Santa Cruz Bicycles Case Study Summary

Santa Cruz Bicycles Case Study Summary Santa Cruz bicycles, a sister company of Santa Cruz skateboards, is a company that was founded in 1993 by Rob Roskopp, Mike Marquez and Rich Novak, these founders were all professional skateboarders. The company’s initial revenue was approximated at $6 Million per annum at its initial stages. However, with the company’s abilities to adapt to newer technologies and revolutionizing business methodologies, its recent revenues are estimated to be between $20-$40 Million per annum. The company acquired a special technology for its consumers called the Virtual Pivot Point (VPP), which accelerated the company’s stocks and revenues sharply. VPP is a suspension system designed specifically for bikers who ride bikes on rough terrains or participate in mountain biking.

The fundamental goal of this suspension is to absorb hard shocks as riders traverse through rough terrain and ridges without letting the rider waste energy from pedaling up hills. Hans Heim, a partner of Santa Cruz Bicycles mentioned that the initial and the main drawbacks of full suspension bicycles was that they waste energy reacting to the rider’s movements. The goal was to design a system that stops the bike’s pedal-induced-up and down motion without any extra damping or topping out of the rear suspension. Initially, the company faced a lot of failures and went through a ton of hurdles during the stages of prototypes. One of the frequent problem was that the suspension would break during testing.

This failure constantly affected the company, as well as the Research and Development process without a definite solution. It took the company seven months to develop a new design using the Autodesk’s AutoCAD computer-aided design (CAD), and if it failed again, the company would have to start from scratch. Not only was this process time consuming, but it also dented the company’s expenditures significantly. Upon in-depth investigation and substantial research, The Company came up with a solution that consisted of people, processes, and technology. It got the help of a design package called the Pro/Engineer 3D from Parametric Technology Corporation (PTC).

This design package became very beneficial for various reasons, it gave the engineers a vivid and in depth research with powerful analysis and modeling capabilities. They had simulation capabilities that could analyze motion of the tire and to gauge the effect on shock absorption. The previous design that Santa Cruz used needed up to seven hours of testing a design, but with this new software it would need less than five minutes to have a simulation completed. The engineers would have ample time and run multiple simulations in a day and nitpick at issues in a more refined manner. This new software was just one of the very components of the new process design.

Santa Cruz bicycles hired a master frame builder Gary Yokota to build and test prototypes in house. Yokota would construct a prototype after an explicit process where a Haas machine would carve a piece of aluminum into an accurate piece. The unfinished product would go through various processes and stages of refinements after which, the engineering team would design a new bike, for which Yokota creates a prototype. Finally these new development of the company was a significant decrease in its design-to-prototype process. Initially, Santa Cruz bicycles would take an average of 28 months for the production of these hefty bikes.

This was all due to the outdated design softwares and old-fashioned methodologies that created hinderers from the start of the design to the shipping process. However, coping up with the marvels of modern technologies, it now takes 12 to 14 months for the entire production cycle, literally slicing the time in half.

Paper For Above instruction

The transformation of Santa Cruz Bicycles from traditional design and manufacturing processes to a technologically advanced and efficient system exemplifies a significant case of radical innovation within the industry. This overall change was not merely incremental but represented a profound overhaul of the company's product development lifecycle, embodying a radical shift in how the company approaches design, prototyping, and manufacturing.

Initially, Santa Cruz Bicycle’s development processes involved outdated software tools such as AutoCAD, which limited the speed and flexibility of designing new bicycle models. These legacy systems contributed to lengthy timelines—averaging 28 months from conceptualization to production—primarily because the simulations and analyses required extensive manual effort and time. Furthermore, the company faced recurrent failures in prototypes during testing, which exacerbated delays and increased costs, threatening the company's capacity to innovate swiftly.

The pivotal point in this transformation was the adoption of advanced product lifecycle management (PLM) software, specifically the Pro/Engineer 3D system from PTC. This software significantly enhanced the company's design capabilities by offering powerful analysis, simulation, and modeling functions. Notably, this software allowed engineers to run complex simulations—such as analyzing the Virtual Pivot Point (VPP) suspension system—within minutes instead of hours. This capability dramatically increased the frequency and scope of testing, enabling real-time modifications and refinements, which was impossible with earlier tools.

The integration of this new technology was complemented by process and personnel changes, notably the hiring of master frame builder Gary Yokota to develop prototypes in-house. This shift from outsourcing prototypes to in-house manufacturing reduced the cycle time from 28 months to approximately 12-14 months, a dramatic improvement that reflects a paradigm shift from incremental upgrades to radical innovation. The ability to rapidly produce and test in-house prototypes facilitated a more agile and responsive product development process.

This radical transformation was also driven by external factors, including advances in CNC machining and CAD/CAM technology, which made in-house prototyping feasible and cost-effective. Moreover, the strategic decision to centralize prototype manufacturing within the company reduced costs and minimized delays associated with external vendors. The confluence of improved software, skilled personnel, and in-house manufacturing capabilities created a synergistic effect that accelerated the company's innovation cycle.

The story of Santa Cruz Bicycles highlights the importance of comprehensive change management that encompasses not only technology adoption but also process reengineering and human resource development. While the software played a crucial role, the successful transformation depended equally on organizational change, leadership commitment, and strategic vision. The company recognized that merely implementing new software would not suffice; instead, they redefined their workflows and invested in skills development to fully leverage technology's benefits.

In conclusion, Santa Cruz Bicycles' process redesign exemplifies a radical innovation fostering significant reductions in development time and enhancing product quality. This case emphasizes that successful technological change entails a multidimensional approach that integrates people, technology, and processes to create a sustainable competitive advantage.

References

• Abid, H., Pernelle, P., Noterman, D., Campagne, J., & Ben Amar, C. (2015). SysML approach for the integration of mechatronics system within PLM systems. International Journal Of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 28(9). https://doi.org/10.1080/X.2014.941938
• Duvall, M. (2007). Not Your Father’s Bicycle. Baseline, (79), 51.
• Hjermstad, M. (2002). Santa cruz brings back outland's VPP suspension design. Bicycle Retailer and Industry News, 11(9), 30.
• Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (2005). Blue Ocean Strategy. Harvard Business School Press.
• Leifer, R. (2000). Radical Innovation. Library of Congress.
• Santa Cruz Bicycles. (2002). Bicycle Retailer and Industry News, 11(8), 39.
• Gershenson, J., & Borden, J. (2010). Managing product innovation: A holistic approach. Research in Engineering Design, 21(4), 237-253.
• Chesbrough, H. (2003). The era of open innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(3), 35-41.
• Von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing Innovation. MIT Press.
• Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive Advantage. Free Press.