Introduction
Because the ROCC model changes how information flows and how teams interact, Infineon’s approach focused on capability-building—not only technical (hard) skills, but also soft skills such as communication, conflict management, and decision-making in critical situations. The intervention was structured as experiential learning within the Bridges 5.0 project, and it emphasized involving employees early in the design phase to better align outcomes with end-user needs and to smooth acceptance of the new set-up.
How the Teaching Factory worked at Infineon (step-by-step)
1
Brainstorming to define the right use case
The intervention began with a focused brainstorming exercise to identify and agree on the most relevant use case. This first step ensured that the workshops addressed a real operational need—something the participants recognized from daily work—and that learning activities would stay anchored to practical, high-impact situations rather than abstract training content.
2
Make performance visible—understand KPIs, impacts, and information sources
The second step focused on building a shared, detailed understanding of internal KPIs and the cause-and-effect chains behind them, including the systems landscape. This step brought a new level of visibility and transparency to participants regarding their tasks in the event of a tool downtime: which KPIs are affected, how they are affected, and which surrounding data points and process dependencies must be considered. Just as importantly, the group clarified where this information can be found and how it is currently accessed, then mapped the operational reality of “who does what, in which state, using which materials”—whether software tools, paper-based handovers, or informal communication channels.
3
Identify inefficiency and redesign for better decisions
With KPI logic and process realities made explicit, the third step asked a deliberately critical set of questions: Where is effort “worthless”? Where do teams lose time—or lose information—during coordination and escalation? What could be a better solution? This analysis made improvement opportunities transparent, particularly around (1) data aggregation and interpretation and (2) communication patterns and recurring inefficient steps. A key benefit was self-learning: participants recognized which parts of their own daily routines were not efficient and why. The tangible output was a clear catalogue of requirements describing what should be improved to enable faster, fact-based, and less frictional decision-making.
Learning design: why experiential formats mattered
Outcomes: what changed after the intervention





