Episode 3. The impact of a big data project on people, processes, and technology

Bridgestone wants to embed microchips in tires. Based on anonymized data collected from sensors, Bridgestone can measure consumption and track location. Such an ambitious data project has a huge impact on the business model, the organization, the people, and the technology. How do they handle this?

Ralph Steenmetz, CIO at Unilabs and former Big Data Program Lead at Bridgestone, answers these questions and more.

Alex: Good afternoon. Our final guest of the day is Ralph Steenmetz, CIO at Unilabs and former program leader at Bridgestone. With Ralph, we’re primarily going to discuss the big data project at Bridgestone. Ralph, the first question is quite simple: Can you briefly tell me about the project?

Ralph: Yes, in 2018, I received a call from Bridgestone. They had a project but didn’t know exactly how to approach it. They handed me a single sheet of paper outlining the idea and said, “We’re going to put chips in our tires.”

At that time, it mainly involved truck and bus tires because they had enough space for chips. They wanted to use chips to collect and distribute additional data, for example, for the sales department, the authorities, and stakeholders who needed or required it.

The problem, however, was that they didn’t fully understand the impact this would have on the rest of the organization, competitors, or government entities like the EU.

Eventually, I started the project. Within the first six months, I realized it wasn’t as straightforward as they initially thought—it turned out to be far from a small, simple project. It had a massive impact on the entire organization.

It affected everything, from logistics and warehousing to supply chains, sales, and marketing. We had to communicate to stakeholders that we’re now putting chips in our tires. This brought with it a host of organizational and strategic challenges.

Ralph: The major advantage for Bridgestone with this project was that they could collect much more information. However, the significant drawback was that if they were to implement a certain standard, that standard would also need to be adopted by other players in the market—such as Michelin, Continental, Goodyear, Pirelli, and others.

Ultimately, we established a consortium for this purpose. Together with the EU, we discussed how to ensure we wouldn’t violate competition laws or create a cartel.

Over time, the EU, different regulatory bodies, and competitors all concluded that it would be beneficial to collaborate on this. This meant the project would eventually grow into something much larger than just an internal initiative within Bridgestone.

Ralph: The major advantage for Bridgestone with this project was that they could collect much more information. However, the significant drawback was that if they were to implement a certain standard, that standard would also need to be adopted by other players in the market—such as Michelin, Continental, Goodyear, Pirelli, and others.

Ultimately, we established a consortium for this purpose. Together with the EU, we discussed how to ensure we wouldn’t violate competition laws or create a cartel.

Over time, the EU, different regulatory bodies, and competitors all concluded that it would be beneficial to collaborate on this. This meant the project would eventually grow into something much larger than just an internal initiative within Bridgestone.

Ralph: For Bridgestone, this project meant I was tasked with linking the production database and the sales database using unique codes printed on the tires.

With the appropriate scanner—which I’ll touch on shortly—you could extract a wealth of information, such as:

• Tire type: For example, a 365/16/75
• Tire age: The week and year it was manufactured
• Optimal placement: Whether the tire was best suited for a steering axle, trailer, lift axle, or drive axle

Additionally, we could provide other valuable information, including:

• The materials used (which is important for recyclers)
• The cost of the tire
• The weight of the tire (which is useful for transporters)
• Regulatory data (i.e., information for authorities in places like Dubai and Russia to better regulate tire imports)

In short, my role was to create a connection between the manufacturing, sales, and marketing databases. Some of this information was used internally at Bridgestone, while other information could be sold as an additional product. This gave rise to the concept of tire as a service.

For instance, customers could have their tires reprofiled (rethreaded)—which Bridgestone allowed twice—and ensure they got their exact tires back, not a replica. At the same time, Bridgestone collected valuable data on tire usage, such as:

• Which truck the tire was used on and in what kind of environment
• How the tire performed
• How the product could be improved

The problem, however, was that Bridgestone announced the project as if it were an Apple launch: “We’re putting a chip in our tire, and this will change everything.” While this was true, they hadn’t fully considered the ecosystem required to support it.

Questions like the following were insufficiently addressed:

• Are all scanners compatible?
• Is our warehousing and logistics system equipped for this?
• Do we need to adapt our processes?

As a result, the big data project expanded into a large-scale transformation initiative for the entire organization.

Ralph: Okay, truck and bus tires are not the biggest revenue generators for Bridgestone. Car tires, particularly those for passenger vehicles, make up a much larger portion of the revenue.

Since we were already implementing this project for truck and bus tires, there was growing interest in several countries to expand this technology to luxury vehicle tires. For example, chips were eventually added to S-class tires in Japan.

This big data initiative within Bridgestone eventually inspired competitors to start similar projects within their own organizations. This not only led to significant transformations within Bridgestone but also within other players in the industry.

Additionally, new opportunities emerged, and a central organization called GD was established, specifically focused on automotive components, to coordinate and support these developments.

Alex: And what exactly does GDSO stand for?

Ralph: GDSO stands for the Global Data Service Organization. It allows the data collected from tires using their unique codes to be shared.

For instance, if a tire is manufactured by Bridgestone, you can subscribe to Bridgestone’s data. This gives you access to more information than what’s visible on the tire itself, such as:

• The composition of the tire
• The maximum lifespan
• How many times the tire has been reprofiled (i.e., new tread patterns)
• The complete maintenance history of the tire

You can also integrate this data with your fleet management system. By entering the codes, you can track exactly what has happened to a specific tire—for example, whether it needs to be rotated from the inner side of the axle to the outer side. This gives you a full overview of the tire’s history and optimal usage.

Alex: So you essentially have a real-time overview of your fleet’s status. You can see exactly what actions are needed to optimally manage and maintain the tires.

Ralph: Correct. However, the challenge is that there are a lot of tires on a single truck. For example, you need to install the same type of tire on the same axle, ideally from the same manufacturer.

But it’s also possible to have Michelin tires on the front axle, Bridgestone on the middle axle, and Pirelli on the rear axle. That’s allowed.

The problem arises when you, the customer, need to contact each of these manufacturers individually to get information about the tires. Gathering all the required data becomes very difficult because you’re dealing with multiple manufacturers.

Alex: Yes, that’s true.

Ralph: That’s why GDSO was established. GDSO acts as a gateway for collecting information about tires from various manufacturers. Imagine you have a truck with Michelin, Pirelli, and Bridgestone tires.

With GDSO, you can drive your truck through a scanner that identifies all the tires. Then, GDSO queries each manufacturer for information. It connects to the public big database of the relevant manufacturer, such as Bridgestone, to obtain the necessary information. This can include standard data or subscription-based data.

GDSO is a not-for-profit organization sponsored by various industry stakeholders. For instance, if the system identifies a Bridgestone tire, GDSO connects to Bridgestone’s database and provides the required information.

If the data is subscription-based, you can specify how payments will be handled—either directly with Bridgestone or through the dealer, depending on the established agreements.

Alex: Okay, looking back at this big data project, what were the biggest frustrations you encountered? What problems did you face?

Ralph: I think the biggest challenge was that people underestimated the true scale of big data. At the start of the project, they believed everything would run smoothly within six months. In the end, I worked on it for 2.5 years, and even after that, it took months to change people’s mindsets.

On such a project, you realize that it’s not just about handling tons of data but also about doing a lot more with it. It’s not as simple as just adding a chip to a tire and assuming everything will work seamlessly. You also need to think about other things:

• What happens when tires are stacked and the chip can no longer be read?
• Can my scanner still read them?
• Are my logistics processes equipped to support this?

This meant we had to completely redesign processes, such as tire storage in racks. It was more than just a transition; I would call it a complete transformation.

We also had to deal with operational technology. Gates had to be built, and we brought in suppliers like Sions and Zebra to develop prototypes. For example, imagine a forklift driving through a gate while all the tires are scanned accurately. It took a long time to make this work.

In addition, there was extensive consultation with the EU. We had to convince them that our project was not a threat to the free market but rather a tool to strengthen it. These frustrations ultimately led to positive outcomes. The EU realized that if everyone had a big data database, other projects—such as labeling tires for the energy transition (ESG labels)—could be easily integrated.

We later applied this principle to other initiatives, such as sports projects in countries like the Russian Federation and Japan.

Alex: You’ve already mentioned the frustrations you experienced during this project. What advice do you have for other organizations embarking on similar projects to ensure things run smoothly and help them avoid the challenges you faced?

Ralph: I think it’s important to establish a few things at the start of such a project:

1. Clarity on timelines and expectations: As a client, you need to estimate as accurately as possible how long the project will take. This is particularly challenging with a completely new product, like this project, which was not only a big data initiative but also involved creating a new product. Combining these two factors makes it even more complex, so it’s crucial to set realistic expectations.
2. Ensure robust data management: When developing a big data product, you must ensure that the underlying databases feeding it are managed well. This means they need to have a consistent and reliable data management process. Without proper data management, you risk encountering significant problems during execution.

Ralph: Here’s an example: If I don’t assign a color to a tire because I know that standard tires are black, but a database includes a color table, I have to decide: Do I use that color information or not? If I use it, should I enrich the data in one database or leave it out of the other? You have to address these kinds of questions step by step.

The challenge is that when you begin, you often don’t have enough support from the top of the organization. There’s a lack of clear backing and willingness to accept that this project will impact every part of the company:

• Sales will be affected.
• Marketing will be affected.
• Logistics and supply chain management will be affected.
• Production will be affected.

In short, the entire organization must adapt. If you’re not ready for this transition, the project will be slow and problematic.

Alex: I actually discussed this in a previous conversation. Are you saying that all departments in the organization need to be involved? You need to bring them in because they know current processes and involve them in the changes that will occur?

Ralph: That’s correct. Initially, you need to involve all departments. But taking that extra step to engage senior management is just as important.

For example, if I approach a COO or CEO who says, “We want to do this project because our competitor is doing it,” I think that’s the wrong starting point. The objective should be: “We want to do this because it will help us improve and align our processes better with the transition.”

Competition might be one driver, but the primary goal should be ensuring the project has a positive impact on your organization and processes.

Alex: So, it’s more about understanding why we’re taking the first step. This often triggers a cultural shift within the organization.

Alex: Could you elaborate on how manufacturers can ensure a seamless transition between various IT and OT systems?

Ralph: In our case, collaboration with operational technology (OT) providers was essential. The scanners we used didn’t work well on truck tires because of the high iron content. They worked fine on regular car tires, but truck tires were a different story.

We decided to be vulnerable and admit, “We have this problem, and we don’t have all the solutions.” This openness allowed us to ask our OT providers for help. It led to a partnership rather than a traditional supplier–client relationship.

When you have a partner, you get much more traction when facing problems or working through a project where things still need to be figured out. A partner thinks with you and offers flexibility, unlike a supplier, who might stick strictly to their product and say, “This is what we have; take it or leave it.” That rigidity can make a project much more difficult.
I don’t necessarily believe in strictly following agile or waterfall methodologies. This approach, however, fosters openness to discussion and flexibility.

The key is that collaboration goes both ways. For instance, if an OT provider says something can only work through a specific protocol, you must be willing to adjust your protocols. It’s about mutual adaptation to arrive at a workable solution.

Alex: That’s great, especially as you mentioned protocols. Which standards and protocols do you think are critical for integrating IT with OT effectively?

Ralph: That’s a bit tricky because for the entire process—not just at Bridgestone but also for the GDSO project—we had to determine what the standard should be. In the end, we developed a new ISO standard.

This ISO standard was officially registered. It was based on a coding system where, for example, the first two letters indicate the manufacturer, the next two letters denote the specific factory, followed by additional details.

This collaboration was crucial. Without such a standard, consistent operation within OT would be impossible. For instance, in a barcode or other code, you must be able to interpret the first two letters consistently. For Bridgestone, those letters might mean “Bridgestone,” but if Michelin uses a different system, the same letters could represent a speed index.

To prevent this, we worked with the five largest tire manufacturers and other stakeholders to agree on a standard. This standard was then registered as an ISO standard and managed by GS1. This process ensured consistent integration and collaboration across both IT and OT systems.

Alex: Okay, we've been talking for a while now. I have a cup here with four interesting statements. I’d like to ask you to pick one randomly.

You can answer “yes” or “no,” but of course, I’d appreciate it if you could briefly explain your answer.

Ralph: No problem.

Alex: And afterward, I'll pick one too.

Ralph: Interoperability, or ensuring seamless integration between different IT and OT systems, is impossible without implementing uniform standards and protocols. As I mentioned earlier, this is exactly what the ISO standard is for.

If the industry doesn't know where it's headed, suppliers within the industry can't determine how to approach the implementation of uniform standards and protocols either. This became very clear during this project. I've often seen different clients approach things slightly differently. For example, the color red is interpreted just a bit differently at one organization compared to another.

Therefore, it’s essential to know what "red" means both within your organization and for your suppliers. You must ensure that the terminology and vocabulary are aligned. That’s why we decided to establish a fully documented ISO standard.

With the ISO standard, you get a unique code that allows you to make data more consistent and easier to interpret for both internal systems and external parties.

Alex: Okay, I see. Now, I’ll pick a statement to comment on. 

Statement: Data management is about manufacturing companies not being able to guarantee the consistency and accuracy of data when combining IT and OT systems without significant investments in data quality.

Hmm, this is a tough statement because it mentions “significant investments.” A major investment for one company might be insignificant for another.

However, I do believe this is something that must be carefully considered. Data—and especially high-quality data—might be one of a company’s most important assets. Without properly managing and organizing your data, it becomes difficult to keep your business running smoothly.

So, there will definitely need to be investment. Whether that investment is significant depends on the company's situation and perspective.

Ralph: Yes, I understand the use of the word "significant." However, I think it's not just about a financial investment but also a psychological one.

It’s not only about getting your databases in order and making sure everything is running smoothly. It’s also about everyone in the organization speaking the same language. If I’m talking to Henk, Harry, Herman, or Hanna about the color red, do they all see the same thing? It could be that Hendrik is colorblind and says it’s not red when it is.

We experienced this while working on the Bridgestone project. Within the sales organization, some people said, “This is my data, and I don’t want to share it.” But if you don’t open up that data, the rest of the organization can’t work with it. That means you have to let go of a certain mindset.

This change requires investment in people. You need to train them, guide them, and help them get used to a new way of working. It’s about creating a shared reality where everyone understands that a common database is not just theirs but belongs to the entire organization.

How large that investment is depends on what’s required:

• Is it about simple adjustments to tables or columns?
• Or is it a broader transformation where people need to learn how to collaborate with a single large database?

The crucial point is that if someone enters incorrect data, it affects the entire system. It requires collaboration and shared responsibility to keep data accurate and usable.

Alex: So, it’s more about the culture within a company and the vision of the employees within the organization. When it comes to data quality, changing the culture and mindset may be even more important than the financial investment.

Ralph: Absolutely, and it must come from both sides. It must come from the top: The CEO, COO, and other C-level leaders need to invest in and advocate for this. But change must also happen at the grassroots level, among the employees who work with the data.

Alex: If there’s no drive or understanding at the bottom that “we’re going to take this next step,” you can do whatever you want from the top, but it won’t work. For this to succeed, you need the support of everyone in the organization.

Alex: Ralph, I want to thank you very much for this brief but inspiring session. Thanks for your time!

Ralph: Absolutely.

Alex: As we just discussed with Ralph, it's very important to approach these types of projects with a partner rather than a supplier—a partner who thinks strategically with you and helps you look for the best solution.

If you'd like a partner to explore this with, I’d be happy to hear from you!