The first point is “Responsiveness to Customer Needs.” BPI supports this by focusing on reducing cycle times for business operations, thereby improving the turnaround for customer requests.

The second Value is “Automating Document Process.” Using process mapping tools, In-Plants can show their knowledge in a clear and easily understood graphic approach.  Process mapping will help in identifying key functional responsibilities as well as areas needing automation the most.

The next two Values In-Plants possess are the “Ability to Evolve Effectively Over Time” and “Developing New Areas of Expertise.” BPI is a tool which helps to clearly identify the current state of In-Plant operations and to build a picture of the future state in terms of new process and new capabilities.  BPI can then drive preparation of a roadmap of effort required to evolve to the future state.  By using BPI metrics, In-Plants can track and measure their progress in the evolution, and ROI on new capabilities.

The fifth Value In-Plants also do a superb job at is “Assessing New Technologies”, both in the impact a new technology will have on the business process and the costs and challenges to implement by using BPI.  Combining the knowledge of the technologies and the cross functional stakeholders’ roles, BPI helps the organization to smoothly introduce new technologies in the shortest time and with minimal cost.

In-Plants Value in “Educating Constituents on What You Can Do and What Can Be Done” is improved through the focus on process and cross functional co-operation.  This focus improves the relationships and openness of the constituents by showing the interdependencies of the various constituents.  BPI helps to establish a business culture more open to discussing capabilities and limitations in the operations.

In-Plants position within the organization gives them a full understanding of the corporate cultures and BPI provides a methodology to use that knowledge and unique position to optimize the value In-Plants have for document delivery.

This weeks fold features an Asymmetrical Broadside Booklet Fold submitted by RR Donnelley. This broadside booklet fold gives you the feel of a bound book but opens up to reveal a variety of panels. Watch the video below for more details!

Business Process Improvement, (BPI), utilized by many outsource and commercial business communication resources to improve their performance and competitiveness, can also help In-Plants by using a structured approach to embracing the changes needed to meet market demands. Taking inventory of the current business process, work flows, and organization’s skills, BPI defines the internal company current state.  Part of this methodology involves engaging the participation of a cross-functional team of internal business customers, from marketing, to IT, and through other critical functions, providing a vehicle to collect valuable inputs to define the requirements and priorities which the in-plant uses to build a future state definition.  Once the future state is drafted, the same cross- functional team provides feedback and suggests changes.  By focusing on the end-to-end process, and not an isolated area or individuals, the methodology is non-threatening and encourages open and candid collaboration.

With the future state clearly defined, the organization can identify gaps and overlaps between current and future state in the process, workflow, and staff skills.  This data can be formatted into a step-by-step plan of action, with priorities and interconnectivities defined for the transition.  BPI can also assist in defining the key metrics to measure ongoing performance progress in making the In-Plants more competitive in capabilities, cycle time, and quality.

Thanks to Barb for the thought provoking article and sobering statistics to help us see the big picture. I hope you all see BPI as I do, as a tool to help respond to the “changin’ times”.

InfoTrends recently completed its 2010–2015U.S. Digital Production Printing Application Forecast. Print is driven by applications, and digital production printing is no exception. Demand for specific applications changes over time for a number of different reasons, including growth in usage, electronic replacement, and shorter runs. This study explored 28 specific application segments and measured digitally printed application volume changes in A4 (U.S. letter-sized) equivalent impressions.

The top three production digital print applications in theU.S.will be direct mail, books, and bills and statements. Combined volumes for these applications are expected to exceed 270 billion impressions. Book printing is expected to account for a 16.6% share by the end of the forecast period (94.5 billion impressions).

In terms of pure pages, the book market is expected to show the biggest gain. Its share is expected to experience a compound annual growth rate of 14.2% between 2010 and 2015, representing over 45 billion pages by the end of the forecast period.

Inkjet and digital printing will aggressively begin to displace analog offset printing of books. Improvements in continuous-feed inkjet printers will fuel the shift to digital printing within the book market. Every aspect of inkjet – speed, quality, and format – will see significant leaps in performance during 2012.

Publishers Will Respond!
Digital printing is destined to grow in volume at the expense of conventional printing for the book market. In an uncertain market, publishers are beginning to embrace digital because it enables shorter runs. Shorter runs reduce the amount of unsold books, reduce storage costs, allow reprinting in smaller batches, and offer the opportunity to print specialty books for niche markets, including self-published books.

There is much confusion about how consumers want their content delivered, but digital printing will provide the answer. Publishers understand the value proposition, and everything links to dollars and cents.

The Bottom Line
Technology keeps changing and publishers, authors, and printers are feeling the effects. Although print isn’t going away, ebooks are here to stay. Publishers need partners with technology and service offerings that will help content move seamlessly between traditional book printing, on-demand digital printing, and electronic distribution.

While the transition to digital is not moving at the same rate for all publishing segments (Trade, K–12, Higher Education, Professional, and Scholarly), it is generally believed that ebook sales will account for a substantial portion of trade revenues within the next five years. Just a few years ago, traditional companies were more frightened of this transformation than excited about the opportunity. Today, this has reversed. Printers, publishers, booksellers, distributors, and agents have embraced the new technologies and are retooling their businesses to accommodate a world of digital and printed books.

The Good News… Book Sales Are Up!
In August 2011, the Association of American Publishers (AAP) and the Book Industry Study Group (BISG) released the U.S. BookStats. This is considered one of the most comprehensive statistical surveys conducted in the modern publishing industry. It is focused on capturing size, scope, revenue, and expansion across multi-platform content and sales distribution channels. Net sales for publishers increased to $27.94 billion in 2010, representing a 5.6% increase over 2008. Publishers sold 2.57 billion net units in 2010, marking a 5.6% increase over 2008. Growth hit all segments. Higher education was up 18.7%, with sales reaching $4.55 billion in 2010.Sale of trade books grew 5.8% to $13.9 billion, partly fueled by ebooks. One of the strongest growth areas was adult fiction, which saw a revenue increase of 8.8%. While ebooks represented only .6% of the total market in 2008, this share had risen to 6.4% by 2010. A September 2011 Harris Poll indicates that one in six Americans (15%) currently uses an eReader, while another 15% plan to purchase one in the next six months. At the same time, however, this also implies that 70% of the market does not own an eReader and has no near-term plans to acquire one.

The key message is that eReaders are definitely here to stay, so the printing and publishing worlds must change with the times. There will always be a place for hardcover and paperback books, but recent developments will demand a huge transition for book printers and publishers alike. How businesses adapt will determine who is left standing five years from now.

Check back next week for Part 2 of this post!

Every day we hear about tools and programs for improving operating performance. There are many of them, with more versions coming out all the time. They include TOC, Lean, Six Sigma, ISO, CMM and BPI/BPM. Some, such as Six Sigma and ISO, have rigorous training and certification programs which are major projects to undertake in themselves. What is a company to do to understand which to choose, and possibly even when?

The answer to this question requires an organization to clearly define goals, timing, and the rationale for beginning at all. Is there a specific issue, or is there a client/industry mandate, or is the business looking to establish a base for optimizing performance overall? A comprehensive overview is impossible in a short piece such as this, so I anticipate this distillation may provoke some lively feedback and discussion.

TOC – Theory of Constraints

• Focus: identify constraints or limitations for a task or process
• Action: eliminate the constraint
• Results: maximize the throughput
• Limitation: usually targeted to a single task/function

“Build it and they will come.”

LEAN

• Focus: eliminate waste, operate just in time
• Action: make to order, optimize single piece flow
• Results: rework eliminated , reduced inventory, reduced floor space, reduced cycle time
• Limitation: difficult in a project oriented business more effective with ongoing production

“Don’t build it until it is needed.”

SIX SIGMA

• Focus: variation in a process, tracking error/incident statistics and cause
• Action: DMAIC – Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control
• Results: find and eliminate sources of variation, can help with complex problems due to structure
• Limitations: rigorous, statistical intensive approach, can lead to analysis paralysis; cost for six sigma training and certification can be high.

“Build it exactly to customer specification.”

ISO

• Focus: documenting the process
• Action: document the existing process in detail in a structured way, and audit compliance to the documented process
• Results: consistent and repeatable process drives highly repeatable outcomes, improved supplier quality
• Limitations: focus is on documentary evidence, so a poor process can be documented and followed and certification still achieved. Corrective action focuses on the documentation. ISO is a costly system if certification is pursued.

“Document what you do and do what you document.”

BPI/BPM

• Focus: define, analyze, and improve cross-functional business process
• Action: map the existing process, define tasks and inputs and outputs for each, identify and remove gaps and overlaps, manage with metrics and link actions to results
• Results: refined and reengineered process with reduced cycle time and cost, and increased first pass yield.
• Limitations: requires top down support to be truly effective, scope of process needs to be clearly defined, must apply the appropriate problem solving tools and project management skills

“Manage as an enterprise around meeting overall corporate goals; use the right tools as applicable.”

Companies need to have a clear understanding of their goals and needs, and a measure of their tolerance for change. The urgency for improvement is another critical factor. Finally, consider what skills you need to add, and/or assistance you may require to most efficiently and effectively address your needs and the tool you choose. This can reduce the time to achieve results and improve the probability of success.

Let’s tackle the first aspect, DATA.  For the longest time, the print industry has struggled to track, capture and manage consumers or investors tendencies.  In the 80’s, databases were in their infancies and to build one, manage the intricacies, intra or inter-record relationships and extract the data practically took a mainframe computer or at least a mini-computer. Not to mention understanding the complexities of and INTEGRATING all that data into the print stream.

There’s the second aspect – INTEGRATION.  Frankly, integrating, not to mention building and extracting the data, was beyond the scope of printing an invoice or statement.  Third party outsourcers or even the largest processors were having trouble developing and launching the transpromotional document.  Instead, variable messaging was launched as a step in a forward direction.  Simply stated, variable messaging involved keying on data elements within the print stream and changing the message content to the targeted audience – the end recipient.  It didn’t go far enough and transpromo lingered.

Fast track to the present.  The PC or personal computer has been in existence for over 20 years, software integrators have become more sophisticated making databases prevalent in every aspect of our life and third party processors are beginning to understand the power of data.  Data is at everyone’s fingertips and solution providers are working with their clients in building analytic models of their consumers, their buying trends and overall demographics. But transpromo still lingers, why?  In the biller space, the solution could be as simple as getting the marketing department to work with the accounts receivable department.  The complex answer is most likely, determining what message to integrate into the transactional document.  While data is prevalent in everyday life, billers are still struggling with what message fits best within their image and specifically which message targets the end user.

Transpromo is a real achievable target and integrators are working behind the scenes to implement sound solutions.  But in looking at the third party landscape, I think it’s important (at least from an old programmer’s point of view) to identify those firms that understand both sides of the equation – the marketer and the biller.  Integrating a sound solution will most likely drive revenue, increase your consumer’s product awareness and promote social awareness, but a failed solution will end up being just a fancy way of launching variable messaging.  Is it worth it? I think so.  In today’s competitive landscape, I think it’s important for firms to build consumers or customers for life and with transpromo and variable message you have a chance to effectively achieve that goal.

This post was generously provided by SourceLink and written by Tim Furr. If you are looking for another marketing services provider blog… check out SourceLink! 

What do you think? I’d love Digital Nirvana readers’ input on this issue.

To get you started, here is the section that acknowledges that issue from my CSR/marketing/sales staff education primer “Digital Printing: Transforming Marketing and Print Management.”

The technology used to drive digital presses has, in the past, made for some limitations in graphic design. Some presses (especially older presses) have tighter registration than others, for example, which could be a challenge if you need to match hairlines across the fold. Digital presses have also been notorious for having difficulty with large areas of solid color and with vignettes and other subtle gradations.

With the newer generations of presses, however, this is far less of an issue that it used to be. In fact, there are many who would argue that these issues no longer exist. Newer presses have largely overcome traditional design limitations, and especially in publishing, the issues of registration and halftones have been remedied. Still, every press is different, and even if your digital printer is working with an older machine, its prepress and design staff can often help you overcome these challenges with workarounds.

Thus, as with print quality, these and other design limitations are really a non-issue in most cases. If you have settled on digital output for your next print job, talk to your service provider about any accommodation your designer might need to make, if any.

Do you agree with what’s written? Are there still design limitations that bug you or your clients? If so, which ones?Last time I asked a question like this, it generated a terrific discussion. Let’s get it going again!

Also, for those who observe, I wish you deep blessings on this Good Friday — a day we call “good,” not of its own accord, but because of the joy that followed three days later.

Watch for yourself!

http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/VE51wjRCFNc

Here’s what I wrote. What do you think?

Visual differences from offset

This might sound like a big “duh!” so why mention it? The issue of offset versus digital quality has dogged this marketplace for more than a decade, so it’s necessary to at least give it a nod. Yes, digital quality is not the same as offset. It’s close, but not identical.

For extremely high-end jobs, such as annual reports, the choice is almost always offset, regardless of run length or price, but few applications fall into this category. Even many commercial photo books are now being produced digitally. The output won’t be identical to high-end sheetfed, but there are digital technologies that get awfully close. Some practitioners claim that, in some cases, digital production quality is actually superior.

In terms of appearance, one of the most basic differences between digital and offset arises because most digital presses apply dry toner on top of the paper, while offset uses liquid ink that soaks into it. Thus, sheets printed with dry toner can have a slightly brighter, glossier appearance (unless the sheet is coated, in which case the coating masks any differences in gloss between the two). If you run your finger across the top of the sheet, you may feel a slightly unevenness that comes from the differing layers of toner. In the sheetfed market, HP Indigo presses are distinguished by their use of a liquid toner that soaks into the paper much like ink. This gives the prints a more offset-like appearance.

In the high-speed, high-resolution inkjet market, one of the issues is color saturation. More water in the inks means greater challenges with drying, especially with high percentages of ink coverage. In the lower resolution (lower ink coverage) transpromo market, this is not an issue. But in the textbook market, this is why we’re seeing these presses used more heavily for higher education than for the more graphics-heavy K–12 textbooks. The imaging technology of the high-speed, high resolution inkjet machines (as opposed to the lower resolution transpromo machines) is still being refined, but certainly, the issues of heavy ink coverage and dry time will be addressed over time.

There are other subtle differences between digital and offset, such as scattering of toner around the edges of text, but marketers—and consumers—are unlikely to notice them unless they know what they are looking for and are looking through a loupe.

Keep in mind, too, that “difference” doesn’t mean “bad.” There are those, even experts in the printing industry, who actually prefer the appearance of digital print for some applications.