Case Study
Avoiding the Wrong Automation Investment
- Automation
- Strategy
An industrial machinery manufacturing client approached Product Insight to design a robotic system that would automate a manual cleaning, inspection, bagging, and boxing process. While the automation was technically feasible, the economics did not support it. Product Insight helped the client avoid unnecessary capital investment by saying no to implementing the ask, and instead reframed the project around operational value and ROI.
Challenge
The client wanted to bring an outsourced process in-house but lacked the labor to support it manually. Automation appeared to be the obvious answer, but given the relatively low production volume and fast cycle times, it introduced significant development and integration cost without delivering operational advantage.
Solution
We stepped back from the assumption that a robot was necessary and evaluated the full system instead. We analyzed labor involvement, throughput, cycle time, operational constraints, and total system cost to understand where automation would actually create value. That analysis showed that the robotic system would add complexity without meaningfully improving performance.
Instead, we recommended a simpler manual workflow designed around the operator experience. The solution included structured work instructions, training materials, and a bench-based or glove-box-based process tailored to the cleaning requirements. The recommendation also preserved the option to revisit automation later if production volume or strategic priorities changed.
Outcome
The client avoided a costly automation investment with limited economic upside. By separating the business objective from the assumed technical solution, we identified a faster, lower-risk path to bringing the process in-house. The resulting workflow achieved the operational goal without unnecessary complexity or capital investment. The value didn’t come from building a machine, but avoiding the wrong one.