I first wrote about the role of conflict in creating successful products in my 2002 engineering PhD dissertation. Since then, I’ve repeatedly seen that great products are the result of a talented, passionate, and diverse group of people working together to overcome obstacles to create something of exceptional value. Conflicts are bound to arise, and a big part of the role of the chief engineer is to laser focus all of that energy on creating compelling value for the customer.
This has caused some to interpret the chief engineer’s role as primarily one of “managing” team conflict and making the appropriate tradeoffs, but I see the chief engineer’s role as creating conflict and building tension in the system. Chief engineers develop a compelling vision for the product; challenge the limited, functional mindset of the team; and push for more… a lot more. This is what I think the best chief engineers do.
I see the chief engineer’s role as creating conflict and building tension in the system.
The Lexus is born
Ichiro Suzuki was given the truly daunting task of developing the first Lexus. Internally, it was known as the Circle F project but would become the Lexus LS 400. At the time, Toyota was known as anything but a luxury brand. Consequently, Suzuki knew for Toyota to compete in this space, it had to create a truly exceptional vehicle that featured both category-leading functional performance and an elegant, refined appearance.
Suzuki worked tirelessly to deeply understand the customer and the specific customer-defined value of a luxury product during the study phase, a critical early period focused on deep learning and understanding before executing. The result was his product concept paper that identified for the team his list of “no compromise performance goals.”
He also personally recruited some of the most talented engineers at Toyota to deliver this vehicle. His no-compromise concept paper and hand-picked engineers were just the start of the conflict. Suzuki continually challenged his team to deliver “and” solutions; in other words, he refused to choose between this “or” that but demanded both. To say the program was stressful is an understatement.
However, the results were remarkable, and the team was justifiably proud. Suzuki and team either hit or exceeded every one of his no-compromise goals. At the time of the Lexus launch in 1989, the Mercedes 300E, 420SE, and 560SEL were seen as untouchable. The LS 400 outsold all three Mercedes models by nearly three times in a single year. Moreover, it launched an entirely new division in Toyota that has been highly successful ever since.
A faster horse
My friend and former Ford colleague Dave Pericak took the reins of a major Mustang redesign in 2015 when it was running a distant second to Chevy’s Camaro, a position it had been in for the past five years. Mustang had lost its connection with its customer, and Dave had to figure out how to get it back.
Even though he had been a Mustang guy all his life, Dave started with the customer to understand what it would take to get this car right for its 50th anniversary. In the process, he rediscovered both his and his customer’s deep emotional relationship with the car.
This emotional connection started with the car’s exterior styling, so that’s where Dave started. He stirred up a hornet’s nest in the design studio when he insisted on a more powerful stance that featured strong rear “hips,” making the car look like it was ready to pounce. This resulted in a bodyside stamping process that was not manufacturable by current methods. Dave pushed the issue until it got to me, and together, we paired a product and process engineer to innovate a solution.
Not willing to compromise on a seemingly minor detail, Dave put his job on the line in a conflict with Ford’s finance bureaucracy that wanted to eliminate Mustang’s sequential rear turn signals. Dave insisted the signals were a part of Mustang DNA. He worked with engineering directors to offset costs elsewhere and deliver the tail lamps.
Not willing to compromise on a seemingly minor detail, Dave put his job on the line in a conflict with Ford’s finance bureaucracy.
But the Mustang was more than looks. It needs to excite all the customers’ senses. Sit in a Mustang and push the starter button. Feel that throaty rumble? The deep growl that quickens your pulse? That’s no accident. Dave worked with a powertrain engineer through 50 different exhaust systems to get just the right sound. The results were amazing. The 2015 Mustang increased the previous year’s sales by 49% and outsold Camaro by 37% the first year. The redesigned Mustang continued to outsell both Camaro and Challenger for the next five years.
The whale takes flight
Although I unfortunately never met him, Joe Sutter was by all accounts a humble, thoughtful engineer. He modestly attributed being selected as the 747 chief engineer to being “in the right place at the right time.”
His humility did not stop him from taking on Juan Trippe, the autocratic leader of Pan Am, Boeing’s largest customer at the time. Trippe wanted a narrow “two-story” fuselage for the plane, and that was the going-in assumption. But that just didn’t make sense to Sutter. So, with hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, hundreds of engineers champing at the bit to get started, and a very impatient customer, Sutter and a small team continued to study the problem.
Finally, he told Boeing leadership that the plane had to be a wide-body. Leadership said Trippe wanted a narrow body; end of story. Sutter took his case directly to Trippe and, after several very difficult meetings, decided to build a mock-up. After walking through the mock-up, Trippe and his team agreed with Sutter.
Later in the program, Boeing experienced difficult times. Finance directed Sutter to cut 1,000 engineers from the program. At that point, he had 4,500 people on the program, and only 2,700 of them were engineers. He knew he could not deliver the program with this cut, so he refused. That got him an invitation to the chairman’s office.
On his way to meet the chairman, Sutter figured today is as good as any to get fired, so he asked for 800 more engineers. The chairman blurted out, “You are not going to get 800 more engineers,” and left the room. Sutter figured he was done. But after a couple of weeks of not hearing anything, he figured no news was good news. He was not fired, and he ended up delivering one of the most iconic airplanes in history. (This story was adapted from the excellent book 747: Creating the World’s First Jumbo Jet and Other Adventures From a Life in Aviation by Joe Sutter.)
Earning it
All of which is to say, the best chief engineers are not camp counselors or diplomats; they are strong people who develop deep insights into what the product needs to be and have a passion for delivering it. They bring the team together around a compelling vision and keep them moving forward with a relentless drive.
Leading this way can be exhausting. It would be much easier to just “keep the peace” and compromise with each stakeholder. But this does not deliver great products. The best chief engineers work hard to understand customer value and work even harder to deliver it. Chief engineers may lead without “formal authority,” but in the case of great chief engineers, everyone knows who’s running the show. Because they earn it.d, functional mindset of the team; and push for more… a lot more. This is what I think the best chief engineers do.
Designing the Future Using Lean Product and Process Development
Learn how to reduce time to market, improve quality, and drive innovation in a hands-on, coach-led experience that applies Lean Product and Process Development across your value stream.
