Odd problems are found in prototype testing. Example: While developing that big electric drilling machine, our LA plant did a beautiful job of packaging the product to make service access simple . . . except that they never stood it up on end - the way it would hang in the customer's derrick. Most of our engineers and line workers had never visited a drilling operation, so consequently one or two of the large access panels hinged in the wrong direction, making service really difficult because they pivoted UP instead of down. One of the first changes we made on the first "production" model was to hinge those heavy steel panels at the bottom so that they could be opened easily, swung down and then used as work platforms while the machine was hanging 40' in the air. It seems like a small oversight, but inverting those doors made maintenance of the first production units (Ser.# 8-10) much easier.
But that's not unusual. We get used to looking at something in a certain context and become blind to obvious errors. I worked on the development of many products and one of my tasks was to get to know the drilling and maintenance crews (since I was NOT an engineer I could ask stupid questions without jeopardizing my professional credentials) and ask three questions: 1. What do you like?, 2. What do you NOT like?, and What would you change if you could? Answers were sometimes rather foolish, considering the intended mission of the product, but by and large they pointed up problem areas, addressed practical concerns, and in many cases provided an insight to rather simple solutions. I'd come back from a rig call on a new product that might last two days to a week with pictures, video, and a yellow legal tablet or two covered with pencil notes from drillers, roughnecks, even rig electricians and mechanics I'd interviewed over coffee down on the mess deck. In time, even the most brilliant engineers had to recognize the value of this user information. We had a saying, "the product is only going to be as successful as the customer is willing to LET it be". When you make those customers a part of your team, you take advantage of their enthusiasm and address their inputs. If they feel they are being heard and respected, they will make both the product and the company successful. My hat's off to these guys from the North Slope to Abu Dhabi who made their living with those machines and
really made the products perform. They may not have had a long string of letters after their names, but they were as much a part of the products' final form as any of us.
The first Elios will likely go through this same revision process once it is released in limited distribution. Running changes will probably be minor, but if they address real-world issues they will make the vehicle a far better product than the engineering and assembly technicians ever would have believed. Not
every suggestion is a good one, but somewhere within a user's analysis often a clear bit of wisdom will show itself. It's up to the engineering and manufacturing leadership to review and interpret this constructive criticism and use it to their advantage.