Start with the problem
The Five Problems.
Five display problems put production programs at risk. Each one below: what it is, what creates it, and how Keith Mitnik's Why Change? framework answers it.
Problem 1 of 5
Obsolescence
Your display is going end-of-life. Your product isn't.
Learn about obsolescence: causes, engineering checks and next steps ›What creates it
- Single-sourced glass with no second source qualified
- No lifecycle clause in the supply agreement
- The display was never reviewed after the product launched
- Driver IC or polarizer upstream went end-of-life first
What the framework recommends
- 1
Confirm the real requirement: form, fit and function of the current part, not just its part number
- 2
Cross Match a 100% drop-in replacement before considering any redesign
- 3
Prove it in your application with first-article testing
- 4
Put a lifecycle plan in writing so the next end-of-life is a schedule, not a surprise
Problem 2 of 5
Delivery
Late glass stops a line faster than anything else on the BOM.
Learn about delivery: causes, engineering checks and next steps ›What creates it
- Offshore-only production with no domestic buffer stock
- Forecasts sent once a year and never updated
- No escalation path when a shipment slips
- One freight route and one customs broker
What the framework recommends
- 1
Quantify what a line-down day actually costs your program
- 2
Share a rolling forecast so builds are sized to real demand
- 3
Move to scheduled releases with domestic buffer stock
- 4
Name one accountable contact who owns every order end to end
Problem 3 of 5
Quality
Process, not people. We don't believe in operator error.
Learn about quality: causes, engineering checks and next steps ›What creates it
- Incoming inspection that samples instead of tests
- No documented process controls at the supplier
- Bond, gasket and enclosure materials never tested together
- Failures blamed on handling instead of root-caused
What the framework recommends
- 1
Root-cause the failure in your application before accepting any corrective action
- 2
Test the display with your real bond, gasket and enclosure materials together
- 3
Require documented process controls, not sampling plans
- 4
Change the process that allowed the failure — never blame the operator
Problem 4 of 5
Performance
Sunlight, temperature, viewing angle: specified, then proven.
Learn about performance: causes, engineering checks and next steps ›What creates it
- A catalog part chosen on paper specs, not application testing
- Sunlight, temperature and viewing angle never specified together
- Touch never tuned for gloves, water or the actual cover glass
- Optical requirements decided after the enclosure was tooled
What the framework recommends
- 1
Specify sunlight, temperature and viewing angle together, as your users actually see them
- 2
Reject paper specs: test the candidate display in the finished product
- 3
Tune touch for your real cover glass, gloves and water exposure
- 4
Decide optical requirements before the enclosure is tooled
Problem 5 of 5
Cost
System-level cost, not unit price. And the last reason to change.
Learn about cost: causes, engineering checks and next steps ›What creates it
- Over-specified brightness, size or resolution nobody uses
- Unit price negotiated while rework and delays go uncounted
- Extra bezels, boards and cables a custom module could absorb
- Annual price increases accepted without a spec review
What the framework recommends
- 1
Count total cost — inspection, rework, delays and field failures — not unit price
- 2
Right-size the spec to how the display is really used
- 3
Treat cost as the last reason to change suppliers, never the first
- 4
Review the spec before accepting any annual price increase
Learn how Phoenix keeps the whole program in view.
Explore the thinking behind the engineering, or tell us where your display program needs help.