November 4, 2025 • 37 mins
In the debut episode of People B4 Machines, host Amanda Cupido dives into the evolution of Industry 4.0 and the emergence of Industry 5.0 with guest Jeff Winter, a globally recognized thought leader in industrial automation. Together, they explore the shift toward human-centric, sustainable, and resilient industrial models, emphasizing the importance of collaboration between people and technology. Jeff shares insights on the challenges of scaling digital transformation, the role of leadership and culture, and the critical need for clear strategies in navigating this transformative era. Tune in for actionable advice, bold questions, and a fresh perspective on the future of manufacturing.
Thanks for listening to People Before Machines, conversations on the chaos of factory automation, from Monday morning to the very near future. For more bold questions and sharp insights, visit us at People Before Machines.com. Our next episode, with Jeff Burnstein, Top floor to shop floor: Why is it taking so long to connect these floors? drops November 18th. And remember, the future isn't fully automated, it's people-powered. Now back to the show.
For more bold questions and sharp insights, visit www.peopleb4machines.com. Remember, the future isn’t fully automated—it’s people-powered.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Jeff Winter (00:00):
In addition to our workforce not being ready, I
honestly think our leadersaren't ready either.
We've poured billions intotechnology, but far less into
preparing our people.
You know, the workers are told,oh, artificial intelligence is
going to help you, but then notshow them how their roles
evolve.
Leaders talk about digitalfirst strategy, but can't
(00:21):
explain what that means fordecision making or
accountability or career paths.
Intro (00:32):
People before machines.
Conversations on the chaos offactory automation from Monday
morning to the very near future.
Amanda Cupido (00:41):
Welcome to People Before Machines.
Conversations on the chaos offactory automation from Monday
morning to the very near future.
I'm Amanda Capito, a speaker,author, and entrepreneur with a
passion for the intersection oftechnology and humanity.
This episode, we're discussingIndustry 4.0 and beyond,
(01:02):
specifically, what it looks liketo shift the focus to creating
a human-centric, sustainable,and resilient model of
industrialization.
We'll dive into best practices,who's driving this shift, and
potential pitfalls with today'sguest, Jeff Winter.
He is the vice president ofBusiness Strategy for Critical
Manufacturing, where he leadsstrategic growth initiatives and
(01:24):
business development and hashelped position the company as a
global leader in MEStechnology.
Jeff has 20 years of experienceworking for different
industrial automation productand solution providers.
He's known for his ability tocommunicate complex concepts to
a wide range of audiences, whichis why he has been recognized
by more than one group as thetop industry 4.0 thought leader
(01:47):
globally, including being a topvoice on LinkedIn with more than
85 million views of hiscontent, which is why I am
especially excited to have himon the podcast.
Welcome, Jeff.
Jeff Winter (01:57):
Thanks for having me here.
This is going to be fun.
Amanda Cupido (02:00):
It is.
Let's dive right in.
So we talk a lot about industry4.0, and some are even already
talking about industry 5.0.
What are the key differencesbetween the two and why does it
matter right now?
Jeff Winter (02:13):
You know, when people ask me the difference
between Industry 4.0 and 5.0, Ialways like to start with a
little history lesson.
So the term Industry 4.0 wasactually born at Hanover Fair in
Germany back in 2011.
And then a couple years later,it became part of the Germany's
official high-tech strategy2020.
(02:34):
And at the time it was allabout these nine technology
pillars, things like IoT, bigdata, robotics, simulation, all
that stuff.
But then the idea took hold allaround the world.
And when it did, it took ondifferent meanings all around
the world.
So what I've learned over theyears is industry 4.0 can really
(02:54):
be seen in two different ways.
Some people use it to describeor as a label for the era that
we're living in right now,basically the digital
transformation age ofmanufacturing.
Yet others see it as adestination.
So they think of it as thisperfect end state of
(03:16):
hyper-connected, self-optimizingfactories.
Now, both views are valid, andthat duality is part of what's
fueled conversations like theseall over the years.
Now, then comes along the ideaof Industry 5.0.
And it first showed up reallyaround 2021 with some of the
(03:37):
European Commission papers thatcame out.
And what is interesting is it'snot even pitched as a brand new
revolution, it's described asan evolution of Industry 4.0,
which is why so many people getconfused.
Now, what it does is it layerson three really important
themes.
It layers on beinghuman-centric, sustainable, and
(03:59):
resilient.
In other words, it's all aboutmaking sure that all this tech
that we built doesn't just crankout efficiency, but it also
actually serves people.
It protects the planet and itholds up when disruptions hit.
Now, very few disagree withthis concept, although a lot of
people don't like the term, thelabel industry 5.0 to describe
(04:22):
it, myself included, as I thinkit appears misleading since it's
not a brand new industrialrevolution, but rather an
evolution.
So I personally like todescribe industry 4.0 more as
the era that we're living inright now, with a vision of what
it could be, which means allthe stuff that we're talking
(04:43):
about, in my view, is just partof Industry 4.0 or the fourth
industrial revolution.
And why does this matter rightnow?
Because if you look at thepast, oh, 15 years or so, the
pace of change has beenrelentless.
Cloud, artificial intelligence,IoT, advanced automation,
digital twins, you name it.
And it's not slowing down, it'saccelerating.
(05:06):
So having a clear strategy forhow to take advantage of all
these disruptive technologiescollectively, together, is no
longer optional.
It's becoming essential.
Whether you called industry 4.0or 5.0 or something entirely
different, it really doesn'tmatter.
What matters is that you don'tignore it and you approach it
(05:27):
with a proactive strategy tothrive in this transformative
time that we're living in rightnow.
Amanda Cupido (05:33):
Okay, thanks for that history lesson.
I think it's really importantto set the stage.
And it just makes me thinkabout the role of this
human-centric innovation.
So whether we're referring toit as industry 5.0 or just at
the second iteration of 4.0, howdoes it differ from what we're
doing right now?
That's the core question, Ithink, of how we want to move
(05:54):
towards that or what would needto change.
Jeff Winter (05:56):
And this depends on how you view industry 4.0.
Once again, whether you see itas a description of our era or
as a destination.
Now, for argument's sake here,I'm going to be answering more
on the destination side, meaningwe're talking about the
European Commission-specificversion of Industry 5.0.
So now, in that framing,Industry 4.0's destination, if
(06:18):
you want to call it, was allabout automation, connectivity,
and autonomy, essentiallymachines and systems doing as
much as possible on their own.
And the role of human was oftenminimized.
And Industry 5.0 kind ofchanges that narrative.
(06:40):
It flips the narrative.
Human-centric innovation says,wait a second, the purpose of
all this tech isn't to pushpeople out, it's to lift them
up.
So instead of treating workersas obstacles to efficiency,
Industry 5.0 treats them ascreative partners.
You know, artificialintelligence, robotics, and
(07:01):
digital platforms become toolsthat enhance human judgment,
intuition, and problem solving.
That shift matters becausehumans bring what machines
can't (07:12):
empathy, ethics, context, and imagination.
So in Industry 5.0, you seeinnovation aimed at
collaboration.
Cobots are collaborativerobots, you know, designed to
safely work side by side withoperators.
Augmented reality and virtualreality for personalized
(07:32):
training, decision supportsystems that explain the why
behind recommendations.
So it's not about replacinghuman input, it's about
designing technology that adaptsto us.
And the stakes are high withskill shortages and generational
workforce shifts and risingexpectations for meaningful
(07:54):
work.
Human centricity becomes acompetitive advantage.
And companies that get thisright won't just have more
efficient factories, they'llhave more engaging employees,
more innovative ideas, andstronger resilience when things
inevitably change.
Amanda Cupido (08:12):
So you're talking about these shifts.
Who is driving these shifts?
Jeff Winter (08:16):
So what's funny is I've been asked this several
times.
And so I found actually about ayear ago an interesting study
from 2023 on industry 4.0adoption in developing
countries.
And it was by uh TsunguaUniversity.
And the the study surveyed, Ithink it was something like 215
(08:39):
Chinese manufacturing firms, andfound out that industry 4.0
adoption isn't really about thetechnology itself, even though
the managers generally agreed,actually an average of 4.6 on a
five-point likert scale as partof the study.
And what they found is that,yeah, the tech had big
advantages.
Everyone agreed on that, butthat didn't actually push them
(09:02):
to adopt.
What actually mattered wasgovernment support, which had an
average of 4.4 out of five, andcompetitive pressure, which was
a 4.2 out of five, whichtogether nudged the top
executives to get on board.
And once the leadership backedit, adoption followed.
(09:22):
And bigger firms, the ones over2,000 employees they found, and
those with stronger technicalknow-how, were also much more
likely to adopt.
And when you look across these14 technologies that they
evaluated against, the firmsplit into three camps.
About a quarter of them werelight adopters, around 40% were
(09:44):
moderate adopters, and roughly athird were heavy adopters.
Now, in addition to this Likertscale that they used, they also
provided uh beta values.
And these these beta valuescome from structural equation
modeling, which is basically, inlayman's term, a type of
regression analysis.
So instead of just showingaverages, which is what I talked
(10:06):
about before, it looks at howmuch one factor actually
influences another when youcontrol for everything else.
So for example, governmentsupport had a beta of 0.34,
meaning that for every increasein government support, say an
average from a three neutral toa four agree on that Likert
(10:27):
scale, there was a strongpositive jump in the likelihood
that top management wouldsupport industry 4.0 adoption.
And I found that fascinating.
So overall, companies indeveloping economies don't
actually adopt Industry 4.0 justbecause it looks good on paper.
They adopt it when leaders feelbacked by government, when they
(10:49):
feel pressured by competitorsand confident that they will
have the size and the skills tomake it work.
And that's why over the pastdecade, you've actually seen a
lot of countries invest billionsof dollars and even set up
institutes to help advancemanufacturing, both either in
their country or globally.
Amanda Cupido (11:08):
This is fascinating.
In an ideal world, though, doyou feel that's the way it
should be?
Like that's how the shiftshould be driving?
Or do you feel like it shouldbe, yeah, or where would you put
the power, so to say?
Jeff Winter (11:21):
It's kind of a funny question because in an
ideal world can mean a lot ofthings to a lot of people.
So if you look at more as justkind of like the free market
laissez-faire approach, itshould be driven by uh mostly
competitors, just a newtechnology comes out, and then
people adopt it as they see aneconomic ROI for them to adopt
(11:42):
it to win in their marketplace.
But when you start to look atcountry-to-country comparisons,
then there's this incentive togo, but we want our country to
advance.
And so if they're not seeingthe natural inclination to do
it, we want to help them.
We want to help them get overthat hump so that we can we can
push them to that edge, becauseif they do, then our country
(12:05):
will do better overall.
So it's one to go, I would sayI like that the governments uh
around the world have set theseinstitutes up.
I mean, I'm part of CESME,which is the US government
institute for smartmanufacturing.
It's one of well over a dozenset up by Manufacturing USA to
help, you know, manufacturingcompetitiveness in the United
(12:27):
States, you know, against theworld.
And I do believe it's workingto help elevate and lift,
especially the small tomedium-size manufacturers, to
give them a boost so that theycan compete in a world where
other countries are supportingtheir manufacturers.
Amanda Cupido (12:45):
Yeah.
And it must be interesting thento follow what government
leaders are, what actionsthey're taking around the world,
because we might get a surprisecountry pop-up with them
embracing 4.0 technologies andbeyond just because their
government leaders are takingthat kind of a stance.
So that's exciting.
All right.
It seems as though somemanufacturers have yet to figure
out how to begin with realizingthe value of digital
(13:06):
manufacturing as a whole.
So I just thought it would begood if we zoomed out for a
second and talk about your 10golden rules for digital
transformation.
I am gonna rhyme them offquickly.
It's prioritize end userexperience, commit to continuous
learning, uphold data securityand privacy, embrace agile
methodologies, break down datasilos, conduct regular testing,
(13:28):
design for future growth,regularly revise digital
strategies, engage and involveleadership, and finally maintain
transparent communication.
Now, I zoomed through them allbecause as you yourself note,
there are no surprises there.
And the hardest part oftransformation isn't knowing
what to do, but it's sticking toit.
So why don't you elaborate onthat?
Jeff Winter (13:49):
Sure.
So this was a fun post that Imade.
I actually made the list lastyear and then rewrote an article
to kind of back the post.
But one of the things that Ilike to encourage every
manufacturer is you need to havea clear definition and vision
of what industry 4.0 means toyour company.
(14:10):
Pick a term that works for yourcompany and come up with that
definition and that vision.
Because if you don't agree as acompany on what it means, what
do you think the chances are ofyou actually succeeding in it?
The moment you turn it into acollection of projects, they get
evaluated as a collection ofprojects rather than a
transformative change of yourorganization.
(14:31):
So I came up with these, I callthem 10 golden rules to help
companies think about what theyshould be putting in place for
their company that kind ofguides all decisions across the
company.
So this is like the step beyondthe vision.
And it's more what rule bookare you giving employees so that
not only do you have thevision, but you're giving some
(14:53):
guidance for how they makedecisions so that you're all
working together collectively asan organization across
departments and achieving theresult that you want.
So I tried to do this to spurconversation.
I doubt that any company woulduse my 10 exactly, but I put my
10, I put my, you know, mydefinition of what they each
(15:13):
meant to try and get companiesto go come up with your list.
It could be five, it could beeight, it could be more, but
something that helps to definehow you guys are actually making
decisions in the company andwhat you're trying to do as a
result of industry 4.0 ordigital transformation at your
company.
Amanda Cupido (15:32):
This is great.
And especially tying into howwe started this conversation,
everybody is using these words alittle bit differently.
So even providing this kind ofclarity for your team so that
we're all making sure thatyou're talking about the same
thing.
I think it's important.
So kudos to you for promptingthat for leaders.
Jeff Winter (15:47):
I actually did a workshop in June of this year
where we asked everyone theformality of their industry 4.0
or digital transformationdefinitions in the company
across the series ofmanufacturers and then asked
them to kind of state what theythought it was.
And what I found funny was theinside single companies, we had
(16:09):
one that had like four companiesin attendance.
They didn't all have the samedefinition for what industry 4.0
meant.
And this was a real workshopwhere we got to discuss this as
a group, and yet they had theirsfairly standardized on their
rankings.
So it's funny to see how itworks out for the companies to
go, oh, we absolutely have adefinition.
(16:29):
Yes.
And they go, what is it?
And then all four people haveslightly different answers.
Amanda Cupido (16:34):
It's so interesting because we always
just think that what we'rethinking is what everybody else
is on the same page about.
It just really uh holds up amirror to how wrong we can be.
I actually even think that thiscomes up with the word podcast.
Since we're on a podcast, wemight as well uh lean into it.
You know, when someone says theword podcast, the people who
(16:54):
have been podcasting since itsinception in 2004 are thinking
audio only, RSS feed, right?
But podcasts of now, that word,there are video podcasts,
they're on YouTube.
Does it count if you only putup one episode?
Is that a podcast now, right?
Or is it a standalone video?
Like that definition is sounclear.
So even when we're talkingabout things that seem
(17:14):
straightforward, like a podcast,let alone industry 4.0, like
people think so differently.
So I find this fascinating.
Thanks for sharing thatexample.
I want to do a gut check here.
Okay, so I wonder if, onaverage, you think manufacturing
professionals areoverestimating the technological
(17:35):
capabilities that we currentlyhave and what's in the near
future.
Jeff Winter (17:40):
So I think the key thing to remember, going back to
industry 5.0 as defined by theEuropean Commission, it's not
actually about a brand new setof technologies, if you look at
it.
It's it's not like someoneinvented 5.0 tech and dropped it
on the market.
The tools, artificialintelligence, robotics, digital
(18:02):
twins, cloud, augmented reality,edge computing, all that stuff
is it's already there.
The real question isn't do wehave the technology?
It's can we use it at scale ina way that delivers on the
vision that we're trying toachieve?
Whether you have the vision ofindustry 4.0 as originally
defined or industry 5.0, thesame question applies.
(18:26):
And that's where companies gettripped up.
Demos look amazing, pilots lookslick, but stitching it all
into day-to-day operations withreal people, real data, and real
business models, that's thehard part.
So are we overestimating?
I'd say in some cases, yes.
Now, the technology is readyenough to support industry 4.0's
(18:51):
vision, industry 5.0's vision,but the bottleneck isn't the
hardware or the software.
It's leadership, right?
It's strategy and it's culture.
The vision of human-centric,sustainable, and resilient
industry, it's completelypossible.
The technology is there and itworks.
(19:12):
The challenge is whethercompanies are really ready to
run with it or not.
Amanda Cupido (19:17):
And so, what advice do you give to a leader
or even somebody on the factoryfloor who's excited but feels
that hesitation from the teamaround them?
Like, what would you advise forthese folks who might be
needing that extra push to bemore ready?
Jeff Winter (19:33):
So, a lot of initiatives that I see are
driven by new technologyadvancements.
And even if they're justdabbling, they're experiments,
they're pilots, they're drivenby it.
Look at just AI in the pastcouple years since ChatGPT came
out, and how many companies nowhave made initiatives and
(19:53):
strategies around generative AIand now agentic AI, just because
the technology is there andpeople are starting to see other
people have successes, whichresults in fear of missing out
or FOMO, and then that drivesthis need for companies to go,
we have to do something or we'regonna be left behind.
But not many take a step backto actually really understand
(20:18):
the art of the possible in termsof what it actually can do.
So they can apply it towardstwo aspects of their company.
The first is solving problems,which is what most I would say
do focus on.
They think of the technologyand they go, what problem can
this technology solve?
I think that's a great startingpoint.
(20:39):
But I would argue it alsomisses half of what you should
be looking at.
The second is a concept calledfuture solving, which I actually
got from Brian Evergreen in hisbook, Autonomous
Transformation.
And I love this concept becauseit shifts away from looking at
technology, especially AI, togoing, but what can we fix
(21:01):
today?
And it re-asks the question,but what new future can we
create?
There is no problem today.
We're talking about creatingsomething, whether it's a new
business model, a new offering,a new way of working, whatever
it is that's new.
So it's not fixing somethingthat wasn't working.
It's creating somethingentirely new based off of where
(21:22):
we want to go.
And if you start thinking inthat mindset and educate
yourself on what the technologyis and what it can do, you will
come up with a better vision anda better strategy and a better
set of communication internallyand involvement of employees so
that they know how and why andwhere to use the technology to
(21:45):
benefit them as individuals,their departments, and as the
companies.
Because technology doesn't failoften technically.
In fact, I rarely know oftechnology failing technically
or the initiative failingbecause of technology
technically.
It fails because the employeeseither resistant, they don't
understand how it helps theirjob, they don't understand how
(22:07):
it fits into a purpose or amission.
And so it ends up stalling fornon-technical reasons.
And that's the part you need tofocus on more because it gets
back to understanding what areyou doing, why are you doing it,
where are you going.
Amanda Cupido (22:20):
What about people who are caught up when the
because they're thinking aboutfactory debt?
Jeff Winter (22:25):
So the way I look at it to answer any question of
I'll call it any new purchase oradoption or application of
technology is you need tounderstand the category of
initiative that falls into.
And this is related to anotherpost that I made, actually, one
of my more famous ones, which isaround the types of industry
(22:46):
4.0 initiatives.
And I broke it up intomodernization, optimization, and
transformation.
And those are very different.
Each of them have differentpurposes, each of them have
different goals, each of themare graded differently.
And where I see a lot offailure occurring is by labeling
something one and then treatingit like the other.
(23:08):
So a good example,modernization is usually about
replacing older, outdatedtechnology with new, more modern
technology systems or ways ofworking.
The justification for that iswidely different than an
optimization where you're tryingto just get better at doing
something using your existingsystems, ideally already
(23:29):
modernized, but maybe not.
And that's way different thantransformative, which is
fundamentally changing how yourcompany works, how it creates
value, how it captures value, orhow your employees work.
So if you label something astransformative and it's really
just upgrading an old techsystem, you're gonna fail
overall because you're gonnagrade it wrong.
(23:49):
It's not gonna achieve what youwant.
And that's that's a hugeimpact.
So in the case of let's sayyou're in the middle of a
deployment and a new technologycomes out, you can decide does
that impact where your vision isgoing?
How does it relate to yourinitiative?
Was it a modernizationinitiative where now it makes a
fundamental difference inwhether you transform to a new
(24:11):
thing or not?
Then it may be justified toreplace your technology, even
though you just did it, youknow, right before.
Or you may decide to go, thisdoesn't add any value compared
to where we're going.
The current version ofmodernization that we have is
sufficient for the vision wehave for where we're going.
So I think it depends on acase-by-case basis, but you
(24:32):
really need to understand whyyou are looking at this
technology and what type ofinitiative are you trying to do.
Amanda Cupido (24:39):
All right.
We can't have this conversationwithout talking about
cybersecurity.
So as we look ahead, there'sonly going to be more device
interconnectedness and even morepersonal data involved.
Are you concerned about theexpanded attack service?
Jeff Winter (24:51):
Cybersecurity is one of the probably the biggest
elephants in the smart factory.
And because every time weconnect another robot, another
sensor or AI tool, we're notjust creating value, we're
creating another doorway.
And attackers only need oneopen door.
I mean, if you look at uh IoTAnalytics last year said that
(25:16):
there was something like 18.8billion connected IoT devices.
I mean, that's that's a hugeamount of devices.
That doesn't even includelaptops and cell phones.
Just those devices alone is ahuge amount of interconnected
ways of accessing systems.
Provides a huge value, but itdoes potentially open many
(25:36):
doors.
So the mistake companies make,I think, in my opinion, is
thinking of cybersecurity as anadd-on, something that you bolt
on at the end.
In reality, it has to be has tobe baked in from the start.
And this means, in my opinion,three things.
You design for security, notfor efficiency, or not just for
(25:56):
efficiency.
Every connected device or datastream has to be secured by
design, not patch later.
The second is you need to treatpeople as the front line.
The best firewall in the worldwon't help you if an employee
clicks on the wrong link.
And so training and awarenessare as critical as the
(26:16):
technology you use.
And third is make itcontinuous.
Threats evolve daily.
Cybersecurity in the factory ofthe future isn't a project,
it's a living capability, justlike maintenance or quality.
So you have to treat this asone of the core fundamental
aspects of how you approach yourjourney and your vision of
(26:40):
industry 4.0.
Amanda Cupido (26:42):
Thanks.
So well put.
As we look ahead, are there anylearnings that you think stand
out from everything we'veimplemented already that we
could take as we continue toimplement and evolve into the
future?
Jeff Winter (26:57):
We aren't done with industry 4.0 yet, regardless of
whose definition you use forindustry 4.0, either as the
vision of and destination ofwhere we're going or description
of the time that we're in rightnow.
We still have a ways to go.
A lot of manufacturers arestuck in pilot purgatory.
Great demos, lots of proof ofconcepts, but not enough at
(27:20):
scale.
And that's lesson number one.
Don't confuse experimentationwith transformation.
I would also have to say thatanother big lesson is that
technology alone doesn't movethe needle.
Industry 4.0 has taught us sofar that you can have tons,
thousands of IoT sensors.
(27:41):
You can have many on everysingle machine and dashboards
and every office.
But if the data isn't trusted,if workflows aren't redesigned,
and if people aren't engaged,the value never shows up.
And maybe the biggest lesson asa result of this is
communication.
Too many initiatives wereframed as tech projects instead
(28:04):
of business strategies, businessimperatives.
And that's why they fizzled outor met resistance.
People didn't really understandthe why.
I love Simon Sinek's goldencircle.
It all comes back to the why.
And if the why isn't clear,adoption never sticks.
Amanda Cupido (28:26):
Yeah.
And I was just about to ask, howdo you make sure people don't
get left behind?
But I think you've justanswered it.
Is there any other tips thatyou have for making sure that
everybody is coming along withyou and you're not just running
with the torch alone and youlook back and find out there's
no one there?
Or in other words, is theglobal workforce prepared for
all of this?
Jeff Winter (28:46):
The simple answer is no, not yet.
I mean, we're going to leavepeople behind if we treat this
as a tech upgrade instead of aworkforce transition.
The tools are racing ahead atspeeds that most of us have a
hard time comprehending.
But skills, organizationaldesign, and incentives haven't
(29:09):
caught up yet.
So if we digitize tasks withoutredesigning roles, we create
automation anxiety.
And if we buy platforms withoutbuilding capabilities, we we
manufacture dependence on a fewheroes.
So if we we end up scalingpilots without the proper
training, we're gonna end upwidening the gap between the
(29:32):
early adopters and everyoneelse.
So I think, in my opinion, thatthe fix is simpler and maybe
maybe harder than just buyingsomething new to try and solve a
particular problem.
So a couple of things I like topoint out here.
First is we have to redesignthe work, not just the workflow.
Pair every use case with a rolemap.
(29:55):
You know, what the human nowdoes more of, whether it's
judgment, whether it's it's youknow exception handling
improvement whatever it is andless of repetition number two is
upskill in weeks not yearsbite-sized job embedded
learnings micro credentials youknow augmented reality job aids
(30:18):
onboarding for all the newtechnologies peer coaching
measure skills adoption kind oflike you would measure OEE
overall equipment effectivenessmake sure that you're constantly
improving next is build careerlattices not ladders create
visible pathways from operatorto you know tech to analyst to
(30:43):
improvement lead and rewardproblem solving and cross
skilling and last I would say ismake change management a first
class citizen communicate thewhy I've already mentioned the
importance of this involve thefrontline champions and link
incentives to new behaviors notjust new outputs but in addition
(31:05):
to our workforce not beingready I honestly think our
leaders aren't ready eitherwe've poured billions into
technology but far less intopreparing our people you know
the workers are told ohartificial intelligence is going
to help you but then not showthem how their roles evolve
leaders talk about digital firststrategy but can't explain what
(31:27):
that means for decision makingor accountability or career
paths.
And that disconnect breeds fearon the floor and confusion in
the boardroom.
So the the risk isn't justleaving frontline workers behind
it's leaving managers andexecutives behind too.
Many still lead with playbooksfrom the last industrial era,
(31:48):
assuming efficiency alone isgoing to win and in a world of
artificial intelligence, in aworld of autonomy and and
human-machine collaboration,that mindset is already
outdated.
Amanda Cupido (31:59):
All right you put so much into that answer.
I hope people were taking notesum I got another one for you
which might have a meaty answeras well.
How do we measure the successof industry 4.0 and when should
we begin to bridge to the nextlevel of industrial innovation?
Jeff Winter (32:15):
Great question.
And there's no silver bulletfor this one.
So first up it depends on howyour company defines industry
4.0 and your role within it areyou trying to survive the
revolution are you trying tojust stay afloat until the next
one?
Or are you trying to lead?
Those are very differentambitions.
(32:37):
And I hear all the time but mycompany isn't even at industry
3.0 yet that's only true if youthink of industry 3.0 as the
epitome of automation anddigitalization.
But if you view these eras 1.0steam we'll say 2.0 electricity
(32:57):
3.0 automation you've alreadylived through them we're done
with industry 3.0 you've made ityour company might be thriving
now or struggling now but you'rehere you don't have to be the
perfect golden star of industry3.0 to start making advancements
(33:17):
in industry 4.0 you can stillhave paper processes you can
still run a lot of youroperations in Excel.
It doesn't disqualify you Idon't advise it but it doesn't
disqualify you.
The game isn't about it's aboutknowing what technologies to
apply where to apply them andwhen to apply them in order to
(33:38):
either survive or to thrive.
And you have to make thatchoice.
That's where the two views ofIndustry 4.0 matter if you treat
it as an era then success issimply engaging with the
technology of our time.
Pick your favorite technologyand just engaging with it so
that you're not left behind.
And if you treat it as adestination then success is
(34:01):
judged by how close you get tothat vision of fully connected
autonomous self-optimizingoperations for industry 4.0 or
the human-centered sustainableresilient approach of industry
5.0.
And there are many maturitymodels out there you can use to
evaluate your current capabilityor maturity against the art of
the possible the highest levelof achievement but no company is
(34:25):
there on any of these maturityscales and honestly I don't know
any company trying to get tothe highest level of achievement
it's all about the right levelachievement for your company at
the right time.
And either way grading successhas to go beyond tech adoption
for some it's cost savings,efficiency gains or uptime.
(34:45):
For others it's more ambitiousdata-driven decisions, new
business models, customerco-creation.
And in some cases success isalso about societal impact.
Are you empowering your people?
Are you advancingsustainability and are you
building resilience?
Amanda Cupido (35:02):
All right one last curveball question for you
before we let you go if youcould fast forward 10 years,
what decision are you makingtoday that you think you will
regret the most?
Jeff Winter (35:12):
I would have to say it's experimenting more.
I think of myself just ingeneral as an earlier early
adopter just like on atechnology you know adoption
curve I'm always someone thatkind of adopts new technologies
when they come out.
But the one thing I think Icould do better at is
experimenting with them, tryingto focus on looking for ways
(35:35):
that they can help me with mywork, my job, my career rather
than just going, this is awesomeand I'm going to use it because
I'm an early technology adopterthat's probably one that I
would say that I might look backon because the amount that
things are changing is happeningso fast that failure to react
quickly can be catastrophic at apersonal level or at a
(35:58):
corporate level.
Amanda Cupido (35:59):
Yeah, for sure.
Well Jeff we'll leave it there.
Thank you so much for joiningus and thank you for tuning in
to People Before Machinesconversations on the chaos of
factory automation powered byEclipse.
We're here to challenge thestatus quo in factory automation
because machines don't buildfactories, people do.
The technical producer for thispodcast is Ryan Dentinger.
(36:22):
I'm Amanda Capito if you gotsomething out of today's episode
we'd appreciate it if you shareit with a teammate, a plant
leader or anyone who's tired ofthe automation echo chamber.
Be sure to follow for realtalk, bold questions and sharp
insights and remember the futureisn't fully automated.
It's people powered talk to yousoon.
Outro (36:42):
Thanks for listening to People Before Machines
conversations on the chaos offactory automation from Monday
morning to the very near futurefor past podcast episodes search
people before machines onSpotify Apple Podcasts Amazon
Music YouTube orEclipseAutomation dot com
In addition to our workforce not being ready, I
honestly think our leadersaren't ready either.
We've poured billions intotechnology, but far less into
preparing our people.
You know, the workers are told,oh, artificial intelligence is
going to help you, but then notshow them how their roles
evolve.
Leaders talk about digitalfirst strategy, but can't
(00:21):
explain what that means fordecision making or
accountability or career paths.
Intro (00:32):
People before machines.
Conversations on the chaos offactory automation from Monday
morning to the very near future.
Amanda Cupido (00:41):
Welcome to People Before Machines.
Conversations on the chaos offactory automation from Monday
morning to the very near future.
I'm Amanda Capito, a speaker,author, and entrepreneur with a
passion for the intersection oftechnology and humanity.
This episode, we're discussingIndustry 4.0 and beyond,
(01:02):
specifically, what it looks liketo shift the focus to creating
a human-centric, sustainable,and resilient model of
industrialization.
We'll dive into best practices,who's driving this shift, and
potential pitfalls with today'sguest, Jeff Winter.
He is the vice president ofBusiness Strategy for Critical
Manufacturing, where he leadsstrategic growth initiatives and
(01:24):
business development and hashelped position the company as a
global leader in MEStechnology.
Jeff has 20 years of experienceworking for different
industrial automation productand solution providers.
He's known for his ability tocommunicate complex concepts to
a wide range of audiences, whichis why he has been recognized
by more than one group as thetop industry 4.0 thought leader
(01:47):
globally, including being a topvoice on LinkedIn with more than
85 million views of hiscontent, which is why I am
especially excited to have himon the podcast.
Welcome, Jeff.
Jeff Winter (01:57):
Thanks for having me here.
This is going to be fun.
Amanda Cupido (02:00):
It is.
Let's dive right in.
So we talk a lot about industry4.0, and some are even already
talking about industry 5.0.
What are the key differencesbetween the two and why does it
matter right now?
Jeff Winter (02:13):
You know, when people ask me the difference
between Industry 4.0 and 5.0, Ialways like to start with a
little history lesson.
So the term Industry 4.0 wasactually born at Hanover Fair in
Germany back in 2011.
And then a couple years later,it became part of the Germany's
official high-tech strategy2020.
(02:34):
And at the time it was allabout these nine technology
pillars, things like IoT, bigdata, robotics, simulation, all
that stuff.
But then the idea took hold allaround the world.
And when it did, it took ondifferent meanings all around
the world.
So what I've learned over theyears is industry 4.0 can really
(02:54):
be seen in two different ways.
Some people use it to describeor as a label for the era that
we're living in right now,basically the digital
transformation age ofmanufacturing.
Yet others see it as adestination.
So they think of it as thisperfect end state of
(03:16):
hyper-connected, self-optimizingfactories.
Now, both views are valid, andthat duality is part of what's
fueled conversations like theseall over the years.
Now, then comes along the ideaof Industry 5.0.
And it first showed up reallyaround 2021 with some of the
(03:37):
European Commission papers thatcame out.
And what is interesting is it'snot even pitched as a brand new
revolution, it's described asan evolution of Industry 4.0,
which is why so many people getconfused.
Now, what it does is it layerson three really important
themes.
It layers on beinghuman-centric, sustainable, and
(03:59):
resilient.
In other words, it's all aboutmaking sure that all this tech
that we built doesn't just crankout efficiency, but it also
actually serves people.
It protects the planet and itholds up when disruptions hit.
Now, very few disagree withthis concept, although a lot of
people don't like the term, thelabel industry 5.0 to describe
(04:22):
it, myself included, as I thinkit appears misleading since it's
not a brand new industrialrevolution, but rather an
evolution.
So I personally like todescribe industry 4.0 more as
the era that we're living inright now, with a vision of what
it could be, which means allthe stuff that we're talking
(04:43):
about, in my view, is just partof Industry 4.0 or the fourth
industrial revolution.
And why does this matter rightnow?
Because if you look at thepast, oh, 15 years or so, the
pace of change has beenrelentless.
Cloud, artificial intelligence,IoT, advanced automation,
digital twins, you name it.
And it's not slowing down, it'saccelerating.
(05:06):
So having a clear strategy forhow to take advantage of all
these disruptive technologiescollectively, together, is no
longer optional.
It's becoming essential.
Whether you called industry 4.0or 5.0 or something entirely
different, it really doesn'tmatter.
What matters is that you don'tignore it and you approach it
(05:27):
with a proactive strategy tothrive in this transformative
time that we're living in rightnow.
Amanda Cupido (05:33):
Okay, thanks for that history lesson.
I think it's really importantto set the stage.
And it just makes me thinkabout the role of this
human-centric innovation.
So whether we're referring toit as industry 5.0 or just at
the second iteration of 4.0, howdoes it differ from what we're
doing right now?
That's the core question, Ithink, of how we want to move
(05:54):
towards that or what would needto change.
Jeff Winter (05:56):
And this depends on how you view industry 4.0.
Once again, whether you see itas a description of our era or
as a destination.
Now, for argument's sake here,I'm going to be answering more
on the destination side, meaningwe're talking about the
European Commission-specificversion of Industry 5.0.
So now, in that framing,Industry 4.0's destination, if
(06:18):
you want to call it, was allabout automation, connectivity,
and autonomy, essentiallymachines and systems doing as
much as possible on their own.
And the role of human was oftenminimized.
And Industry 5.0 kind ofchanges that narrative.
(06:40):
It flips the narrative.
Human-centric innovation says,wait a second, the purpose of
all this tech isn't to pushpeople out, it's to lift them
up.
So instead of treating workersas obstacles to efficiency,
Industry 5.0 treats them ascreative partners.
You know, artificialintelligence, robotics, and
(07:01):
digital platforms become toolsthat enhance human judgment,
intuition, and problem solving.
That shift matters becausehumans bring what machines
can't (07:12):
empathy, ethics, context, and imagination.
So in Industry 5.0, you seeinnovation aimed at
collaboration.
Cobots are collaborativerobots, you know, designed to
safely work side by side withoperators.
Augmented reality and virtualreality for personalized
(07:32):
training, decision supportsystems that explain the why
behind recommendations.
So it's not about replacinghuman input, it's about
designing technology that adaptsto us.
And the stakes are high withskill shortages and generational
workforce shifts and risingexpectations for meaningful
(07:54):
work.
Human centricity becomes acompetitive advantage.
And companies that get thisright won't just have more
efficient factories, they'llhave more engaging employees,
more innovative ideas, andstronger resilience when things
inevitably change.
Amanda Cupido (08:12):
So you're talking about these shifts.
Who is driving these shifts?
Jeff Winter (08:16):
So what's funny is I've been asked this several
times.
And so I found actually about ayear ago an interesting study
from 2023 on industry 4.0adoption in developing
countries.
And it was by uh TsunguaUniversity.
And the the study surveyed, Ithink it was something like 215
(08:39):
Chinese manufacturing firms, andfound out that industry 4.0
adoption isn't really about thetechnology itself, even though
the managers generally agreed,actually an average of 4.6 on a
five-point likert scale as partof the study.
And what they found is that,yeah, the tech had big
advantages.
Everyone agreed on that, butthat didn't actually push them
(09:02):
to adopt.
What actually mattered wasgovernment support, which had an
average of 4.4 out of five, andcompetitive pressure, which was
a 4.2 out of five, whichtogether nudged the top
executives to get on board.
And once the leadership backedit, adoption followed.
(09:22):
And bigger firms, the ones over2,000 employees they found, and
those with stronger technicalknow-how, were also much more
likely to adopt.
And when you look across these14 technologies that they
evaluated against, the firmsplit into three camps.
About a quarter of them werelight adopters, around 40% were
(09:44):
moderate adopters, and roughly athird were heavy adopters.
Now, in addition to this Likertscale that they used, they also
provided uh beta values.
And these these beta valuescome from structural equation
modeling, which is basically, inlayman's term, a type of
regression analysis.
So instead of just showingaverages, which is what I talked
(10:06):
about before, it looks at howmuch one factor actually
influences another when youcontrol for everything else.
So for example, governmentsupport had a beta of 0.34,
meaning that for every increasein government support, say an
average from a three neutral toa four agree on that Likert
(10:27):
scale, there was a strongpositive jump in the likelihood
that top management wouldsupport industry 4.0 adoption.
And I found that fascinating.
So overall, companies indeveloping economies don't
actually adopt Industry 4.0 justbecause it looks good on paper.
They adopt it when leaders feelbacked by government, when they
(10:49):
feel pressured by competitorsand confident that they will
have the size and the skills tomake it work.
And that's why over the pastdecade, you've actually seen a
lot of countries invest billionsof dollars and even set up
institutes to help advancemanufacturing, both either in
their country or globally.
Amanda Cupido (11:08):
This is fascinating.
In an ideal world, though, doyou feel that's the way it
should be?
Like that's how the shiftshould be driving?
Or do you feel like it shouldbe, yeah, or where would you put
the power, so to say?
Jeff Winter (11:21):
It's kind of a funny question because in an
ideal world can mean a lot ofthings to a lot of people.
So if you look at more as justkind of like the free market
laissez-faire approach, itshould be driven by uh mostly
competitors, just a newtechnology comes out, and then
people adopt it as they see aneconomic ROI for them to adopt
(11:42):
it to win in their marketplace.
But when you start to look atcountry-to-country comparisons,
then there's this incentive togo, but we want our country to
advance.
And so if they're not seeingthe natural inclination to do
it, we want to help them.
We want to help them get overthat hump so that we can we can
push them to that edge, becauseif they do, then our country
(12:05):
will do better overall.
So it's one to go, I would sayI like that the governments uh
around the world have set theseinstitutes up.
I mean, I'm part of CESME,which is the US government
institute for smartmanufacturing.
It's one of well over a dozenset up by Manufacturing USA to
help, you know, manufacturingcompetitiveness in the United
(12:27):
States, you know, against theworld.
And I do believe it's workingto help elevate and lift,
especially the small tomedium-size manufacturers, to
give them a boost so that theycan compete in a world where
other countries are supportingtheir manufacturers.
Amanda Cupido (12:45):
Yeah.
And it must be interesting thento follow what government
leaders are, what actionsthey're taking around the world,
because we might get a surprisecountry pop-up with them
embracing 4.0 technologies andbeyond just because their
government leaders are takingthat kind of a stance.
So that's exciting.
All right.
It seems as though somemanufacturers have yet to figure
out how to begin with realizingthe value of digital
(13:06):
manufacturing as a whole.
So I just thought it would begood if we zoomed out for a
second and talk about your 10golden rules for digital
transformation.
I am gonna rhyme them offquickly.
It's prioritize end userexperience, commit to continuous
learning, uphold data securityand privacy, embrace agile
methodologies, break down datasilos, conduct regular testing,
(13:28):
design for future growth,regularly revise digital
strategies, engage and involveleadership, and finally maintain
transparent communication.
Now, I zoomed through them allbecause as you yourself note,
there are no surprises there.
And the hardest part oftransformation isn't knowing
what to do, but it's sticking toit.
So why don't you elaborate onthat?
Jeff Winter (13:49):
Sure.
So this was a fun post that Imade.
I actually made the list lastyear and then rewrote an article
to kind of back the post.
But one of the things that Ilike to encourage every
manufacturer is you need to havea clear definition and vision
of what industry 4.0 means toyour company.
(14:10):
Pick a term that works for yourcompany and come up with that
definition and that vision.
Because if you don't agree as acompany on what it means, what
do you think the chances are ofyou actually succeeding in it?
The moment you turn it into acollection of projects, they get
evaluated as a collection ofprojects rather than a
transformative change of yourorganization.
(14:31):
So I came up with these, I callthem 10 golden rules to help
companies think about what theyshould be putting in place for
their company that kind ofguides all decisions across the
company.
So this is like the step beyondthe vision.
And it's more what rule bookare you giving employees so that
not only do you have thevision, but you're giving some
(14:53):
guidance for how they makedecisions so that you're all
working together collectively asan organization across
departments and achieving theresult that you want.
So I tried to do this to spurconversation.
I doubt that any company woulduse my 10 exactly, but I put my
10, I put my, you know, mydefinition of what they each
(15:13):
meant to try and get companiesto go come up with your list.
It could be five, it could beeight, it could be more, but
something that helps to definehow you guys are actually making
decisions in the company andwhat you're trying to do as a
result of industry 4.0 ordigital transformation at your
company.
Amanda Cupido (15:32):
This is great.
And especially tying into howwe started this conversation,
everybody is using these words alittle bit differently.
So even providing this kind ofclarity for your team so that
we're all making sure thatyou're talking about the same
thing.
I think it's important.
So kudos to you for promptingthat for leaders.
Jeff Winter (15:47):
I actually did a workshop in June of this year
where we asked everyone theformality of their industry 4.0
or digital transformationdefinitions in the company
across the series ofmanufacturers and then asked
them to kind of state what theythought it was.
And what I found funny was theinside single companies, we had
(16:09):
one that had like four companiesin attendance.
They didn't all have the samedefinition for what industry 4.0
meant.
And this was a real workshopwhere we got to discuss this as
a group, and yet they had theirsfairly standardized on their
rankings.
So it's funny to see how itworks out for the companies to
go, oh, we absolutely have adefinition.
(16:29):
Yes.
And they go, what is it?
And then all four people haveslightly different answers.
Amanda Cupido (16:34):
It's so interesting because we always
just think that what we'rethinking is what everybody else
is on the same page about.
It just really uh holds up amirror to how wrong we can be.
I actually even think that thiscomes up with the word podcast.
Since we're on a podcast, wemight as well uh lean into it.
You know, when someone says theword podcast, the people who
(16:54):
have been podcasting since itsinception in 2004 are thinking
audio only, RSS feed, right?
But podcasts of now, that word,there are video podcasts,
they're on YouTube.
Does it count if you only putup one episode?
Is that a podcast now, right?
Or is it a standalone video?
Like that definition is sounclear.
So even when we're talkingabout things that seem
(17:14):
straightforward, like a podcast,let alone industry 4.0, like
people think so differently.
So I find this fascinating.
Thanks for sharing thatexample.
I want to do a gut check here.
Okay, so I wonder if, onaverage, you think manufacturing
professionals areoverestimating the technological
(17:35):
capabilities that we currentlyhave and what's in the near
future.
Jeff Winter (17:40):
So I think the key thing to remember, going back to
industry 5.0 as defined by theEuropean Commission, it's not
actually about a brand new setof technologies, if you look at
it.
It's it's not like someoneinvented 5.0 tech and dropped it
on the market.
The tools, artificialintelligence, robotics, digital
(18:02):
twins, cloud, augmented reality,edge computing, all that stuff
is it's already there.
The real question isn't do wehave the technology?
It's can we use it at scale ina way that delivers on the
vision that we're trying toachieve?
Whether you have the vision ofindustry 4.0 as originally
defined or industry 5.0, thesame question applies.
(18:26):
And that's where companies gettripped up.
Demos look amazing, pilots lookslick, but stitching it all
into day-to-day operations withreal people, real data, and real
business models, that's thehard part.
So are we overestimating?
I'd say in some cases, yes.
Now, the technology is readyenough to support industry 4.0's
(18:51):
vision, industry 5.0's vision,but the bottleneck isn't the
hardware or the software.
It's leadership, right?
It's strategy and it's culture.
The vision of human-centric,sustainable, and resilient
industry, it's completelypossible.
The technology is there and itworks.
(19:12):
The challenge is whethercompanies are really ready to
run with it or not.
Amanda Cupido (19:17):
And so, what advice do you give to a leader
or even somebody on the factoryfloor who's excited but feels
that hesitation from the teamaround them?
Like, what would you advise forthese folks who might be
needing that extra push to bemore ready?
Jeff Winter (19:33):
So, a lot of initiatives that I see are
driven by new technologyadvancements.
And even if they're justdabbling, they're experiments,
they're pilots, they're drivenby it.
Look at just AI in the pastcouple years since ChatGPT came
out, and how many companies nowhave made initiatives and
(19:53):
strategies around generative AIand now agentic AI, just because
the technology is there andpeople are starting to see other
people have successes, whichresults in fear of missing out
or FOMO, and then that drivesthis need for companies to go,
we have to do something or we'regonna be left behind.
But not many take a step backto actually really understand
(20:18):
the art of the possible in termsof what it actually can do.
So they can apply it towardstwo aspects of their company.
The first is solving problems,which is what most I would say
do focus on.
They think of the technologyand they go, what problem can
this technology solve?
I think that's a great startingpoint.
(20:39):
But I would argue it alsomisses half of what you should
be looking at.
The second is a concept calledfuture solving, which I actually
got from Brian Evergreen in hisbook, Autonomous
Transformation.
And I love this concept becauseit shifts away from looking at
technology, especially AI, togoing, but what can we fix
(21:01):
today?
And it re-asks the question,but what new future can we
create?
There is no problem today.
We're talking about creatingsomething, whether it's a new
business model, a new offering,a new way of working, whatever
it is that's new.
So it's not fixing somethingthat wasn't working.
It's creating somethingentirely new based off of where
(21:22):
we want to go.
And if you start thinking inthat mindset and educate
yourself on what the technologyis and what it can do, you will
come up with a better vision anda better strategy and a better
set of communication internallyand involvement of employees so
that they know how and why andwhere to use the technology to
(21:45):
benefit them as individuals,their departments, and as the
companies.
Because technology doesn't failoften technically.
In fact, I rarely know oftechnology failing technically
or the initiative failingbecause of technology
technically.
It fails because the employeeseither resistant, they don't
understand how it helps theirjob, they don't understand how
(22:07):
it fits into a purpose or amission.
And so it ends up stalling fornon-technical reasons.
And that's the part you need tofocus on more because it gets
back to understanding what areyou doing, why are you doing it,
where are you going.
Amanda Cupido (22:20):
What about people who are caught up when the
because they're thinking aboutfactory debt?
Jeff Winter (22:25):
So the way I look at it to answer any question of
I'll call it any new purchase oradoption or application of
technology is you need tounderstand the category of
initiative that falls into.
And this is related to anotherpost that I made, actually, one
of my more famous ones, which isaround the types of industry
(22:46):
4.0 initiatives.
And I broke it up intomodernization, optimization, and
transformation.
And those are very different.
Each of them have differentpurposes, each of them have
different goals, each of themare graded differently.
And where I see a lot offailure occurring is by labeling
something one and then treatingit like the other.
(23:08):
So a good example,modernization is usually about
replacing older, outdatedtechnology with new, more modern
technology systems or ways ofworking.
The justification for that iswidely different than an
optimization where you're tryingto just get better at doing
something using your existingsystems, ideally already
(23:29):
modernized, but maybe not.
And that's way different thantransformative, which is
fundamentally changing how yourcompany works, how it creates
value, how it captures value, orhow your employees work.
So if you label something astransformative and it's really
just upgrading an old techsystem, you're gonna fail
overall because you're gonnagrade it wrong.
(23:49):
It's not gonna achieve what youwant.
And that's that's a hugeimpact.
So in the case of let's sayyou're in the middle of a
deployment and a new technologycomes out, you can decide does
that impact where your vision isgoing?
How does it relate to yourinitiative?
Was it a modernizationinitiative where now it makes a
fundamental difference inwhether you transform to a new
(24:11):
thing or not?
Then it may be justified toreplace your technology, even
though you just did it, youknow, right before.
Or you may decide to go, thisdoesn't add any value compared
to where we're going.
The current version ofmodernization that we have is
sufficient for the vision wehave for where we're going.
So I think it depends on acase-by-case basis, but you
(24:32):
really need to understand whyyou are looking at this
technology and what type ofinitiative are you trying to do.
Amanda Cupido (24:39):
All right.
We can't have this conversationwithout talking about
cybersecurity.
So as we look ahead, there'sonly going to be more device
interconnectedness and even morepersonal data involved.
Are you concerned about theexpanded attack service?
Jeff Winter (24:51):
Cybersecurity is one of the probably the biggest
elephants in the smart factory.
And because every time weconnect another robot, another
sensor or AI tool, we're notjust creating value, we're
creating another doorway.
And attackers only need oneopen door.
I mean, if you look at uh IoTAnalytics last year said that
(25:16):
there was something like 18.8billion connected IoT devices.
I mean, that's that's a hugeamount of devices.
That doesn't even includelaptops and cell phones.
Just those devices alone is ahuge amount of interconnected
ways of accessing systems.
Provides a huge value, but itdoes potentially open many
(25:36):
doors.
So the mistake companies make,I think, in my opinion, is
thinking of cybersecurity as anadd-on, something that you bolt
on at the end.
In reality, it has to be has tobe baked in from the start.
And this means, in my opinion,three things.
You design for security, notfor efficiency, or not just for
(25:56):
efficiency.
Every connected device or datastream has to be secured by
design, not patch later.
The second is you need to treatpeople as the front line.
The best firewall in the worldwon't help you if an employee
clicks on the wrong link.
And so training and awarenessare as critical as the
(26:16):
technology you use.
And third is make itcontinuous.
Threats evolve daily.
Cybersecurity in the factory ofthe future isn't a project,
it's a living capability, justlike maintenance or quality.
So you have to treat this asone of the core fundamental
aspects of how you approach yourjourney and your vision of
(26:40):
industry 4.0.
Amanda Cupido (26:42):
Thanks.
So well put.
As we look ahead, are there anylearnings that you think stand
out from everything we'veimplemented already that we
could take as we continue toimplement and evolve into the
future?
Jeff Winter (26:57):
We aren't done with industry 4.0 yet, regardless of
whose definition you use forindustry 4.0, either as the
vision of and destination ofwhere we're going or description
of the time that we're in rightnow.
We still have a ways to go.
A lot of manufacturers arestuck in pilot purgatory.
Great demos, lots of proof ofconcepts, but not enough at
(27:20):
scale.
And that's lesson number one.
Don't confuse experimentationwith transformation.
I would also have to say thatanother big lesson is that
technology alone doesn't movethe needle.
Industry 4.0 has taught us sofar that you can have tons,
thousands of IoT sensors.
(27:41):
You can have many on everysingle machine and dashboards
and every office.
But if the data isn't trusted,if workflows aren't redesigned,
and if people aren't engaged,the value never shows up.
And maybe the biggest lesson asa result of this is
communication.
Too many initiatives wereframed as tech projects instead
(28:04):
of business strategies, businessimperatives.
And that's why they fizzled outor met resistance.
People didn't really understandthe why.
I love Simon Sinek's goldencircle.
It all comes back to the why.
And if the why isn't clear,adoption never sticks.
Amanda Cupido (28:26):
Yeah.
And I was just about to ask, howdo you make sure people don't
get left behind?
But I think you've justanswered it.
Is there any other tips thatyou have for making sure that
everybody is coming along withyou and you're not just running
with the torch alone and youlook back and find out there's
no one there?
Or in other words, is theglobal workforce prepared for
all of this?
Jeff Winter (28:46):
The simple answer is no, not yet.
I mean, we're going to leavepeople behind if we treat this
as a tech upgrade instead of aworkforce transition.
The tools are racing ahead atspeeds that most of us have a
hard time comprehending.
But skills, organizationaldesign, and incentives haven't
(29:09):
caught up yet.
So if we digitize tasks withoutredesigning roles, we create
automation anxiety.
And if we buy platforms withoutbuilding capabilities, we we
manufacture dependence on a fewheroes.
So if we we end up scalingpilots without the proper
training, we're gonna end upwidening the gap between the
(29:32):
early adopters and everyoneelse.
So I think, in my opinion, thatthe fix is simpler and maybe
maybe harder than just buyingsomething new to try and solve a
particular problem.
So a couple of things I like topoint out here.
First is we have to redesignthe work, not just the workflow.
Pair every use case with a rolemap.
(29:55):
You know, what the human nowdoes more of, whether it's
judgment, whether it's it's youknow exception handling
improvement whatever it is andless of repetition number two is
upskill in weeks not yearsbite-sized job embedded
learnings micro credentials youknow augmented reality job aids
(30:18):
onboarding for all the newtechnologies peer coaching
measure skills adoption kind oflike you would measure OEE
overall equipment effectivenessmake sure that you're constantly
improving next is build careerlattices not ladders create
visible pathways from operatorto you know tech to analyst to
(30:43):
improvement lead and rewardproblem solving and cross
skilling and last I would say ismake change management a first
class citizen communicate thewhy I've already mentioned the
importance of this involve thefrontline champions and link
incentives to new behaviors notjust new outputs but in addition
(31:05):
to our workforce not beingready I honestly think our
leaders aren't ready eitherwe've poured billions into
technology but far less intopreparing our people you know
the workers are told ohartificial intelligence is going
to help you but then not showthem how their roles evolve
leaders talk about digital firststrategy but can't explain what
(31:27):
that means for decision makingor accountability or career
paths.
And that disconnect breeds fearon the floor and confusion in
the boardroom.
So the the risk isn't justleaving frontline workers behind
it's leaving managers andexecutives behind too.
Many still lead with playbooksfrom the last industrial era,
(31:48):
assuming efficiency alone isgoing to win and in a world of
artificial intelligence, in aworld of autonomy and and
human-machine collaboration,that mindset is already
outdated.
Amanda Cupido (31:59):
All right you put so much into that answer.
I hope people were taking notesum I got another one for you
which might have a meaty answeras well.
How do we measure the successof industry 4.0 and when should
we begin to bridge to the nextlevel of industrial innovation?
Jeff Winter (32:15):
Great question.
And there's no silver bulletfor this one.
So first up it depends on howyour company defines industry
4.0 and your role within it areyou trying to survive the
revolution are you trying tojust stay afloat until the next
one?
Or are you trying to lead?
Those are very differentambitions.
(32:37):
And I hear all the time but mycompany isn't even at industry
3.0 yet that's only true if youthink of industry 3.0 as the
epitome of automation anddigitalization.
But if you view these eras 1.0steam we'll say 2.0 electricity
(32:57):
3.0 automation you've alreadylived through them we're done
with industry 3.0 you've made ityour company might be thriving
now or struggling now but you'rehere you don't have to be the
perfect golden star of industry3.0 to start making advancements
(33:17):
in industry 4.0 you can stillhave paper processes you can
still run a lot of youroperations in Excel.
It doesn't disqualify you Idon't advise it but it doesn't
disqualify you.
The game isn't about it's aboutknowing what technologies to
apply where to apply them andwhen to apply them in order to
(33:38):
either survive or to thrive.
And you have to make thatchoice.
That's where the two views ofIndustry 4.0 matter if you treat
it as an era then success issimply engaging with the
technology of our time.
Pick your favorite technologyand just engaging with it so
that you're not left behind.
And if you treat it as adestination then success is
(34:01):
judged by how close you get tothat vision of fully connected
autonomous self-optimizingoperations for industry 4.0 or
the human-centered sustainableresilient approach of industry
5.0.
And there are many maturitymodels out there you can use to
evaluate your current capabilityor maturity against the art of
the possible the highest levelof achievement but no company is
(34:25):
there on any of these maturityscales and honestly I don't know
any company trying to get tothe highest level of achievement
it's all about the right levelachievement for your company at
the right time.
And either way grading successhas to go beyond tech adoption
for some it's cost savings,efficiency gains or uptime.
(34:45):
For others it's more ambitiousdata-driven decisions, new
business models, customerco-creation.
And in some cases success isalso about societal impact.
Are you empowering your people?
Are you advancingsustainability and are you
building resilience?
Amanda Cupido (35:02):
All right one last curveball question for you
before we let you go if youcould fast forward 10 years,
what decision are you makingtoday that you think you will
regret the most?
Jeff Winter (35:12):
I would have to say it's experimenting more.
I think of myself just ingeneral as an earlier early
adopter just like on atechnology you know adoption
curve I'm always someone thatkind of adopts new technologies
when they come out.
But the one thing I think Icould do better at is
experimenting with them, tryingto focus on looking for ways
(35:35):
that they can help me with mywork, my job, my career rather
than just going, this is awesomeand I'm going to use it because
I'm an early technology adopterthat's probably one that I
would say that I might look backon because the amount that
things are changing is happeningso fast that failure to react
quickly can be catastrophic at apersonal level or at a
(35:58):
corporate level.
Amanda Cupido (35:59):
Yeah, for sure.
Well Jeff we'll leave it there.
Thank you so much for joiningus and thank you for tuning in
to People Before Machinesconversations on the chaos of
factory automation powered byEclipse.
We're here to challenge thestatus quo in factory automation
because machines don't buildfactories, people do.
The technical producer for thispodcast is Ryan Dentinger.
(36:22):
I'm Amanda Capito if you gotsomething out of today's episode
we'd appreciate it if you shareit with a teammate, a plant
leader or anyone who's tired ofthe automation echo chamber.
Be sure to follow for realtalk, bold questions and sharp
insights and remember the futureisn't fully automated.
It's people powered talk to yousoon.
Outro (36:42):
Thanks for listening to People Before Machines
conversations on the chaos offactory automation from Monday
morning to the very near futurefor past podcast episodes search
people before machines onSpotify Apple Podcasts Amazon
Music YouTube orEclipseAutomation dot com
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.