90-e strongly battered domestic instrument and machine tool industry, other advanced industries. Civil aviation industry leads a miserable existence.
But the engineering industry of the military industrial complex remains the backbone of the Russian economy. Its competitiveness, especially the growth rate due exclusively to high-tech and knowledge-intensive sectors.
- The corporation was tasked to start the production of a large-scale facility, say, to resume production of the Tu-160. The first actions of her leadership?
- When it comes to creating production for a new product, the chief executives of the corporation first of all have the task to competently organize pre-design work, conduct technological training, select head production. It is clear that today such an aircraft cannot be made on any of the existing enterprises. We need to establish large-scale cooperation between the plants. Since the release of the last such machine, a considerable time has passed, much has changed - the enterprises that participated in the production chain are closed or turned out to be abroad. Part of the technology is likely outdated, the other - is lost. First: you need to create a digital - 3D-model of the product. A set of scanned drawings in the computer - the last century. We are talking about the three-dimensional digital model assembly. To be able to see the requirements for any of the parts and manufacturing technology of each. Second: organize the elaboration of the implementation of the task.
Creating such a production is a long process; it can take several years. An important question is the choice of technology, selection of equipment, its manufacture. It often happens that standard machines are not suitable, you need to order, develop and manufacture tooling, which in itself is a long and expensive business. Then there will be the delivery of equipment, commissioning, development of technology on a specific product and then delivery on all parameters that were previously installed. In addition, it is necessary to carefully plan production cooperation.
- Where is your place in this thread?
- When the production program appears, then our work begins. You can not develop technology is unknown under what and in what extent. When we solve a problem, we necessarily take into account the possibilities of cooperation between enterprises, the presence in the holding of competence centers or plans to create them. In accordance with this, we develop production technology, select equipment, accessories and tools, and develop personnel requirements.
To carry out such a large-scale project, we need a structure that is able to guarantee the execution of the contract, when the contractor assumes everything: technological and construction design, selection and purchase of equipment, accessories and tools, organization of construction of the facility and control over its progress, installation and commissioning of equipment and t . In any project management textbook, the advantages of EPCM contracts are described (EPCM from English engineering - engineering, procurement - supply, construction - construction, management - management): cost reduction , predictability of achieving the desired result, flexibility in the distribution of risks and responsibilities, an individual approach to the customer.
- It's in the textbook, but in our reality?
- The system is widely developed in the West and a little here in our country - in sectors that are largely integrated into the world: in the energy and oil and gas production.
As for the enterprises of the defense complex and engineering in general, the problem is that the customer in most cases simply does not have the opportunity to conclude such a contract, because it works in financial and management regulations that do not allow the project to be fully invested. Hence the problem. We also can not be responsible for the project entirely. The customer has an organization that leads the construction of the facility, but no one responsible for the supply of equipment, for the training of personnel and building an information corporate system.
- So, in the state there is no customer?
- Not in the state, but in mechanical engineering. In the state he is. When it comes to building a nuclear power plant, nobody offers to build it in parts. NPP surrenders turnkey.
“But nuclear power plants are also machine-building ...”
“One can pour in one hundred billion, make the plant ideal, but it will be loaded by three percent, because it is included in cooperation with enterprises that have not been modernized in any way”
- This is an energy facility, from there comes an order for turbines and other equipment, that is, engineering serves as a supplier. But the project is managed by the energy company or its general contractor, which is responsible for ensuring that the facility is created according to the budget and the time frame and gives the required number of megawatts. Here the scheme of the EPCM-contract works well, it must be extended to mechanical engineering. And talk about it for a long time.
The state should act as a competent customer. Do not ask the heads of companies performing defense orders how much money has been invested in their plants, but ask how much the production will cost tank. An engineering company will develop production technology, select equipment and give its approximate cost. We add to it the costs of design, modernization of production, scheduled repairs, other related costs, then we divide the amount received by the number of tanks ordered and get the price of one. In fact, this is not the same as the cost of a tank at a given enterprise.
The challenge is to ensure the product life cycle. In the product life cycle, production is only a part - the most important, but no more. And the design development, R & D, modernization of the products in use and further recycling are financed in parts at best.
Initially, engineers are developing a product design, then an engineering company or a technological institute comes into play, which develops technical and technological solutions for future production. Based on this information, design estimates are compiled. After this, the data are provided to the construction company. We now have the opposite. Funds are allocated to the construction part. This is the main difference. It is impossible to start building a plant until an engineering company or a technological institute creates a project, receives money for it, and together with the customer passes the state expertise.
But organizational-technological design, which plays a crucial role, is not given enough attention at this stage. What is the result? The building was built magnificent, equipment purchased the most modern, but the careful organizational and technological design of money and attention was not enough.
Why is it important? Any company is tied to the territory where it is located. For example, if there are enough skilled workers in the region, we can make a project with the maximum possible use of universal machines in order to minimize the cost of purchasing equipment. But there may be a completely different picture, and then you have to use deserted technologies, because there is simply no one to supply to universal equipment.
These and many other issues must be taken into account at the stage of pre-project works or, in modern terms, when conducting a technological audit of the project.
- How to achieve this?
- The most important thing is to lay out the pre-project procedures in the regulations. This will create a quality plant. Here we can recall the Soviet experience - in the then practice of the concept of "technological audit" was not, but operated on others - "technological design", which was a mandatory phase for any industrial enterprise. And it was financed in a regular way based on the volume of total capital investments in the project - exactly what is not there now.
- Is it possible to return to this?
- Return to need! If we are talking about production modernization, then it must necessarily be tied to the product that is supposed to be produced. Otherwise we can spend huge money, buy good machines and at the same time get a zero result. Because it can turn out: on these machines, the required product cannot be made or it is required to develop an expensive tooling and many more circumstances that have not been previously taken into account can open up. As a result, either the product will not be produced at all, or its cost will become prohibitive. Therefore, we constantly say that we need a clear regulation on the performance of work on technological audit and design. And then a quality project will be made with a normal feasibility study, which takes into account every step and all the costs of equipment, personnel, equipment and so on.
We emphasize once again: we need a system order of society and the state The country is involved in global competition, the world from the fifth technological mode, from paperless technology is moving to the sixth - to a deserted technology. Accordingly, those who accomplish this first will be the undisputed leaders. And today, more than half of the economy is still in the fourth dimension.
“And the enterprises are driven by people proceeding from the paradigm of the fourth order ...”
- Right. It is necessary to move the industrial policy a half cycle forward.
- Who in the country can do this?
- Previously, the industrial policy program was and was implemented in each sectoral ministry. Now there is only the Ministry of Industry and Trade, which cannot cover everything, and a vacuum appears. So it's up to the business. Understanding is required from each corporation: it manages not production of specific products, but thousands of factories. This is what should proceed, because a competitive product should be offered to the market, and not information about how many manufacturers and machine tools the manufacturer has.
“To this he can answer what the tanks, which the Defense Ministry requires, are from this demand ...”
- So the fact of the matter is that they are not responsible for the tank, but for the factories that are not clear what and why they produce. And with an arbitrary cost.
But this is one side. Before talking about modernization in any enterprise, you first need to understand - in the production chain of which product it is included, in the interests of which product it is worth to introduce innovations and how this will affect the enterprises entering into cooperation. You can enter one hundred billion, make the plant perfectly modern, but it will be loaded by three percent, because it is included in cooperation with enterprises that have not been modernized ...
Investments should be considered in the complex, so we are now talking about what corporate executives need. There are a lot of problems at the plants, but at the level of a corporation there are more of them exactly because there are many enterprises, they are different, their leaders hold different views and have different life experiences, the teams are well-established and also significantly differ in age and qualifications. And you need to manage them in a single way. And we propose to do this based on the thesis that you need to manage the production of a product, and not a specific plant. There is a director there, let him manage it.
The whole question is the ability to set the right tasks, ask the right questions to enterprises that belong to the corporation, and get the right answers in the same format. And we are again talking about technology auditing. What is the use if an audit at a hundred factories of one corporation is carried out by different organizations according to their own methods and each provides results in its own form? On such a shaky basis, it is impossible in principle to draw any conclusions, because there is no attachment to the final result.
- Need a regulation?
- Exactly. In which it is clearly stated: what is a technology audit, who has the right to carry it out. And every auditor must be certified. Today, anyone can carry out technological design; even licenses are not necessary for this and technical education is not necessary.
By the way, we can create any kind of regulatory documents, but the money for technological design or technological audit must necessarily be included in the budgets of corporations. It is necessary to allocate money for engineering to enterprises, so that they can order engineering services on the side.
This will serve as the best incentive for the development of engineering companies. Now there is no corresponding line in the budget, and even if the head of the corporation wants to order such a service, he has no opportunity.
- And he begins to seek reserves?
- He, for example, asks to carry out the design for free, including the cost of services, say, in the equipment that will be acquired on the basis of the project. It distorts the market, so it is impossible to do. In the construction there are clear rules for payment of design work, and exactly the same rules should be taken when forming the cost of pre-project. We need a clear link to the estimated value of the object, then it will come to understand why such money is being requested.
So far, our enterprises are not ready to pay for it - they just don’t understand what they really get. In addition, many managers do not know what engineering is, or think that it is only a matter of supplying equipment, and they believe that Finval is doing just that.
- How to manage the upgrade?
- The main point: when requesting a corporation from a company for financial resources, a concept of upcoming changes should be drawn up. That is, it is necessary to convey to the corporation what kind of transformations are necessary, how they are planned to be carried out and why. Modernization should begin first of all with a product, that is, with what the company plans to produce and to what extent. We have successful experience in creating and protecting such concepts.
- Is it a purely financial document?
- The justification of investments can not be made only on the basis of financial calculations. The concept should be based on technological development. It is necessary to go from the product, to show that there is a clear and long-term demand in the market - only if such information is available, the document will be of interest to the investor.
- Now the creation of competence centers is in vogue. In your opinion, do they really contribute to the modernization of the machine-building complex?
- We ardently advocate the creation of competence centers. Modern economics means ensuring competition through the effective interaction of such centers with serial enterprises. But there are reservations.
- What kind?
- For example, there is a hive of enterprises producing about the same products and included in the same structure. The corporation receives a request for funding from them, and it turns out that you need to buy, suppose one hundred identical machines, each worth two hundred million rubles. Here the question arises: is it really necessary for each plant to give the requested funding or is it worth creating a single center, where there will be not one hundred, but ten such machines, and it will provide all enterprises with products of a specific nomenclature?
- The idea is sound.
“Ideally, such a center also works efficiently with orders, fulfills them efficiently and on time, and most importantly, it has relevant technological expertise, that is, it monitors market trends and replaces outdated technological processes with new ones in time. For example, if a competence center is created in the field of foundry, then it should be an expert in this field. It is necessary to connect a scientific base to such a competence center, the activity of which is focused on advanced research and development that can outpace competitors. But it is in the narrow specialization, as mentioned above, in the casting. This gives a reserve for export. Moreover, it is important to develop both military and peaceful themes. If it is cast, the company can produce both guns and pans. It is necessary only to add applied work in the field of science and you can go to world markets.
- Are you talking about the realities of our day?
- It should be so, but today there is no single clear understanding in government structures that there is a center of competence. They still believe that it is just a set of machines that produce standard operations, standard products, and for the enterprise this is another opportunity to receive money from the state.
But the problem is that technologies are changing rapidly, and we are in favor of not just a set of machines in the centers of competence, but also an applied science.
We are in favor of the fact that in the centers of competence there was such a composition of equipment and scientific activity that truly turns our country into a world leader in the field of production. With the introduction of modern technologies in the centers of competence, we will create sustainable and innovative products. Yes, at the initial stage it will be products for its plants, and in the future the participation of competence centers in international exhibitions will raise us to a completely new level - the world leader in the field of production. Competence centers need to take part in leading trade fairs as a separate producer, where we will be able to demonstrate our advanced developments and scientific base.
All activities should be focused on the future. Now the ratio of production, for example, 90 percent - military products, 10 percent - civilian. But over time, this proportion, for obvious reasons, is shifting towards the civil one. The number of civil orders will increase, including by reducing the cost of production in this particular industry. Competence centers should be leaders not only within the corporation, but across Russia. We will be able to master new types of products, as well as fulfill export orders. We must have the best enterprises in the industry, with impeccable quality of product performance, meeting international standards. And we must be one step ahead of the competition.
In the meantime, everything turns into “let's save money, we will not buy all machines, we will take ten times less, we will put it in one place”. This is good, but not enough. The lack of science and developmental incentives will lead to the fact that instead of a center of competence, in a couple of years a “garage with nuts” will appear. Meanwhile, the corporation that built the center, in addition to having saved on equipment, will also want to recoup the costs. And they can be fought off only in the foreign market, where the center will pick up third-party orders.
- Is it bad to pay back the costs?
- It may happen that the factories of the corporation, at once, need some kind of ill-fated nut. And in the center there is a millionth order, because of one nut there they will not be able to re-adjust machines and will be right in their own way. What is the result? The problems of the plants were aggravated - they used to have their own equipment, they made this nut out of necessity, now there is no such possibility. But plants do not produce nuts, but some kind of product. And it may be that it will not be finally handed over because of one ill-fated nut. And from this there is already a problem with the surrender of the state defense order. At 99,99 percent, everything is ready, but there are not enough nuts. And why? Because they said that there is nothing to do at the factory, this machine is too expensive a nut. Because they consider its cost compared with mass production. And it should be considered in comparison with the cost of the total product and losses due to the fact that the delivery is delayed for months, as they are waiting for the nut.
- To solve this issue?
- To heads making decisions on creation of the centers of competence. To avoid such absurd situations, among them must be present technical specialists who are able to anticipate and voice these risks. Such decisions cannot be made only from economic feasibility and on the basis of financial calculations.
- In this case, is there a regulation in the country for creating competence centers?
- Not. Each corporation determines for itself what exactly it means by the center of competence and what tasks it intends to solve with its help.
- Are there such centers that fully correspond to their name?
- There is. For example, in our company there is a Center for Engineering Technologies. There not only the equipment that we supply is presented, but also processing technologies are being worked out, machine operators and technologists are being trained. Having the experience and the necessary expertise, we can reasonably say on what kind of equipment is better to produce the product and how to do it optimally. Not cheap or expensive, but the only way - optimal. The price does matter, but the optimum is made up of different things: of seriality, risks, possibilities of expanding production, established cooperation, etc. It is one thing to spank nuts with millions of copies and quite another to a million different nuts. But it is impossible to consider all goals as primary.
- What is your way out?
It is necessary to create centers of competence. They will help build technological competencies, the emergence of new breakthrough technologies, reduce production costs. This in turn will increase its competitiveness. It is necessary to realize that after a few years the rearmament of the army and fleet The Russian Federation will end and there will be an urgent need to produce competitive civilian products. Today we need to think about the production of civilian and dual-use products so that the funds spent on the modernization of defense industry enterprises work to develop the entire Russian economy and increase the export of high-tech products. By the way, the creation of centers of competence is not necessarily the prerogative of state structures. For example, in Germany in the machine tool industry, which brings billions of dollars in revenue and provides the country with a leading position in the world market, 99,5 percent of engineering and manufacturing companies are representatives of small and medium-sized businesses - they play the role of centers of competence there and very successfully.
- And we have?
- We have a little more complicated. The creation of such centers requires large financial expenditures and the involvement of serious specialists. Few small and medium enterprises are ready for such investments. And the market of engineering services in our engineering has not yet been formed. As for state-owned enterprises, now many corporations are beginning to be interested in creating competence centers, but when organizing them, it is necessary to clearly formulate goals. Technology development issues should be handled by technology professionals, not lawyers or financiers. These centers are not always able to be self-sufficient, but it should be clearly understood what problems they will help to solve and what kind of results corporate management wants to get from their creation. And besides, it is necessary to understand that the design of such a center is not done instantly. It may take from three months to six months, depending on the volume of the production program and the complexity of cooperation. Because competently designing a cooperation is not at all the same as building a building and putting ten machines. It is necessary to clearly calculate how to ensure that each of the factories of a corporation receives what it needs at a particular moment, and the final customer - finished products just in time with the required quality. We have successful experience in designing such centers.
It should be noted that in the West, tenders are announced for the finished product, our situation is different - tenders are held for the supply of equipment. Competence centers have equipment, a scientific base, and corresponding competencies. Together with all these parameters, our centers of competence will be able to participate in global tenders for the supply of specific products.
- Who except you can solve such problems?
- Probably, someone may, if puzzled. But by and large, no one is busy with it. Too complicated and unpredictable. The main task of corporations is the harmonization of interaction with factories, the construction of intelligible management. In dialogue with us, this problem is solved. We can tell you what to look for, help formulate requirements. For corporate executives, the approach to the development of their enterprises should be systematic. Cooperation should be considered from the point of view of the production of the final product - and this is the most difficult.