PREDIX SCHEDULER
Predix Scheduler leverages GE's Predix platform to deliver a powerful, customizable product that can be used with a number of back-end services and workflows. This results in schedules optimized by a set of user-configured parameters and objectives that enable Scheduler users to save time, explore different scheduler possibilities, and ultimately feel confident that the jobs will be done.
The backbone of the product is an innovative auto-scheduler feature developed by our team of engineers and data scientists. This enables the product to make highly accurate and educated schedules based on large amounts of data and complex algorithms. The product is currently in use by Pitney Bowes and Lixil.
Currently undergoing GE's patent and innovation review process
This product is poised as GE's next offering as part of the Asset Performance Management suite of products available for both internal and external GE Digital software clients
Team design effort with Visual Designer Masaki Akiyama
Note / Due to the confidential nature of work at GE, this page provides a high level overview only. For a more detailed convesation about my work please get in contact with me
OVERVIEW
The Emerging Verticals team is new group at GE software focused on helping meet Jeff Immelt's goal of being a $15 billion software company by 2020. We work with clients external to GE that have business goals and challenges that align with our core focus on the Industrial Internet. The idea is that by expanding our network to include businesses outside of GE we can grow our data, knowledge, and expertise to create a more well-rounded suite of products to be used both by GE's businesses and other external companies as part of Asset Performance Management.
With the scheduler tool we had two such clients - Pitney Bowes and Lixil - with seemingly very different scheduling use-cases. From July 2015 - February 2016 I led the UX engagement through this rocky new territory.
I led customer engagement workshops, client relations and design reviews. I was the UX lead working with Masaki Akiyama as visual design support while I led the UX and IxD - creating prototypes, wireframes, and final deliverables while interfacing with data scientists and engineers in an agile development environment. We delivered both instances of the generic scheduler tool to Pitney Bowes and Lixil in February.
PROJECT CHALLENGES
1.
Product owners struggle to see the problem as 'generic'
If we make two separate applications for Lixil and Pitney Bowes then we do not have a re-usable product.
As that was the original desired direction, I took it upon myself to convince the team that it was possible with extensive UX Architecture work.
2.
Pitney Bowes scheduler needs to fit an existing suite
As part of the Clarity Suite, the new scheduler application needed to fit the product line. The other products were designed by another designer with the old GE Design System.
3.
Lixil stakeholders and end users are located in Japan
Time zone and language differences made this one hard to navigate. Everything was done at odd hours and through a translator - not to mention the design had to reflect Japanese preferences and style. Luckily we had Mas - a seasoned designer with fluency and experience in Japan.
Current Scheduling Focus:
By thinking about Lixil's (Supply Chain), PB's (Material Processing) and GE's APM (M&D) workflows, and the data that go with them, as simply two different resolutions of the same essential process -
I was able to build the case that a generic product was possible.
With the support of key engineering colleagues we designed the framework that would make it possible.
Generic Schedule Process:
Primary Schedulers in each Focus Area:
1.
2.
3.
Other Scheduler Users:
THE PROBLEMS WITH SCHEDULING
1.
Overly Mental Process
Too much information is stored in our scheduler’s heads.
This means assignments often happen with only a subset of the potentially available information.
2.
Excessive Guesswork
Guesses fill in the gaps once the knowledge runs out for any given schedule.
3.
Complex Parameter Matching
Even when all information is readily available our schedulers have a hard time optimizing for all parameters that contribute to meeting a scheduling objective.
4.
Changing Information
New information is constantly coming in. This makes optimization a real problem.
UX GOALS
Quick
The tool itself needs to shorten the time it takes to do scheduling. That means both the UI and the algorithm need to be streamlined and optimized to return usable results as quickly as possible
Correct
The tool needs to make the correct assignments that match up to what the scheduler themselves might choose based on all available information
Trusted
The tool needs to provide adequate information in order to build trust with the scheduler in the resulting schedule
How we meet our UX Goals:
Scheduler Ecosystem:
UI Overview:
High and Detail Level Schedule Views:
Client-Site Admin Screen Patterns:
WHAT PITNEY BOWES THINKS
The primary screen for Pitney Bowes scheduler is the high level scheduler view that enables the scheduler to see an overview of their entire operations.
The detail view enables the scheduler user to make updates to the individual jobs. This changes how they appear on the high level schedule view (previous image) for scheduling.
Branded for Lixil, as opposed to PB, Lixil's main scheduler focus is primarily on the detail job view. This difference is because of how the automatic scheduler engine is configured for each company and where in the workflow the scheduler user comes in.
You'll see similarities in both layout and content between the Lixil and Pitney Bowes Job Focus screens. The metadata is different, but the purpose and overall functionality remain intact as two expressions of a single generic product.