Vol.1 No.2 2008

70/85

Interview : The Toyota Motor approach from basic research to product realization−139 Synthesiology - English edition Vol.1 No.2 (2008) and on their own. The preceding developer thinks, “Advanced research is complicated, and there’s nothing I can do,” while a product developer may think, “Preceding development can think freely, but can’t come up with a product.” It is important how well these three phases rotate. I think in many cases, we see success by rotating the key man who will act as the core. I used to do research on gear, so I speak from my experience. I had success by setting up a system where the advanced researchers worked jointly with preceding developers on noise and vibration problems in automobiles. Demand and practical methods were available in the workplace of preceding development. People of research worked hands-on, actually saw what were the problems, and ran experiments to see for themselves. Then they realized when research had to be stepped up here and there or expanded in range, or they saw some different form of application. They learned to pick things up. When advanced research and preceding development talk to each other, they see the limit and potential of their theories, and I think that allows them to set the course of research. (Akamatsu)I see. From the opposite standpoint, solutions to problems that the preceding developers run into may be found by talking to the advanced researchers. (Umeyama)Yes. And if the researchers can realize that they can pick up new research topics there, they can appreciate the fact that development is a hotbed of exciting new topics. (Akamatsu)Do preceding development and product development have similar relationship? (Umeyama)The way things are done when going from preceding development to product development is quite different. Preceding development is a place where people investigate composition to meet the performance criteria set as goal. Since the goal cannot be achieved by thinking only about constraints, preceding development can work on the generation of a breakthrough idea to achieve the goal, and when they get something good, they hand it over to product development. In product development, the concern becomes production technology conditions, weight, reliability, cost, and requirements as a product. Product development receives the results of preceding development, but in a way in which the receiving side handles the work done by preceding developers, who are emotionally attached to their own accomplishments, is very difficult. The results are not necessarily handed over to product development with all issues cleared, so if a preceding developer hands over a high-level demand saying, “You do the rest,” the product developer will have to suffer. If it is handed over suddenly without sufficiently communicating the relevant development information and without shared passion for development, one’s left to say, “I can’t do that!” So, I think it’s important to have a leader with passion to go from preceding development to product development, work together, encourage people, create the product, and then go back to his place. Therefore, I think it may be useful to rotate people between preceding development and product development on a three-year cycle. Integrated research at Toyota Motor Corporation (Akamatsu)In automobile technology, I understand that product realization is achieved by the integration of several types of R&D. Has there been there any case where a single core technology directly evolved from basic or advanced research into a product? (Umeyama)For example, continuing my example of gears, if we wish to put a research result into practice and directly come up with a product, no, that doesn’t happen. A gear is attached to a shaft. If we don’t figure out the appropriate shaft and bearings, it can’t become a product. For automobile parts, I don’t think a single core technology can become a product. (Akamatsu)So, integration is necessary. (Umeyama)For research that requires integration, in the future I think it will become necessary to conduct physical and mental analyses of how a person riding in a car feels, and to clarify the relationship between the behavior of the driver and the control of automobile as hardware. (Akamatsu)I see. It is integration of technologies including the human user. (Umeyama)A car was made to be a tool used by humans, but why does it have this form? Is this form optimal for this tool? And, how do we add attractiveness beyond it being just a tool? Those fields have not yet been sufficiently researched. In such an integrated field, perhaps we can come up with different ideas by setting high goals based on “What are we aiming for in the first place?” Barriers that must be overcome when integrating research results (67)−

※このページを正しく表示するにはFlashPlayer9以上が必要です