In my last post I talked about the impact of workflow on production environments – especially transactional environments – not just as the connective tissue that links people, processes and technology – but a means to reducing costs, boosting productivity and improving quality.

Production print service providers face many challenges today, but in-plant operations arguably face even more. These guys are dealing with squeezed budgets and simultaneous pressure to grow print volumes, improve service levels, increase productivity and offer an ever-expanding suite of services like producing tabs, binding, transaction printing, fulfillment, direct mail, booklets, and security printing. If they can’t meet the corporate need, they don’t just have a bad year – they get lifted right out of the enterprise.

Survival depends on being able to respond to changing customer needs, turn jobs around faster, reduce costs, improve quality and make it easier for internal customers to place orders and track and deliver jobs — all while fending off threats from outside competitors. Which leads to the biggest challenge in-plants face: staying relevant at a time when economic turmoil makes them especially vulnerable to cost-cutting initiatives. For better or worse, the pressure is on to become an indispensable resource. As a result, success is often directly correlated to the efficiency of the workflow. For in-plants looking to boost process efficiency, drive down costs, speed turnaround and satisfy customers, workflow automation is a must.

Here are 10 ways that workflow can help transform a print operation from a cost center to a profit center:

1. Connecting the print center to the corporate network
2. Simplifying job submission, tracking and management
3. Automating pre-print services like scanning, editing and composing documents
4. Selecting and directing jobs to the best-fit device
5. Converting proprietary files to open PDF format
6. Automating finishing
7. Archiving jobs and publishing them to CDs, DVDs
8. Providing customers with easy web-based viewing and reprint ordering
9. Offering customers a portable, fully searchable, and indexed archive
10. Giving corporate customers visibility into what you do and how you do it

Workflow solutions can improve the way that work gets done and make the benefits  of the services that in-plants offer visible across the organization. Workflow archive and audit features provide a baseline to measure against when the “outsourcing option” is discussed.

Let’s face it, in-plant shops are often in the basement or located far, far away from headquarters. They may be a “black box” as far as many of their best clients are concerned. Helping customers understand what has to happen to get their job out the door, and allowing them to participate in success can make your group less of a “plant” and more of a partner.

There has been a lot written recently about changes in printing technology and the transformation of the printing industry, but I have seen little written about one of the other key drivers impacting our industry – software, and more specifically, SAAS or Software-as-a-Service.

As print technology has gotten “better, faster and cheaper” it has caused a shift in the types of companies that are offering specific services along the Marketing Services Value Chain.  Service providers are trying to both demonstrate value to customers through broader offerings and also want to get more volume onto new, more flexible print equipment. Many times, new software is considered when purchasing new printing equipment – perhaps composition software or content management software or web-2-print technology- but, even after acquiring the printer and the software, you still have to invest time and money to develop applications on the new platform – or do you?

There are many SAAS solutions available on the market today specifically geared to getting new print applications up and running fast, without direct investment in the underlying software. While many service providers have jumped on the SAAS band-wagon for delivering white-labeled e-presentment or archiving solutions, few have leveraged SAAS to broaden their print capabilities or offer Transpromo solutions. Below are just a few of the independent  SAAS solutions available on the market today:

• Prospectus and Proxies: Publishing Data Management Inc. 
• Production Print Management: Mimeo (offered to third parties independent of their own store-front) 
• Insurance Policy and Contract Management and various statement applications: NEPS http://www.neps.com/
• Asset  Management Reporting: Client Communication Factory

There are also hosted solutions for fulfillment management, various vertical market statement and confirmation applications and integrated marketing solutions available. The applications and software represented by these platforms would cost a million, or many millions, to replicate – but are typically offered at a very reasonable monthly subscription cost that grows with the number of applications and volume of production used.

In many cases, the key benefit of these solutions to service providers trying to transition to new markets is that they offer the ability to tap into expertise and services as opposed to simply software. Having great power tools (particularly rented ones) doesn’t make you a master carpenter any more than having the top software makes you a programmer – or a vertical business expert. Access to proven platforms, customizable applications ready-to-run, expert consulting support and a price based on actual usage seems like a great way to broaden services without breaking the bank.

If you haven’t considered SAAS yet, why not? If you have, what has your experience been?

This is an open letter to all the wearers of many hats out there.

If your organization happens to be ISO, SGP, FSC or SFI certified, or even if you’re not formally certified to anything, but still subscribe to some type of formalized quality management system framework, you may think this article’s not for you, however hear me out before you decide.

If your organization doesn’t formally subscribe to a quality management system of some type, this article’s definitely for you as the benefits are infinite. It ultimately saves the organization time, money, effort, money, energy, money, resources, money and money.

Quite frankly, like so many other things, the 80/20 rule applies here. In this case, eighty percent of the organizations I visit do not implement internal audit (IA) protocols for their processes, and of the twenty that do, eighty percent of them have no clue how to do it correctly.

Regardless of whether there is an external certifying body that requires it or not, the only way to truly validate conformance to any process is to impartially audit it. Like a financial audit, process auditing is a skill using a rules-based approach. The key is to ask the right questions in a consistent, controlled and meaningful manner in order to discover any underlying nonconformities which may either consciously or unconsciously exist.

The first step is to be able to measure any process from a procedural perspective. No standard? No measurement. No procedures? No control. Anything can be evaluated, verified, validated and/or measured. A procedure can be as simple as how to answer a phone to how to produce a job by breaking down each component part, to how to measure customer satisfaction. It can be statistical, empirical or documentary.

Also, let’s not confuse process or product development, realization, verification and validation with internal auditing. Management and staff directly involved or affected by or from any process activity should always be involved with the procedurally-related activities pertaining to that process. That’s not what we’re talking about here.

Internal auditing is an intermittent activity that should be planned to be enacted at least annually to evaluate every process in the enterprise. Some processes which are more critical than others should be internally audited more frequently, sometimes quarterly, and of course immediately upon reoccurring issue identification such as multiple product non-conformities or customer complaints.

Management needs to ensure that objective guidelines are established based on procedural requirements. Any procedure can be turned into a question for these purposes. A procedure stating that “All Author Alterations shall be reviewed by the CSR in charge” can be turned into the question “Have all AA’s been reviewed by the CSR in charge?” In this way a manageable set of questions applicable to the process can be asked in an objectively interpretable manner.

Audit sampling is also an important aspect of meaningful IA’s. They should be random, yet should represent the breadth of range of the products involved. In cases where a repeatable process is in play, a smaller sampling which is representative of the overall volume is sufficient. Where more variables exist, the audit sample should be larger. It could be as much as 20%. Some auditing standards also use the 8/10 of the square root of the sum total rule. As an example, if you have 1000 unique orders, you would internally audit 25 of them.

Now let’s talk about internal auditors. They should first and foremost be “detail oriented”, articulate and diligent. There’s another term for this kind of person in general use, but this is a family-oriented column. Second and equally as important is that the internal auditor should have no responsibility within the process or system being audited. Case in point is that the CFO of an organization is a prime candidate to perform purchasing department IA’s (unless of course one of the hats the CFO wears is that of purchasing manager). The last point is one of objectivity. With a well-crafted internal audit checklist in hand, internal auditors should be able to validate any process in the organization impartially and with total objectivity. “Just the facts, ma’am”.

Once the IA has been completed, any non-conformances should be expressed in the form of a corrective action request (CAR). CAR’s should reference the specific procedure along with a description of the non-conformant issue(s). From there, management should investigate the causes by performing a root cause analysis (RCA). RCA’s in their simplest form ask why, five times, just like when a child asks why the sky is blue.

And finally, once the IA’s, CAR’s and RCA’s have been completed, it’s time to put together an action plan along with a resolution timeline which is followed up on my management. For issues needing immediate attention due to systematic failure, the timeline should be rather short. For procedural non-conformities which do not directly affect the outcome, a longer period of time is acceptable, but no longer than to be part of the review process during the next scheduled IA. In all cases the CAR should be re-evaluated and either formally closed or elevated.

These are the tops of the waves. IA implementation is just one tool in a total quality management/ continuous process improvement program. Implemented effectively, the end result is always an improvement over the status quo.

By Eric de Goeijen, Océ North America, Production Printing Systems Vice President Product Marketing

Every print job you can think of today has a workflow associated with it – specific tasks and processes that have to be managed and ideally, automated. Not surprisingly, workflow means different things to different people. Jobs flow differently in commercial print shops than they do in high-volume transactional data centers, direct mail houses, service bureaus or CRDs in enterprise environments. So their corresponding approaches to automating workflow are different as well.

In a graphic arts environment, the workflow conversation would center on authoring content, content management, getting images and photographs approved, creating layouts and submitting jobs for print. If you’re in a transaction print environment, the conversation is going to be more about process optimization and automation, integrity, load balancing and qualifying for postal discounts. It’s worth noting that in today’s transaction environments, there should be more of an intersection between the graphic arts creative focus and the transaction efficiency perspective.

In the traditional transaction printing environment, automation efficiencies are gained by streamlining the processes following receipt of content – basically data. The process starts when data arrives and ends when finished documents leave the “shop” either in print or through e-delivery. Sometimes production may be accomplished in a hard-wired “Automated Document Factory” configuration, a virtually connected configuration of varied print and finishing equipment – or a combination of both. Either way, the goal is to reduce costs and boost end-to-end productivity from job submission through tracking, reprinting, indexing and archiving. A workflow solution to support this environment must work seamlessly with many flavors of high-volume print and finishing devices. What’s more it should enable the highest degree of postal automation and quality control.

But in today’s transaction print environments – more than data is being delivered. More and more, transaction documents include variable messaging, graphics, pURLs and other dynamic content potentially created by marketing agencies or colleagues on the graphic arts side of the business. This means taking the workflow from receipt of data forward is no longer enough. Transaction printers have to start thinking about automating workflows that safely integrate the creative process with the mission-critical production process.

In a previous post, Francis McMahon talked about “Getting Marketing Involved in Production Print.” I believe that defining transaction printing workflow as extending beyond the realm of data, and integrating up-stream creative workflows into service providers’ solutions will be critical to driving new business for service providers. What do you think?

We are truly in the golden age of printing. It’s an exciting time full of technology convergence, disruption and acceleration. Along with all of this is the necessary sorting out true cost/benefit of any technology including the energy used to run it. As the old adage goes, you can’t track what you don’t measure. This writing explores that philosophy as it pertains to power consumption.

It is generally accepted that digital printing costs less to both you and your customers in terms of both time and money in specific situations, and although this can be true, the question here is how does power fit into the equation?

Hybrid printing facilities have a variety of options when it comes to jobs that at the outset seem more efficient through the use of one technology over another. Do you run it offset or digital? Preprint shells and imprint data or run an otherwise black-only variable data color job on a digital color press? Sure, time and cost can be calculated in terms of BHC and necessary turn around, but for each piece of equipment what is the true cost of the power used to run it?

The power it takes to run digital versus offset equipment can and should be measured on an isolated basis. There are many permanent and portable power meters and data-loggers on the market generally ranging from $600 to $3000 for a three-phase-capable unit. This cost can be viewed as a quick payoff investment to get a true picture of how much power is consumed by each piece of equipment in the shop for a specified duration, either under load, idle or “off”, provided the results are utilized to proper advantage.

For instance, platesetters, digital presses, cutters &c. all are under idle power when not in use. By calculating the idle time power draw and then isolating a production run under full load, a true picture of the actual cost can be achieved. Now how about warm-up time? Obviously a cutter doesn’t have much of one, while a digital press does. Most shops have these machines powered up all day long, idle or not. How much money could be saved by turning off idle devices when not in use? Of course the same can be said for idle workstations, lighting and climate control, but that’s not the focus here.

On the other hand, offset presses, with the exception of associated compressors, chillers, agitators, recirculators, UV units, thermal oxidizers… well, you get the point, along with folders, stitchers and some types of packaging equipment do not draw active power when not in use. They do however draw at the very least phantom power. In all cases, the question comes down to whether there’s a warm-up time, and how much power that activity consumes and whether or not a lockout device should be employed to completely power down when it would otherwise be “turned off”.

Once the true power consumption costs are calculated for any given piece of equipment how could this play into your organization’s strategy? Here are some thoughts:

1. Benchmark costs for power used for jobs on specific equipment;
2. Track unused idle time and phantom power draw, and find ways to eliminate the same;
3. Report on isolated power consumption as part of a formal Life Cycle Analysis (LCA);
4. Use power consumption as an evaluation tool to cost one technology over another;
5. Integrate power isolation metrics into upper management’s continuous improvement dashboard;
6. Incentivize and empower employees to reduce energy use;
7. Empower customers to make the choice of technologies partially based on energy use;
8. Integrate a power reduction strategy into the organization’s sustainability reporting;
9. Normalize power conservation into the organization’s DNA;
10. Become a champion and tell your story to the masses.

What other ideas can you come up with?

As I write this, I am preparing for the Graph Expo Show. One of the questions I hear all the time at shows is, “do we have the right equipment?” Like so many questions it seems simple, but like so many answers it is much more complex. If asked during a seminar, it is tough to go into the level of detail required to be thorough. As a result, the answers are often abbreviated. Here is an example of an abbreviated answer, that talks about some but not all of the issues in an equipment decision.

How well is your equipment aligned with your product mix?

I like to understand and compare the capabilities of the equipment to the type of work done. The capabilities of the equipment is easy but the type of work done is not. Most companies offer a mix of products and services. The question becomes what do you do most and most profitably? That requires an application analysis. If you’re lucky, you may be able to find that information with an application analysis using a print MIS system.

Where are your bottlenecks?

Bottlenecks are places where work gets stuck. There are two types of bottlenecks – static and moving. A static bottleneck is always in the same place while a moving bottleneck moves through a plant like a snake eating a rat. New equipment does not address a moving bottleneck.

What is your utilization rate?

Utilization is how busy do you keep your equipment. Considering step up times it is often tough to exceed 75% utilization rates or 6 out of eight hours. But that’s only utilization for one shift. For two shifts that would be 12 hours and three shifts 18 hours. Considering the cost of capital equipment these days it is almost always cheaper to run it for more shifts than to buy another one.

How well are staff trained?

Another important consideration is staff training. When I say this people always look at me like I have two heads. It’s simple really. If staff are not trained well, then what looks like an underperforming piece of equipment may just be poorly trained staff. After you improve staff performance then we can assess the increase in productivity you would get and calculate an ROI for a new equipment purchase. Otherwise you’re just moving from an underutilized piece of old equipment to an underutilized piece of new equipment.

What do you think is missing? What else do you think about when considering new equipment?

Howard Fenton is a Senior Consultant at NAPL. Howie advises commercial printers, in-plants, and manufacturers on workflow management, operations, digital services, and customer research.

Is the use of color really that different in transactional and graphic arts print environments? Or do expectations and unique application characteristics drive the perception of color quality and the choice of color technology?

In my experience, the lightning rod for differentiating the two comes down to five key questions:

1. What drives the use of color?
2. How do you define color quality?
3. How much color is enough?
4. How critical is color quality?
5. What is the acceptable cost of color?

Let’s start with transactional environments where applications are fairly predictable from month to month and are printed in significant volumes in highly compressed windows. Here, as with direct mail, color may be used to maintain corporate branding, to induce an action, enhance understanding or just to get attention. Color is also being used in transactional environments to gain the operational efficiencies of a white paper environment and increase the potential for postal savings. As for color quality, in transaction environments the focus is on striking a balance between the cost of color and the quality required to fulfill the purpose of the application – typically directing attention to or highlighting key information on a page like an amount due or due date. More and more, those responsible for transaction documents are looking at the cost-benefit equation related to promotional messages with varying levels of color – but not at the level of color quality associated with graphic arts work.

I’ve never met a print provider who doesn’t expect and produce the best quality- including color reproduction. But we have to be careful to put color quality in context. Is it something that we recognize when we see it? Is it the quality we see in annual reports, photo books or brochures? The ability to reproduce corporate colors within 1 to 3 deltas of the target PMS or Pantone color? I contend that it is some of all of these things. But there are trade-offs in digital (and offset) printing such as throughput, machine settings, supply costs, use of specialty supplies versus standard supplies, and paper costs that can be chosen to manage the resulting color output.

As for transaction and transpromo documents, print providers are more likely to select low-cost commodity-grade papers, manage supply costs by choosing designs with low coverage and optimize throughput to satisfy short print windows, and may not even print at the full resolution that a device is capable of. While willing to make some concessions on quality in return for cost savings, in transactional environments, month-to-month consistency is critical to ensure that the look and feel of the documents contributes to a uniform and consistent relationship. So at any color or resolution level, color management remains critical across these high-volume runs.

Contrast this with how color is used in graphic arts environments. Here, job mixes tend to be more unpredictable, varying from day to day based on what customers bring through the door – or web portal. Turnaround ranges from same-day to more than a week. Volumes run the gamut from very short to very long. The amount of color coverage is driven by the job, but with a difference. Applications tend to be photo- and graphic-intensive and therefore color-intensive – with more frequent use of full color in jobs like direct mailers, photo books, brochures and catalogs. Instead of highlighting data to drive a message, the graphic or creative does the heavy lifting, supported by the message. Consequently, quality is as important – if not more important – than cost. Poor color reproduction of images, especially of people, can result in a failed communication.

This focus extends to the reproduction of product images as well. In graphic arts applications, reproduction of corporate colors is very important, and the trade-off with cost is minimal. Corporate colors must approximate the specified colors and must be produced consistently within a job and from job to job. To achieve these results, we wrestle with the conundrum of process standardization versus manipulating the process to modify print quality (often on the press). This practice isn’t ideal and is often discouraged. However, the point is that print providers who produce graphic arts applications know that skin tones must be accurate, neutrals must be neutral, and products like textiles must look realistic. Graphic arts print providers are highly sensitive to these requirements and will customize the print process to ensure that customer requirements for quality color reproduction are met. There is a strong focus on high screen rulings to achieve better image fidelity, using the best quality coated papers, using extended color gamuts and specialty colors, disciplined color management, emphasis on contract proofing and on-press approvals.

In both environments, when it comes to costs, the numbers tell the story. For example, the cost per page of an inkjet printer producing transpromo documents with limited color is far less expensive than a toner-based digital color press producing image- and graphic-intensive brochures with extensive color. As you can imagine, applying the cost of producing a color brochure to transpromo documents would be cost-prohibitive when you’re producing millions of customer communications per month. So, there are trade-offs. That said, I am increasingly impressed with the image quality, fidelity, and consistency of inkjet technology. Likewise, toner-based systems deliver outstanding color quality for many traditional graphic arts jobs. Either way, the application and business requirements drive the use of color and emphasis on quality vs. cost. From the perspective of a graphic arts guy quickly becoming immersed in the world of transaction printing, the two environments are similar, but with key differences.

What do you think? I look forward to your feedback and would love to continue the discussion at Graph Expo. I’ll be in the Océ booth (#1217) October 3^rd through 6^th.

The best marketing ideas today are operationally justified. Envelope marketing is no exception. A variety of solutions for printing messages on envelopes have been touted to marketing departments for a long time. Some companies pre-print messages on the outside of envelopes such as corporate taglines, incentives to go paperless or eye catching graphics to entice the recipient to open their mail.

Megaspirea, a French firm, introduced what they called “Dynamic Envelope Creation” via the Mailliner 100 at IPEX way back in 2006. Dynamic Envelope Creation was hailed as a holistic process for making a complete mail piece (envelope plus content) out of a single print stream. Variable images and messages could be printed directly on the envelope itself. Despite a strategic relationship with Pitney Bowes and Emtex that should have given the company a lot of reach in the US market – the technology never really took off.

You would think that the ability to dynamically market on the outside of the envelope would be marketing catnip – but in fact, many direct mail marketers feel that the white envelope approach is more effective than jazzy graphics on the outside of the envelope. Transaction mailers today, are still not well integrated with marketing departments (whether in plant or service providers) and therefore envelope marketing is a tough sell to this group.

DST Output (www.dstoutput.com) recently announced an envelope marketing solution that, despite the demise of past market entrants, I believe has a real chance of success. Why? Because the solution is as appealing – or potentially even more appealing- from an operations and efficiency standpoint as it is from a marketing standpoint. Like white paper, full color printing in general – operational efficiencies from wrap envelopes are creating the business case for more effective marketing. First let me explain the solution.

DST’s Wrap Envelope technology is a no-touch process for printing, wrapping and finishing high-volume, First-Class Mail packages in a high-speed production environment. Wrap extends major mailers’ customer marketing efforts with dynamic messaging that can be applied to the front, back and inside of the envelope. This means that the solution provides an envelope marketing opportunity for transaction mail like statements and bills, but also can double as a stand-alone self-mailer.

DST Output’s Wrap Envelopes are printed duplex on continuous plain roll-stock paper, and then literally wrap around multiple pages of statements, bills, inserts and reply/remit envelopes. The process enables mailers to embellish the interior as well as the exterior of the envelope with marketing messaging and promotional content, such as coupons, event information or other customer marketing materials – and can include customer data on the interior to create the self mailer – or additional personalized offer.

There are other operational benefits as well:

1. Placing messaging on the envelope can minimize postal weight by reducing the insert count and replace separate mailings and direct mail.
2. Wrap Envelopes can serve as a self-mailer for privacy statements, regulatory notices or e-statement bounce notifications minimizing the cost of these mailings.
3. The windowless Wrap enhances security and privacy with no see-through areas.
4. No window also makes it fully recyclable (no cellophane) and therefore more sustainable.
5. There is no need to pre-order and warehouse envelopes reducing storage, commercial print and procurement costs as well as improving cash flow.

The Wrap Envelope is a compelling solution for one-page statements or bills – with or without a remit envelope. From a quality perspective, Wrap utilizes an integrated no-touch manufacturing process that tracks each and every mail piece during production to verify that the total package is complete and accurate. If an error is detected, the process automatically remakes the entire mail package.

So, no-touch quality control, cost savings, improved privacy and sustainability and – oh, by the way – completely dynamic messaging inside and out. I think that’s pretty innovative. (Take a look at the examples below.) If DST was selling this as a hardware solution, I think it would be a big success. For now, only DST outsourcing customers can take advantage of the technology and it will be interesting to see whether it is adopted for the marketing features, the operational features or both. How would you use it if you could?

(Click on pictures to see larger view)

Wrap Envelope (front) with logo and text message

Example of Wrap Envelope (front) with Dynamic Graphic

Wrap example with Dynamic Messaging on Back of Envelope

Wrap envelope with Dynamic Graphics and Messages Inside

"Outside In" Wrap Campaign

.

.

.

.

So, you’re one of the smart ones. Or one of the lucky ones . . . You’ve secured a big new client, you’ve got a three year contract, and the daily mail production volume actually turns out to be as much as they said it would be . . . sometimes more. You leased the latest and greatest high-speed inkjet imaging equipment with in-line finishing, and a couple roll-fed inserters, and they’re about 75% utilized by the work for this client. You’re meeting your SLAs, mostly, (there are days with big volume spikes), you’re making good money, and even getting paid for recycling the paper waste! Life is good.

You’re walking the production floor, smiling, remembering the intense, long hours and the crunch of getting the programming done to meet the client’s drop-dead start date – and then the next version came in, and then the next. The file formats were different, the documents were different, and your team just hunkered down, not sleeping much for about a month, working with the client on specs, coding, testing, proofing, and finally getting five versions into production.

As you walk, you take a look at the quality of the imaged rolls waiting to be loaded onto the inserters and are satisfied. You look around and see the paper waste in the gaylord containers for recycling. Wait – how many of those are there? You see the skids with the cores from the paper rolls for recycling – most have a couple inches or more of paper still on them. Holy cow! They’re everywhere!

You turn to the inkjet/finishing system and watch the operators thread 60+ feet of paper through it, which you are pretty sure you saw them do about fifteen minutes ago, and wonder – how good are things really – and how good COULD they be?

We see so many companies in which teams of people, having completed the hard work of getting their client’s complex projects up and running smoothly, heave a big sigh of relief and move on to the next project for the next client. Rarely is there the time or ability to plan and develop the most optimum, efficient production process out of the gate. But you can apply some disciplined methods for improvement post-implementation. Usually, there is a motivating factor, such as wanting to postpone additional capital investment.

For example, I recently worked with a client who had an ongoing group of projects, produced and mailed daily, that was growing and had volume spikes. The client wanted to ensure that they could support continued growth without adding equipment capacity. The daily production run was comprised of five separate variable data files, formatted for print and delivered to the print queue. A print operator would select a file to run on one of two high speed roll-fed two-color inkjet print devices. After printing, the rolls were moved to roll-fed inserters for finishing. The following baseline data was collected for the current state:

1. Threading a printer required sixty feet of paper
2. Set up time was just under one hour for each file in the print department
3. Additional set up time was required at the inserter to set up each print roll

After examining the processes and requirements for the printers and the inserters, my team determined that with minor programming and process changes the files could be combined/stacked in the print queue and run in one continuous run without set ups between them. Two banner sheets were programmed between each file to assure separation at inserting. The solution was tested and new procedures developed and staff trained.

As a part of the process review, testing was done to determine how closely the paper roll could consistently be run to the core, without adversely affecting printer and inserter quality and productivity. Based on this testing, new standards were set and the operators were retrained. Some paper inconsistency issues were identified and were subsequently addressed and resolved with the paper merchant. Paper consistency can have a huge impact on efficiency.

Following the initial testing, additional jobs were identified where similar or the same file separation conditions existed. Metrics were developed to continue to track the Key Performance Indicators, (KPI’s), and both hard cost and soft benefits.

The results were immediately visible:

1. Hard cost savings in terms of material, consumables, click charges, and labor costs in excess of $20,000 per month on the test job were documented.
2. Overall production cycle time was reduced.
3. On-time delivery was improved and;
4. An additional four to five hours of combined printer/inserter capacity were gained per week on just the initial test job!

Getting these results does require some effort – gathering and assessing baseline data, motivating a small team to identify and test possible process improvements, and measuring results of the changes made. But, with a committed and interested management, this can become a way of doing business, not an exception effort, and create an improvement culture through all levels of the company.

Hi my name is Howie and I am a recovering digital junky. Actually it may be optimistic to say that I am in recovery. More likely I am still addicted to all things digital, especially my Blackberry, iPod, GPS, and Macintosh computers.

Like other digital addicts, if you took away my digital toys I would likely experience serious digital withdrawal. I would wander the streets looking for a Starbucks hot spot to either log on or try the only alternative remedy which is getting a Venti Americano. This small, garbage can sized coffee cup has 4 shots of espresso in it. It may not be recognized as an official antidepressant, but it is like drinking rocket fuel.

All things considered, however, I don’t think being a digital junky is all that bad. My “fix” does not hurt others and often helps them. All I need is to answer 20-30 emails a day on my “Crack-Berry,” have a conversation about the value-added opportunities for digital technologies, draw a flowchart or new floor plan that streamlines bottlenecks in digital workflows and work in one or more programs in the popular Adobe or Microsoft suites and I am good to go.

But on a more serious note, I should probably introduce myself again. I have worked in this industry for 2 decades. As you may have guessed, I focus on operational and digital issues such as workflow, digital production, and digital printing.  I work for NAPL, which is an association in our industry whose mission is to enable the graphic arts companies to profit from change. And nothing is changing faster than the impact of digital technologies. Prior to working for NAPL I worked for the PIA/GATF. Prior to that I was the editor of a prepress magazine called “Pre.”

One question from this digital addict is, “When is it worth it to have 2 or more technologies offered in one tool?” For example, I can get GPS on my Blackberry but prefer a separate GPS; I like the Amazon Kindle especially with free email access perhaps more than the iPad with its existing feature set; I like my iPod Nano and don’t mind not storing my music on my phone.

What about you? When does it make sense for you?

Howard Fenton is a Senior Technology Consultant at NAPL. Howie advises commercial printers, in-plants, and manufacturers on workflow management, operations, digital services, and customer research.

Over the past year or so, my colleagues and I at InfoTrends have been taking a look at software that enables TransPromo communications. For those that may have attended InfoTrends’ recent TransPromo Summit in Boston or are attending our European TransPromo Summit in October, you know that TransPromo programs can be extremely effective, but most are inherently complex and require ongoing attention and dedication for recurring success. They often require the proper organizational alignment among many departments for execution, including marketing and IT. Even though there are complexities, software vendors in this space have been working to enhance their solutions for ultimate usability and scalability in multi-departmental enterprise organizations.

The TransPromo technology landscape is very broad, and includes many different types of solutions: document creation and composition, message creation and management, post-composition, output management, production management, and campaign management. We decided to focus on enterprise-level document composition solutions with message creation and management components due to the important role they play in empowering multiple organizations within an enterprise to be involved in a TransPromo campaign. The result is a comprehensive (and lengthily-titled) guide to the leading solutions in this space: The Ultimate Guide to Enterprise TransPromo Solutions: Document Composition. While our existing Ultimate Guides have focused on software solutions for the Graphic Arts (W2P, VDP, Multi-Channel), we wanted to explore solutions that enable wide-scale collaboration in the creation and execution of TransPromo programs. (more…)

At Graph Expo the Must See Um panel identified IT Competency as an area service providers must have to survive. Cary Sherburne sat down with Charlie Corr of Mimeo.com to talk about IT Competency with the printing industry.