CPI) is subject to a rapidly changing environment, characterized by slim profit margins and fierce competitiveness. Rapid changes are not exclusively found in the demands of society for new, high quality, safe, clean and environmentally benign products (Herder, 1999). They can also be found in the dynamics of business operations, which include, inter alia, global operations, competition and strategic alliances mapping. Being able to operate effectively at reduced costs and with increasingly shorter times-to-market is the common denominator of successful companies and corporations. However, attaining this performance level is not a straightforward or trivial issue. Success is dependent on coping effectively with dynamic environments, short process development and design times and, last but not least, continuously changing consumer (or end-user) needs or expectations.
It is now well established by industry and academia that the focus of the CPI has shifted from a process-centered orientation to a product-centered one (Hill, 2004; Bagajewicz, 2007). In recent decades chemical industry has experienced a fundamental transformation in its structure and requirements (Edwards, 2006). In fact, during the last decades we have experienced how the commodity chemical business is gradually releasing its dominating role towards higher-added value products, such as specialty chemicals, pharmaceuticals and consumer products. Chemical industry has been gradually concentrating its activities and streamlining its assets towards value creation and growth by engaging in the manufacture of high-value chemical products. These products are not only characterized by their composition and purities, but by their performance or functionality against the satisfaction of a need or desire of the consumer.
Among process industries, those engaged in the manufacture and marketing of Fast-Moving Consumer Goods are subjected to an even more increasing pressure. The market is not only extremely dynamic and changing, but is also characterized by the predominant role of consumers, which have become more critical, demanding and conscious about their choices since the 1980s. Todayâs customers are more connected, sceptical about the value-for-money proposition they receive and sophisticated in their demands with ever-increasing expectations of their product and service providers (Deloitte, 2014; Nielsen, 2018).
In this particular market segment, all leading FMCG companies are rapidly transforming from general manufacturing hubs of loosely connected products to companies delivering health, wellness and nutrition in a sustainable manner. Manufacturing in a responsible and sustainable way products within those strategic areas imposes technical challenges to work on and requires the development of research and development capabilities. These challenges and capabilities have the clear aim of delivering a product with all associated benefits (financial performance, environmental and societal impacts) at a short time-to-market and at a reduced manufacturing expenditure. Finding and creating business opportunities to be brought successfully to the market (Verloop, 2004) is the response of leading companies to this rapidly changing environment. In fact, from a Design Thinking perspective, true innovations reside at the intersection of consumer desirability, technology feasibility and financial viability. A key activity in this innovation-driven space is the actual creation of the conversion or manufacturing system (i. e., feasibility), which considers simultaneously the other two dimensions. Addressing the dynamic challenges of the FMCG sector requires the development of an appropriate design methodology. Such methodology should provide the right tools and framework to solve the multi-dimensional and multi-desciplinary nature of the design problems, where multiple stakeholders, objectives and types of resources characterize the design space through various time and length scales.
1.2 The development of the PDPS approach
âThe task is not so much to see what no one has yet seen, but to think what nobody yet has thought about that which everybody sees.â
(Arthur Schopenhauer, 1788â1860)
Aiming at a more structured approach toward the ...