Man vs. machine? The ROI of robotics & the cultural shift needed to embrace robotics on the factory floor

I see robots as a partner in human evolution so that we as human beings we can focus our cognitive brain on things which are more value added.

People B4 Machines. Conversations on the chaos of factory automation from Monday morning to the very near future.

Welcome to People B4 Machines. Conversations on the chaos of factory automation from Monday morning to the very near future. I'm Amanda Cupido, a speaker, author, and entrepreneur with a passion for the intersection of technology and humanity. Today we're discussing the ROI of robotics and how to get teams to embrace robotics on the factory floor. And now we know that it's less about the technology itself and more about the people and processes around it, but we're gonna get into all of this with today's guest, Ujjwal Kumar. He is the former group president of Teradyne Robotics, which is an advanced robotics platform that includes universal robots and mobile industrial robots, or MIR for short. They are recognized for being the pioneers and global market leaders of human-scale collaborative and autonomous mobile robots. Ujwell has a 25-year career spanning multiple industries and major multinational corporations, including General Motors, General Electric, and most recently Honeywell, where he was the president and CEO of the Process Solutions business. Some of his specialties include mergers and acquisitions, global expansion, automation, and software and services solutions. Thanks for joining me today.

Thank you, Amanda, for having me here.

All right, so right at the top of your LinkedIn page, you introduce yourself by saying you believe the future of manufacturing lies in human-machine synergy. So I think it's appropriate to start off with asking you how do you see robotics augmenting the human workforce?

We as a human race, we have been doing work which we didn't have machines for. And slowly we got uh newer technologies to help us. And we brought in newer and newer, I won't call it robots, but some automation or robotic solution to make us more productive and take any of those dirty, dangerous, and repetitive work moved over to machines so that we as human beings can focus our cognitive brain on things which are more value-added. So I see robots as a partner in human evolution.

Yeah, and I feel like this is the sunshine and roses approach to uh looking at how we work collaboratively. But I do think that there are some misconceptions and myths around all of this. What are some of the biggest ones you've seen when people are talking about that relationship?

I would say this narrative that robots replace humans is outdated and inaccurate. What we have clearly seen from my work with customers over the past 20 years is that it is not a zero-sum game. Robots like collaborative robots, the cobots, or the AMRs, and now increasingly humanoids are designed to augment human capabilities, not replace them. This idea of robots taking jobs, that's a major misconception. We need to put this question in context. Labor shortages are real. Some project that 1.9 million manufacturing jobs may go unfilled in the US by 2033. Robotics is a bridge to close that gap. As well as helping to offset labor shortages, technologies like these take on the most repetitive and dangerous tasks, which I was talking about earlier, making manufacturing jobs more appealing to the next generation and helping to retain workers towards the end of their careers. So, in my view, the reality is that advanced robotics creates new categories of work and upskill existing roles. Robots will increase productivity. I saw this clearly for myself in one large European factory where they told me that workers initially feared cobots. Months later, they were running more lines, producing more, and working in safer, more engaging roles. So robots can also lead to job creation. So the future of manufacturing is human-machine synergy, not humans versus machines.

You're already alluding to some success stories you've seen and heard. Maybe you could give some more examples specifically in the category of like safety. Um, I think that's one that doesn't get talked about enough. So, what success stories have you seen in that regard?

I'm glad you asked that. I have seen robots transforming safety, productivity, and morale of our employees in the manufacturing floor. Cobots take on hazardous, repetitive, and physically demanding tasks, allowing humans to focus on management and decision-making work. Let's look at some real-life examples. With one of the cobalt examples, where our integrator had worked with this company in India on automating end-of-line operations. After conducting an internal ergonomic risk analysis, the team discovered a major issue in their end-of-line operations. Workers were manually placing boxes on pallets, lifting 8,500 kgs of product per eight-hour shift. This was classified as a level 4 ergonomic risk, one of the highest levels of danger to human posture and masculoskeletal health, level 5 being the severest. The cobots were deployed to automate this task, dramatically reducing physical strain and injury risk. This kind of approach leads to higher employee satisfaction and safer environments. I would also add that flexible automation enabled by robotics enables a faster response to disruptions and shifts in demand that can make workplaces less stressful. All of us would love that, and more predictable for workers. I'll give another concrete example on that. A logistics company here in the US struggling to manage the ever-growing e-commerce demand. Here, automation as part of a 24-7 operation proved invaluable for handling peak seasons like Black Friday, and it removed employees from ergonomically dangerous work. The company realized a three-month return on investment. Three month. And they were able to reduce prices for customers. These technologies, the three-month is a bit uh on the uh optimistic side. Like typically I have seen around less than 12 months. But people are using these, it is becoming a win-win for the workers as well as the manufacturers. And on top of that, these technologies help us attract these Gen Z talent and extend the careers of experienced employees. We saw interest in manufacturing careers drop off in the last couple of decades. Creating more high technology jobs adds a different dimension to manufacturing careers.

Wow, these are some great examples. There's so much to unpack there. I think one area I want to drill down more though on is the workforce morale piece of it all. Because I think, and we'll get into the ROI and more about the numbers, because I know that that's of interest too. But that morale piece, I think it's important to speak to you because we see that there's also a lot of employees that sometimes reject this notion to start bringing in automation. They themselves are scared. So, what tips do you have for leaders who are trying to truly embrace robotics and not just check a box saying, yep, we did it? How do you get the team on board?

I'll I'll first focus on the employee moralities, uh, on the team. Bringing team on board, you have to bring the workers on board as well as the manufacturers or investors, their investors on board. I can touch on both of them. For the workers, it's um right now they like I'm I'm looking at some of the factories uh we are trying to revive in our own rust belt here in US. The way manufacturing jobs had left US in my General Motors days when I worked in Michigan, I will not be able to attract the workers of this generation to come back to those same kind of, let's say, more like those kind of working conditions. Like the factories uh used to be pretty uh noisy, even smelly. You need a very different kind of workplace to attract this new generation of workers. And they need to be trained differently than how they were trained for the previous generation of manufacturing work. So to me, you want to attract workers, you need to reinvent your factory floor. Now, coming to how do we excite the manufacturers, I would say robotics is no longer just about cost savings. It's about resilience, flexibility, and strategic advantage. Automation is essential for competitive businesses, and the technology is developing at a breakneck neck speed, like all of us hear that in the news all the time. I have been asked before what manufacturers should prioritize over the coming years. My advice, like I have three advice. Number one, define the problem. The most successful automation strategies are built around tasks and environments and not around the robot for sure. Number two is look for standard solutions. Use tried and trusted approaches to common applications. Number three is prioritize platforms that scale. Don't go with one-off bespoke solution, which you will create deployment issues and most importantly, redeployment issues as you maximize value from your investment. So I think the ROI should be measured in terms of uptime and output quality, workforce engagement and retention, as well as supply chain resilience and sustainability. And these three together is the biggest promise of robotics for the employees, manufacturers, and their investors.

All right. And then the I I will I'll go back to this is great. And I know we're jumping between this, like the ROI piece and how are we getting people on board? And of course, once people start to see those results, I think that excites everyone, and that can also help with getting people on board. So it is quite cyclical in that way. Um, how do you feel about people who are really caught up in some of the hypotheticals? You know, sometimes we're hearing people speak about AI like it's some sci-fi film. Um, are people really focusing on capabilities that are not realistic? What do you sense in that area?

So I would say there is some hype, uh, especially around this whole humanoid development, where now we see these machines looking like us, talking like the us on the factory floor. It is surely in intriguing. So I I would take some of that uh hype out and focus on what we as uh the industrial uh players we want to focus on.

Yeah.

Intelligent robots, like uh Amanda, I would say the intelligent robots are already delivering value on the factory floor today and in our warehouses, like in things like material handling, assembly and inspection via cobots, autonomous transportation in warehouses. You have uh smart infrastructure for predictive maintenance and energy optimization. Now you said science fiction. What I think what is still science fiction is that humanoid robots in industrial settings. I feel they are impressive, but right now, at the current technology, it's just impractical. You are looking at shorter battery life, low payload, stability issues. And even when these problems are solved, they'll rarely be the right choice for most of the industrial environment. Uh the I I'm super excited about the investment coming in the humanoid space. That will surely solve some of the problems which we will never be able to get to, where say, taking care of our elders, and I would like an assistant at home. Those kind of settings, a humanoid will be a great fit. But for most of the industrial environment, I feel that function must come before form. So a wheel would beat legs in factories. Though there is a lot of public interest in humanoids, I would think these cobots or AMRs and mobile cobots, they will be solving the real problems of today. That's my all right.

So interesting. Are there certain areas within the manufacturing industry that you see a robot being really beneficial, like food processing and packaging, or consumer goods manufacturing, or like are there some specific subsets that you think in particular are especially um suited to have robots on the factory floor?

So I uh see uh robots have been on the factory floor for low more than five decades.

Right.

All the robots which we had in the past, they were all on high volume, low-mex applications. And most of the time you would see them behind a cage. The advanced robotics which we are talking about today, whether it is cobots or AMRs or humanoids, they have the next level of cognitive ability, even sense of touch, smart mobility from point A to point B. So the kind of applications where you can use robots today versus what was possible, say, even five years back, is very different. Now, which ones would I say we should move to a robot? I would say things which are very repetitive, where we are not really using the flexibility and cognitive abilities of our human brain well. Those are the ones where we interestingly also have the highest attrition rate. You look for welders anywhere in the US, it is very difficult to get welders. You look for people to do loading, unloading from truck. You won't find too many people interested in doing those kind of jobs. So I would say the in this labor-constrained environment, the market is already signaling us where you have the highest labor shortages. Because those are the kind of jobs which human beings don't like doing just because now we have a choice. There are enough jobs out there where we can train ourselves and go do that and leave any of these not so exciting, dirty, any potentially dangerous or ergonomically not great, those kind of jobs. Uh, you have AI-based uh robotic solutions to help us there. Right.

Okay, so we've talked a lot about the positive side. We do have to talk about the risks that come with having autonomous or semi-autonomous robots. So, what are some of those risks and do you think we're prepared for them?

Absolutely. I I would say the robot industry overall puts safety at the heart of everything they do. They conform to internationally recognized safety standards. Most of the cobots in the market, for example, are equipped with collaborative capable safety functions. That means subject to risk assessment that can work safely alongside human beings. In practice, that means they are certified ENISO 138.49.1 or ENISO 102.18.1 by TOV. We see that everybody is providing transparency through fully documenting safety functions. For collaborative robots, typically have several advanced configurable safety functions, including configurable stopping time and stopping distance, joint position limits, force limiting, and other features. Often in factories, operational risks from technology stem from poor integration and outdated systems, not from the technology itself. That has been my experience. So the key is responsible deployment, build around tasks, environments, and the people who will be interacting with that robot. And we must continue to ensure as an industry that the safety of humans takes priority over our desire for novelty and experimentation. In the case of humanoids, regulation is still getting matured. Work has started on this now, but it is going to take some time for since now humanoids are still inherently unstable. Now, you're asking about safety, but I also get these questions on ethics, of uh ethical concerns are going to really come to the fore in coming years as robots start leaving industrial environments to become a larger part of our lives. This is not a space that are any of the robotic companies they worry about right now. Like they, I'm not an ethics expert, but there are obvious serious ethical questions in the way we design, say, humanoids to interact with humans in the future. And those are some of the things which we are, as an industry, we are focused on along with safety.

Right. So, how do you manage this? Even when you talk about regulation, are we experimenting before the regulation? Do we wait for that regulation to catch up? Sometimes that takes a long time. How do you balance all of that?

So in our labs, we absolutely experiment beyond what the regulation says because we do want to see what is the potential of these technologies. But I don't think any of the major players in the market would ever bring in a product which does not comply with the regulations. We will test it, experiment it enough such that in the production environment things are stable, safe, and interacting in ethically with the human beings around.

But what if the regulation just doesn't exist?

So um I'm personally it is, it is tough. Um I am personally engaged with several of those uh discussions uh with the industry group like uh A3 to help our lawmakers think through the uh regulatory environment which we need for both continued innovation as well as uh integration of these robots in our factories and warehouses.

That's amazing. You're defining it as we go, um, which is so important. And what are some of those conversations like when you're sitting down around the table and helping to advise? Um, is has there been any surprises that have come up, or are there certain stances you're taking specifically in those rooms?

I I would say rebuilding uh manufacturing is now uh a big focus in almost every part of the world. And we see this uh in Europe, in uh in now in the US, in uh China, in India, in every part of the world. Uh the lawmakers seem to be keen on bringing in the right technology in our factories and warehouses to keep their economies running in this labor shortage situation, which is going to get worse. We have an aging population in all major economies of the world. And uh we need to figure out how will we keep our standard of living and economies uh thriving in this new demographic uh reality.

And so do you have any tips? Speaking now of the global market, do you have any tips for how North America can stay competitive?

In North America, I would say we are in the top five global markets for industrial robot installation, but it's still not enough. We lag behind several Asian and European countries on robot density in manufacturing and warehouses. I would say more in manufacturing than in warehouses. You see, Korea, Singapore, China, Germany, add Japan to that, all have higher robot density than the US. Of course, some companies are very highly automated, but in the US, just um 20% of mid-sized US factories have uh robots. And this is a similar issue also in uh in Canada and uh Mexico, which used to be the labor-rich part of North America, even in Mexico, we have historic low unemployment now. So the issue isn't, I would say, technology. It's like on the robot itself, the issue is more of its adoption. The companies are trying to solve today's problems with yesterday's tools. Some of those I have sold in my life in the last uh two decades. In my view, automation is key to reshoring, securing supply chains, and overcoming labor shortages. To stay competitive in North America, we must ensure that we are using the most up-to-date technologies and operating with an industry 5.0 mindset. Number two, invest in adaptive, intelligent robotics. And then we need to scale our training and education programs. The way we used to train our workers before is no more relevant. So in North America, the manufacturing renaissance is within reach, but it requires deliberate investment in people, technology, and partnerships. And my engagement with the industry groups and the lawmakers is primarily to help drive that point. Okay.

Thank you. There's just so much information. And um I think you've given all of our listeners a lot to think about, but um, before I let you go, I would like to give you a little curveball question here.

Okay.

And it's more of a dreamy question. Okay, so if you could design a robot to solve one problem humanity hasn't cracked yet, what would it be?

I see these landfills filling our cares, uh, living space on our earth everywhere. And when you travel around the globe, you will see landfills growing faster than where we as human beings we live. I think robotics really has a way to help us sift through that garbage. Like uh as uh human beings, we need to first of all reduce. But on the reduced part, that is a problem which robots probably won't be able to help with. But once you have produced something, how do we recycle a lot more? And I feel that uh robotics has a role to play in fixing our expanding landfill problem.

Yes, I agree. And there's we're yes, we can reduce, but there's also so much of a problem that we already have behind us. So how do we backtrack? And I would love to see a world where we could get robotics helping to solve that issue. Well, thank you, Ujjwal. I mean, we've been talking about workflows and integrating humans and machines. And I just wanted to admit before we sign off that we're doing it for this very podcast. We used an AI agent to help come up with some of the questions that I was asking you. But of course, I was also putting my own spin on it and asking you things based on what you were saying. So here we are, walking the walk. Thank you so much for being a part of it.

Thank you, Amanda. It was great talking to you.

And thank you all for tuning in to People B4 Machines, Conversations on the Chaos of Factory Automation powered by Eclipse. We're here to challenge the status quo in factory automation because machines don't build factories. People do. The technical producer for today's podcast is Ryan Dentinger. I'm Amanda Cupido. If you got something out of today's episode, do us a favor, share it with a teammate, a plant leader, or anyone who's tired of the automation echo chamber. Be sure to follow on your favorite podcast player for real talk, bold questions, and sharp insights. And remember, the future isn't fully automated, it's people powered. See you next time.

Thanks for listening to People B4 Machines. Conversations on the chaos of factory automation from Monday morning to the very near future.