Concurrent Engineering http://cer.sagepub.com
Computer Support for Systematic Design Applied in a Cross-functional Commercial Concept Development Project Lars Almefelt, Krister Sutinen and Johan Malmqvist Concurrent Engineering 2003; 11; 107 DOI: 10.1177/1063293X03035425 The online version of this article can be found at: http://cer.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/11/2/107
Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for Concurrent Engineering can be found at: Email Alerts: http://cer.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://cer.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Downloaded from http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
CONCURRENT ENGINEERING: Research and Applications Computer Support for Systematic Design Applied in a Cross-functional Commercial Concept Development Project Lars Almefelt,1,2,* Krister Sutinen2 and Johan Malmqvist2 1
2
Volvo Car Corporation, Interior Development Department 93201 PV4B, SE-405 31 Go¨teborg, Sweden Product and Production Development, Chalmers University of Technology, SE-412 96 Go¨teborg, Sweden
Abstract: In this paper, an empirical study aiming at exploring the practical applicability of a computer support for systematic design methodology is presented. During a six-month project, a cross-functional product development team in the automotive industry was studied using an action-based research approach. The team applied a systematic design methodology and used a computer tool that provides support for systematic design. In this paper we set out our conclusions on the effects of the methodology and tool with regard to creativity, quality, time consumption, and the work process of the team. In addition, suggestions for future development of systematic design tools are listed. Finally, recommendations for the application of systematic design in industry are given. Key Words: empirical study, systematic design, computer support, concept development, application, cross-functional team.
1. Introduction The organisation and culture of today’s automotive industry are highly advanced from the point of view of component development. As a consequence, most components themselves are relatively mature. This means that there is a larger improvement potential in moving the central point of the development process towards early phases, to focus on concept and system design. At the same time, product complexity is continually increasing and demands are changing, which makes the management of concept development more and more difficult. As a result, there is an increased interest in using systematic design methods and support tools. Many such methods and tools exist, but few have been widely adopted in industry [10]. Computer tools for systematic design have also been developed, but so far have not been proven to work [12]. In order to alleviate this situation, Hein emphasises the importance of adapting design methodology for practical use in industry. In connection to this, it is necessary to possess knowledge of how to implement new methods and tools, as well as knowing of potential effects. However, few research efforts have been made to investigate how to implement new tools in industry [4]. Furthermore, many companies are unaware of the potential benefits that can be
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail:
[email protected]
gained by the application of product development methods [3]. Therefore, it seems reasonable to hypothesise that the application of systematic working procedures could support industrial product development projects, but there is a lot to learn about practical application. In this paper, an empirical study aiming at exploring the practical applicability of a computer support for systematic design methodology is presented. The study is partly based on earlier work carried out at Chalmers University of Technology, in which a computer support for systematic design, or a product modelling system, was developed and evaluated [22]. The computer support can be described as a framework providing support for systematic design. Accordingly, a selection of findings from that study constitutes hypotheses to be verified in the empirical study presented now. Furthermore, and more generally, the study is aimed at observing the effects of the application, and collecting information concerning attitudes towards similar tools and associated methods. The study presented in this paper has been carried out within a commercial, cross-functional advanced engineering project in the automotive industry, involving a car manufacturer and suppliers. The researchers have followed the project during six months, and have had three roles in the team: to provide a systematic methodology for the concept development, to document engineering information in the computer support, and take part as observing participants. Consequently, the study should be regarded as action research. The study
Downloaded from http://cer.sagepub.com PENNSYLVANIA STATE 2003 UNIV on April 16, 2008 Volume 11 atNumber 2 June © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
1063-293X/03/02 0107–14 $10.00/0 DOI: 10.1177/106329303035425 ß 2003 Sage Publications
107
108
L. ALMEFELT
contributes new experiences about application of design methodology and support tools in industrial, cross-functional projects. Recommendations include improvement proposals to suit the needs of automotive industry or other industries dealing with complex products. The main body of this paper is arranged as follows: Section 2 frames the problem situation and formulates criteria for successful methodology application. Section 3 is a presentation of the research approach. Section 4 describes the application of the methodology and computer support, and Section 5 presents the corresponding findings. In Section 6, findings are discussed and compared with results from other studies. Conclusions and recommendations are listed in Section 7 and ideas for future work are set out in Section 8.
2. Preconditions for the Application 2.1 Systematic Design Methods and Support Tools
ET AL.
CAD/CAM/CAE systems provide little or no support for these activities. However, there is more and more activity aimed at developing computer-based support for systematic design. In previous work, we have developed and evaluated such a computer support, or a product modelling system [22]. The engineering information contained in this product model was derived from an advanced engineering project in which systematic design was applied for the concept development. SLATE [20], a commercial systems engineering tool, was used for the implementation. Findings from the study indicated that a computerbased product model could support systematic design by organising relevant information and by giving all team members a common view of the design process and emerging design. The systems engineering tool was also shown to provide good support for requirements traceability. Regarding the management of pictures, drawings and samples, i.e., central objects in the context of design, the tool was proven to provide weak support. In connection with the development of the product model at Chalmers [22] an application scenario was thought out. According to the scenario, the product model should provide continuous support for the teamwork. As a result, the product model was thought to support a wide range of teamwork sessions, for instance on the themes of requirements management, brainstorming, function analysis, evaluation, and decision-making (see Figure 1). In between team meetings the team members were thought to work individually, and document their work directly in the product model, whereupon the information would become available for all team members. The empirical study presented in this paper is based on this scenario.
It is essential that an industrial company such as a car manufacturer has the ability to develop complex products in which a large number of product features and properties have to be incorporated. Furthermore, innovation and product renewal are of vital importance for securing the long-term profitability, and even survival, of the operations [14]. At the same time, the company’s direction in terms of operations, organisation, personnel, industrial structure, supplier structure, etc., constitute constraints that can be very difficult to change. This means that the company needs different methods and support tools in order to be able to manage the development of innovative, attractive and profitable products, and to be able to make strategic decisions. Our starting point is that systematic working procedures, e.g., those originating from academia, could serve these purposes and support corresponding activities. Many such working procedures, or methods, exist, the best known originated in Germany [17], with a focus on ‘‘Engineering design’’, and in the US [5], with a focus on complex aerospace- and defence systems (‘‘Systems Engineering’’). Recent variants [23] provide better support for the design of consumer products, e.g., by considering industrial design aspects. The aforementioned methods have their differences but also have a common core. Here the term ‘‘systematic design’’ is used to denote this core. Systematic design emphasises the importance of the early design phases: where requirements are established, function analysis is performed, and new Figure 1. Envisioned teamwork around the product model. principles and concepts created and evaluated. Ordinary Downloaded from http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
Computer Support for Systematic Design
2.2 Prerequisites for Successful Application Bearing in mind the previous sections, it can be concluded that there are many promising tools and methods that could be successfully applied in industrial product development projects. However, application in large organisations already accustomed to a particular work culture is not an issue to be dismissed lightly. For instance, a large number of individuals, each one having their own experiences and points of view, need to agree on a work method. Consequently, it is highly valuable to possess knowledge about prerequisites for successful methodology application, as well as knowing about the potential effects of an application. More specifically, there is a need for practical guidelines for industrial application of tools and methods. Several researchers, (e.g., [19,23]) have characterised successful support methods, given an account of the justification of systematic design methodology, and formulated requirements and guidelines regarding corresponding methods, tools, and their application. In this study, we focus on a number of applicable requirements taking into account the industrial application of methodology and computer support formulated by [15]. The purpose of these requirements is to contribute to a more efficient product development process, and to a rewarding, stimulating working situation for the team and its individuals. To achieve this, methods and support tools should (translation from Swedish):
109
support problem solving rather than dictating a way forward. This view is also shared by Norell. Furthermore, development work should be characterised by a minimum of bureaucracy [9]. These issues need to be considered, as efforts to introduce new working procedures are often met by an unspoken opposition [4]. The guidelines presented above will be mirrored and further analysed in the following sections, including findings and discussion.
3. Research Approach
To conduct empirical research within the area of practical product development is not a trivial task. First, there are many knowledge areas involved, e.g., engineering, computer technology, sociology, psychology and management. Moreover, and perhaps even more crucially, practical product development is a very complex activity affected by a great number of factors, e.g., design knowledge, logics, experience, intuition, emotions, influential players, and development organisation. As an example, consider the number of parameters used by [7] to control an experimental set-up aimed at investigating designers’ thinking methods. Even in such a controlled experiment, fourteen parameters were required in order to represent the diverse boundary conditions for the design process. Therefore, one can conclude that dealing with research in the context of practical product development is not really like entering . Be easy to learn, understand and apply an ideal, fully logical and objective world. Thus, . Contain accepted, non-trivial knowledge within the statistical methods are then difficult to apply, at least area of current interest before having a very good picture of the factors affecting . Provide support in order to identify weak spots the product development. Furthermore, innovation and . Be rewarding to use for different disciplines, leading product development processes are all unique, which to the establishment of common references and shared means that research methods involving a more qualitaviews tive approach are needed to obtain useful methods . Support co-operation and facilitate a learning effect and workable guidelines [16]. for users A systems approach is adopted in this empirical . Contribute to a systematic working procedure study, meaning that the problem situation is seen from a . Have a positive and preferably measurable effect on holistic perspective, and a large number of dynamic the outcome of the product development work within factors are assumed to affect the product development the area of current interest system [1]. In order to keep an open mind, a qualitative In addition, Norell has listed a number of central, approach is also employed, as the study basically aims at psychological requirements that take into account the exploring what the most interesting effects and the working situation of the individual team member. These relevant factors are. requirements are (translation from Swedish): The approach for verifying the validity of the working procedure, and the theory behind it, is based on the . A high degree of perceived freedom of action ideas of ‘‘Verification by acceptance’’ suggested by [6]. . Possibilities for a holistic view, solidarity and mutual Buur means that one way of verifying new design understanding methods is to show that the methods are acceptable to . Possibilities for personal growth and learning through experienced designers. Thus, in the context of this work empirical, hypotheses-testing study, the team members’ More generally, we also want to emphasise our acceptance of applied tools and methods has to be view that tools and methodology application should explored. Moreover, we aim at taking a further step Downloaded from http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
110
L. ALMEFELT
ET AL.
towards ‘‘Verification by application’’, which means import of the written answers agreed with their that the validity of associated tools and methods can be experiences and views. Findings have been jointly verified by demonstrated sound applicability. Furtherinterpreted by the researchers, and have been catemore, in order to cover more socio-cultural and gorised in relation to the theory base presented in management-related aspects, findings of the application Section 2. will be analysed in relation to observations and Following the approach presented in this section, the conclusions of other field studies, e.g., [15], presented results of the scientific study are mainly holistic in Section 2. The results are assumed to be generally and qualitative, and thus reflect experiences derived valid in similar contexts, e.g., in other cross-functional, from the application and attitudes towards similar tools industrial projects dealing with the development of and methodology. complex products. The actual research set-up was as follows: The research team from Chalmers University of Technology 4. The Application in the Development Project was present at the regular project meetings held at Volvo Car Corporation, and followed the project team for a six The empirical study was conducted within a commermonth period. The participants from the university had cial, cross-functional project dealing with the concept several functions within the project team, e.g., to development of a passenger airbag restraint system, a provide a methodology for the concept development, vital subsystem of the overall frontal crash restraint to administrate and maintain the computer-based system. Associated surrounding parts such as the product model, and to act as observing participants. dashboard were also included in the design task. The Consequently, the study should be regarded as action main objectives of the development project were to research, meaning that practical product development, generate and recommend promising concept solutions, scientific research, and learning is combined. A major in respect of certain critical properties. The team advantage of action research, in this context, is that consisted of members from the car manufacturer, two it gives the researchers a deep understanding of the suppliers and the university. The empirical study was practical product development situation [16], besides carried out during the first half of 2001. providing new methodology knowledge for the team In the following subsections, we describe the overall members. More specifically, the action research development process, the applied methods, the project approach was adopted to enable the testing of hypothorganisation and documentation of the project in eses mirroring the theoretical background presented in more detail. Section 2. It should be emphasised that action research involves a certain amount of judgement, and that our 4.1 Overall Development Process presence affects the industrial as well as the scientific result. The latter is highly related to the fact that An outline of the development process for the part of affecting parameters are not constant, e.g., due to the the project studied is shown in Figure 2. The input to the learning effect on the team members. Moreover, the team was a project assignment stating the aforemeneffects of the applied tools and methods are difficult to tioned objectives. The team-members brought a lot of measure with objective measurements, and findings are experience and expert knowledge into the project. difficult to verify in the mathematical sense. It is Additional input came from existing solutions. therefore particularly important to explain how the The first task for the team was to establish a list of study has been carried out and to describe the critical requirements originating from a larger (huge) experiences gained. number of requirements. The number of critical Data has been collected by making notes in a requirements was kept low, in order not to lose focus, logbook, studying the access log of the computer and the team finally identified fourteen requirements tool, document analysis, interviews, and observing crucial for concept development. participation. The five most active, continuously An initial brainstorming session followed to find participating team members, including the project principle solutions for the main functions of the airbag leader, were interviewed. Three of these are employees system. In this project a function-means-tree (F/M-tree) of the car manufacturer, and one is a consultant was used to relate the functions and the corresponding contracted by the car manufacturer. The fifth principle solutions to the general system context. interviewee represents one of the suppliers. The interFunction analysis based on the F/M-tree generated views comprised open questions to capture new kinds further ideas. The team defined a total of 21 functions of experiences, more specific questions mirroring the and 166 principle solutions. theory base, and concrete questions referring to use The team then continued by composing concepts that of the computer support. The interviews were tranprovided an overall solution for four main functions. scribed, after which every intervieweeDownloaded confirmed that the The initial concept composition generated fifteen from http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
Computer Support for Systematic Design
Assignment
Existing solutions
Experience
Establish a list of critical requirements Update
Initial brainstorming for main functions
Iteration
Iteration
Function analysis based on F/M-tree and further idea generation
Concept composition
Concepts evaluation
Three concepts to refine
Figure 2. Process outline for the studied part of the project.
111
For functional decomposition and synthesis, the F/Mtree method was applied [2]. Functional decomposition means that a system is decomposed in terms of its purpose. It identifies the functions of a system to be designed or improved, starting from a main function. To be able to decompose the function into its elements a solution has to be stated for the main function before further decomposition into sub-functions. Each subfunction has to have at least one solution before further decomposition. As a result, the functional decomposition cannot be separated from synthesis. A F/M-tree is a way of illustrating functional decomposition and can therefore be used for organising ideas from a brainstorming session. The functions-means approach is similar to Axiomatic design [21] with its zigzagging between Functional Requirements and Design Parameters. Figure 3 shows the F/M-tree used in the project. For concept evaluation and refinement, the Pugh evaluation method was selected. Pugh’s method compares the alternative concepts to one another in relative terms. One concept serves as a datum, and for each evaluation criteria, the other concepts are compared, to judge if they are better, worse or the same as the datum concept. During the evaluation process, solutions can be combined and improved in order to eliminate weaknesses. Solutions with clearly poor results are removed. A new datum is chosen, the highest ranked concept, and the evaluation procedure is repeated until the results converge. 4.3 Project Organisation
The project team comprised participants from Volvo Car Corporation, two of Volvo Cars’ suppliers and Chalmers University of Technology. The team members’ professional experience ranged from two and a half years to 20 years and represented different disciplines and roles in product development within Volvo Cars and at suppliers. Today’s car manufacturers integrate systems that are often designed, manufactured and delivered to the final assembly by sub-suppliers. The engineer’s task at Volvo Cars has changed from designing to setting up requirements for systems and co-ordinating the design efforts of the suppliers. In this team the members from Volvo Car Corporation represent the materials science laboratory and interior development. One of the suppliers designs and manufactures interior components, sub-systems and module assemblies, while the other supplier develops and delivers crash-safety systems and components. Systems engineers represented the suppliers. The participants 4.2 Applied Methods from Chalmers University of Technology had several functions within the project team. They provided the In this project two specific methods were introduced methodology, were observing participants, and adminito the team. strated the product model. Downloaded from http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 concept proposals. Beyond this, a sixteenth ‘‘Black horse’’ concept was added for evaluation. The sixteenth concept doesn’t really fit into the scope of the project, as it requires major changes outside of the system boundary, but was added to see how the fifteen ‘‘within-scope’’ concepts would match it in an evaluation. The concept evaluation followed the concept screening method according to [18]. Most of the team members were present during the evaluation sessions, in which in-depth and exhaustive discussions resulted in the sharing and utilisation of experience and expert knowledge. During the concept evaluation some concepts were withdrawn while others were refined or emerging. A total of 25 concepts were generated and evaluated. The final result was a selection of three different concepts to be further analysed and refined in the next phase of the project.
© 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
112
L. ALMEFELT
ET AL.
Appeal (Function)
No foil (Solution)
Laminated foil (Solution)
No visible split line (Solution)
Figure 3. Overall structure and partial close-up of the function-means-tree evolved in the project.
Requirements Specification
Concepts evaluation
Tracelinks
Functions-means-tree
Concept proposals
Figure 4. Architecture of the product model used in the project.
4.4 Documentation and Management of Information
point of view. It also showed how the system is decomposed, and captured a pallet of alternative principle solutions. The concept proposals showed the The team from Chalmers provided the basic archioverall system, or concept, solutions composed to tecture of the product model. The architecture meet the purpose of the product. constitutes a framework for capturing the product The product model was stored and maintained in information. The complete team was engaged in the a systems engineering tool, SLATE [20]. The original creation of the product model, which mirrors the idea was that the team members should be able activities of the applied systematic design methodology. to interact with the product model through SLATE’s In between the workshops held at Volvo Car web-interface tranSLATE. However, the version of Corporation in Go¨teborg, Sweden, each team member tranSLATE used is developed for requirements was able to access the product model information management, and as such provided a limited via the Internet. The product model consisted of functionality for some important product models. four parts, a requirements specification, a F/M-tree, For example, the F/M-tree could not be visualised in concept proposals, and a concepts evaluation, as a tree-view, and images could not be managed at all. shown in Figure 4. The requirements specification To overcome this problem an internet portal was captured the intent of the product while the concepts created for the project, see Figure 5, from which evaluation showed how well the product fulfilled the team could start the tranSLATE web-interface the requirements. The F/M-tree described the purpose and view the F/M-tree, concept proposals and other of the system and its components Downloaded from from a http://cer.sagepub.com functional at PENNSYLVANIA associated information. STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
113
Computer Support for Systematic Design
Figure 5. The project portal with the results from the first round of the concept screening (Pugh evaluation).
University of Technology. If the team needed to change any information then they had to notify the administrator and send information to him to update the product model. The product model also has some features that are not currently available to the team. One example is that the different parts of the product model, as requirements and functions, are linked by tracelinks. This means that it is possible to run analyses to see, for example, if all requirements are allocated or if a concept proposal provides a solution for all the main functions. In conclusion, the team applied a methodology rather close to what the textbooks prescribe, however focusing on a few selected methods. Furthermore, they used the computer tool to structure and communicate the results of the design process. In the following section, the views of the team members concerning the utility of the process, methods and tools will be presented.
5. Findings Figure 6. Concept sketch as used in the project.
5.1 Introduction
The findings presented here consist of experiences and All concept proposals generated during brainstorming observations from the application in the development or concept evaluation sessions were refined to the same team. Some of the findings are related to results of level of detail to help the inter-concept comparison. earlier work, e.g., our previous study dealing with the Figure 6 shows one of these. development of a computer support for systematic The project’s web site and tranSLATE together design [22], or important prerequisites for a successful provided the team with a common, easily accessible implementation of tools and methods [15]. Other information source, but the communication was only findings are more independent observations, mirroring, one-way. Certain limitations were due to not all of the amongst other things, the attitudes towards or accepsoftware’s functionalities being available via the webtance of the applied or similar tools and methods. The interface. As an example, the team members could not findings are based on data from interviews, product modify the product model by themselves. The master model access logging, document analysis and our own product model was stored and maintained at Chalmers observations. Downloaded from http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
114
L. ALMEFELT
ET AL.
5.2 The Product Development Within the Team – Effects of the Applied Methodology and Computer Support
proposals from several viewpoints and to consider different parameters. More solution proposals than usual are also considered. Specifically, Pugh’s concept screening method [18] was regarded as a good method There are a lot of different problems associated with for pointing out benefits and drawbacks of different today’s concept development. This is illustrated by the solution proposals. Furthermore, the overall working diverse responses of the team members who were procedure reveals, and utilises the experience and interviewed. However, in general, more extensive and expertise of each team member. The team members are more fruitful communication is requested. This applies to also stimulated into discovering more facts, e.g., when intra-company communication, i.e., between different an evaluation has indicated a lack of some particular departments of the car manufacturer, extra-company knowledge. The working procedure, involving the communication, i.e., between the car manufacturer and computer support, generally leads to better documentasuppliers, and interpersonal communication between tion, which improves knowledge transfer and reduces individuals with different personal interests. A lack of the risk of future mistakes. A structured working communication may result in problems getting the procedure and good documentation also lead to competencies to co-operate towards a common objective. improved work quality in a more general sense. This Consequently, some of the interviewed team members reduces the risk of late changes. As the computer would like a ‘‘structure’’ to provide a common and more support provides structured product documentation, holistic view. In general, the team members would like any essential late changes can be studied more easily, more structure in the early phases of the product and changes can be minimised whilst at the same time development, but several also emphasise that this has to meeting product targets. be carefully organised. Following the ideas of the team Gustafsson [9] has stated that work in product members, the structure should be set up to pinpoint vital development teams should be characterised by a issues and critical aspects, drive the project forward, and, minimum of bureaucracy. Efforts to introduce new, especially at the start, allow independent (open-minded), structured methods and working procedures in develcreative and innovative work. opment organisations are, however, often met by The ability to generate product ideas and technical unspoken opposition. An earlier interview study in solutions is fundamental for a company such as a car Swedish industry [13] indicated that this unspoken manufacturer. As a result, the effects of the applied opposition may stem from previous experiences that methods and computer support on creativity are structured working procedures resulted in high time interesting. The general opinion is that the methodology consumption and bureaucratic, long-winded work. The applied in this project has resulted in more ideas and responses in respect of time consumption in the actual solution proposals than would usually have been the application vary considerably. However, most of the case. According to the interviewed team members, the participants perceive the working procedure as being methodology contributes to this by involving braintime-consuming. In particular, this concerns the Pugh storming and other creative activities, collecting and concept screening method, which, due to all the documenting all ideas, supporting combination of evaluation rounds, is perceived as being somewhat solution proposals and the fact that no solution long-winded. We also observed that some of the team proposal is rejected without good reason. A total of members seemed frustrated about the fact that the Pugh 166 solution proposals in principle and 25 concept evaluation did not fully converge. Another experience, proposals were generated. However, and this was related to the overall methodology, is that the team must commented on by some of the respondents, the success also work on solutions that appear less promising. At also greatly depends on the composition of the team. the other end of the scale we find experience that the Regarding the computer support itself, the team working procedure actually structures the teamwork members are of the opinion that it has no, or marginal, and guides creativity within the team, and so does not effect on creative activities. This opinion coincides with increase the bureaucracy of the task, which is inherently the findings of our previous study [22]. complex. Reflecting this, some of the team members are Another important role for methodology and tools in of the opinion that the total time consumption is product development is to provide support in identifying reduced thanks to the structured working procedure. weak spots [15]. To identify weak spots and thus avoid Furthermore, methods and tools need to meet a mistakes that can lead to consequences later in the number of important psychological requirements related product development, is an important step in quality to the individual needs of the team members, e.g., that assurance. The team members believe that the use of the the working procedure must allow a high degree of methodology, as well as the use of computer support, perceived freedom of action [15]. One opinion of the reduces the number of mistakes. The methodology interviewed team members is that the applied working provides support to study the problem and solution procedure promotes freedom of action, since every team Downloaded from http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
Computer Support for Systematic Design
member is free to present and motivate solution proposals and standpoints. Furthermore, the co-operative development work of the team results in a strong common standpoint towards other departments of the organisation or other potential opponents. There are, however, also indications that the applied working procedure might reduce the freedom of action, e.g., by obstructing short cuts and making it more difficult to add and consider new ideas at later stages. In addition, it is important that the support tools have a learning effect on the team members [15]. The responses we received indicate that the methodology and tool significantly contribute to this. In particular, it was stated that the methodology, involving the use of evaluation matrices, stimulated discussion and debate, and thus forced experts and suppliers to transfer their specialist knowledge to the team to a greater extent than usual. The computer model itself was stated to constitute a means for obtaining updates on recent design changes, and also for knowledge transfer. Another psychological requirement according to Norell [15] is that the working procedure should enable a common view and mutual understanding. The team members interviewed agreed that the applied working procedure results in common references and provides all team members with a common view of the design process, including requirements and emerging designs. This is explained by the methodology in particular providing a support in utilising and collecting the knowledge of all team members, not to mention the fact that the objects, requirements, solutions and evaluations are all created in co-operation and commonly accessible by all team members. One of the respondents expressed this concisely: ‘‘Everyone is on the same playing field’’.
115
methodology and similar structured procedures might inhibit creative personalities, but could also stimulate less creative personalities into becoming more creative. ‘‘The role of the method champion must not be underrated’’ (Norell, [15], quotation translated from Swedish). The general consensus of the team is also that total efficiency is increased when there is one dedicated person responsible for the application of the methodology. Regarding the computer support, the team members also agreed that someone must be responsible for its administration. The clearest risks associated with the application of similar structured working procedures, according to the team members, are the perceived and actual time consumption. High actual time consumption could result in locked resources.
5.4 Use of the Computer Support
Most of the team members regularly accessed the product model. The model was mainly used as a source of information, particularly prior to review meetings. According to the responses of the team members, the requirements specification, concept proposals (including sketches and explanations) and evaluation matrices have been the most useful pieces of information. The more management-orientated team members also found the structure itself interesting out of all associated information. Furthermore, it was stated that the computer support added value by making information available to all participants, and by organising and linking information in a structure that can be renewed and changed. The major disadvantages of the actual application 5.3 Findings Related to Work Organisation relate to the interface of the software. Although the product model supports a proper organisation of The interviewed team members foresee that a more information, its size and complexity makes it difficult general application of similar working procedures to overview. A typical example is the F/M-tree. In could lead to the organisation benefiting in several addition, the software has shown limited ability to ways. At first, the working procedure contributes to the handle sketches and images, which are central objects in more efficient utilisation of skills. As experience and early stages. This agrees with previous observations expert knowledge is shared, the general knowledge level (e.g., [22]). as well as the awareness of different viewpoints According to the team members, good computer increases. support is characterised by easy access, high technical A more specific effect is that the worst problems show reliability, correct data content, logical structure and up early on, as the working procedure promotes early short learning time. Moreover, a computer support that cross-functional co-operation, including establishment gives more output than input means added value. and agreement of the requirements specification. In terms of computer support for systematic design, Furthermore, after following such a procedure, the the team members find a database with solution team is well prepared for documentation, presentation principles essential, and emphasise the value of having and debate. The computer support constitutes a base for sketches or images in connection to every solution presentations, e.g., at design reviews. proposal, also for detail solutions. Also ideas and Bureaucracy in a big company can be a threat to pictures representing initial or divergent thoughts creativity. Reflecting this, it was Downloaded stated from that the applied should be included in the model. There should also be http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
116
L. ALMEFELT
an introductory page describing the basic working procedure, preferably with examples illustrating associated activities. In more general terms, the computer support should provide documentation describing history, present situation and future direction. From a practical point of view, good printing functions are important and therefore requested. The team members were also asked a more philosophic question about what can be solved by using computer support, and what cannot. Their responses tell us that computer support can be used for solving logical problems, administration and for organising data. Computer support cannot replace personal contacts, interpret data or information, or provide any direct support for creative activities and synthesis. 5.5 Attitudes Towards the Working Procedure and Computer Support
ET AL.
5.6 The Team Members’ Thoughts on Future Applications The team members have many improvement proposals regarding the methodology as well as the computer support, and thoughts on how to carry out future applications. In general, the participants find the applied working procedure very suitable for future concept development projects. The team does, however, find that modifications are necessary. Development activities are at first very much about pictures, sketches, drawings and images in 2-D and 3-D [8]. The picture should therefore be regarded as a central object in the product model, and the software tool must allow easy storage and access of all generated pictures and sketches. Furthermore, the interface of the computer tool needs to be developed to allow better overview, and to become more user-friendly. The functionality of the computer tool could also be extended to include a list of involved team members, notes about the creator of different objects, and a system to supply news and other prioritised information to involved competencies. This kind of new functionality is thought to facilitate communication and agreement in a large organisation such as a car manufacturer. Regarding the methodology, it is desirable to reduce the time consumption, in particular for the evaluation rounds. One proposal from the team, aiming at making the methodology application more efficient, is to use some kind of support method to choose and adapt the methodology depending on the actual problem situation. Then, for the actual problem complexity, experience level, and number of participants, etc., an evaluation model, e.g., a question method, provides output in terms of the most suitable methodology and a starting point. Another opinion presented is that the suppliers should use similar working procedures during their concept development. It would then be possible to follow the development procedure and easier to understand the subsequent results. The team members have great expectations for the tool’s requirements traceability functionality, which has not yet been tested to link requirements to technical solutions. Of particular interest is the possibility of identifying requirements not yet met and seeing how properties are affected when the technical solution is changed. In the long run the product model is expected to support knowledge transfer, and thus helps to prevent the same mistakes being made.
According to the team members interviewed, a working procedure is a good one if it is easy to learn, intuitive, addresses important aims and requirements, and the value of an application is easily realised by involved competencies. Moreover, the working procedure should be time-efficient, i.e., provide more energy than it consumes. One of the aims of this empirical study has been to identify attitudes towards the applied and similar working procedures. This is also a step towards a verification of the working procedure following the principles of ‘‘Verification by acceptance’’ [6]. In general, the project participants see significantly more advantages than disadvantages from the applied working procedure. As already mentioned, the major disadvantage is the time consumption, or at least the perceived one. The standard answer to the direct question ‘‘Would you like to apply similar methods and computer support in future?’’ is ‘‘Yes’’, especially from a management point of view. The general attitude is also that the organisation should be developed to support a more widespread application of similar methods and tools. According to the responses this would support a co-operative cross-functional teamwork, where all those considered are involved early on, with efficient utilisation of experience. This would result in generally better quality of concept studies and, in the long run, better products for the final customer. The general opinion is that applied and similar working procedures should be employed in the early stages of product development, by cross-functional teams dealing with relatively complex systems. This kind of working procedure is not then regarded as 5.7 Summary of Findings efficient for developing simple details or systems where prerequisites are given or frozen, or when there are few To summarise, the team found the methodology and design degrees of freedom. tool helpful in generating more solution proposals, Downloaded from http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
Computer Support for Systematic Design
ensuring quality and facilitating teamwork. They were also positive about using similar methods and tools in the future. However, the team also expressed worries about the time consumption of the methods and stated that the computer tool needs to be improved in terms of its interface and image management functionality.
117
prior to meetings and thus had better product knowledge. In addition, more significant positive impact on product quality may be expected in the later development phases, where the model provides support for requirements traceability. The team members had differing opinions on time consumption. While it should be emphasised that the respondents referred to perceived time, not actual, it 6. Discussion should be pointed out that most team members felt that the time consumed was higher than usual, in In this section, we discuss some of the major findings particular for the evaluation. This contradicts one of of the study, including references to other work. the major hypotheses of systematic design: that its The team was of the impression that the work had application helps to shorten lead times. One explanation resulted in more ideas and solutions than usual. This was for this observation could be that most time gains attributed to the working procedure and the composition would be won in the later development phases, and of the team. The team did not think that the computer thus had not yet been reaped within the duration of support had any noticeable effect on the number of the study. Another explanation could be that they ideas. This agrees with observations by, e.g., [12] compared the time consumption for a Pugh evaluation who found that the use of a computer-supported with a traditional one. However, a Pugh evaluation Designer’s Workbench (DWB), a prototype system is more than a pure evaluation. It also involves for product modelling, did not lead to the creation of combination and improvement of solutions and thus more solutions compared to a design process with a has a wider scope. paper-based DWB. However, the tool might have a One major critique from the team towards the tool positive effect by organising ideas in a structured fashion, concerned its image management facilities. The tool is which might in turn lead to the detection of patterns based on the Systems Engineering methodology and and relationships, which might stimulate the generation bases its product representation on networks and trees of of further ideas. It should also be stated that the tool boxes and arrows. However, as one of the participants does not contain a database of existing principles such pointed out: ‘‘you think in images, not in text’’. Similar as TechOptimizer [11]. If the tool included such a views can be found in literature. For example, [8] database or was linked to one, it would probably better emphasises the key role of drawings in design. support the generation of solutions, as a complement However, we must also realise that images can be reprto intuitive creative work. esented in many ways: sketches, 2-D or 3-D computer The team members were of the opinion that the use models, boxes-and-arrows, and diagrams. Moreover, of the methodology reduced the number of mistakes experimental investigations of designers at work have made. It did so by providing support for studying found that they switch back-and-forth between abstract the problem and the solution proposals from several and concrete product representations at a high frequency perspectives. Furthermore, the structured working [7]. As a result, neither current Systems Engineering tools procedure and good documentation generally led to nor CAD systems provide adequate support. There is improved work quality. Another important contribution a need for systems that can utilise many kinds of was the discussions within the team around the Pugh images in an efficient manner. matrices. The use of the Pugh evaluation matrices In general, the team members see significantly more helped to extract the expertise of the team members, benefits than drawbacks with the applied working in particular the supplier engineers. Concerning the procedure, and think that the application of similar effect of the computer tool, it has been reported that methods and tools should be increased. The question is methods implemented on a computer are perceived then how to proceed with large-scale implementation. to have a stronger positive influence on product Beskow and Ritze´n [4] suggest a structure for how to quality than implementations of the same methods on carry out planned changes in product development. The a paper-based system [3]. In their study they state structure is divided in two parts: implementation that the contribution of computer utilisation towards framework and implementation keys. The first part, product quality is significant where the process increases implementation framework, concerns the overall issues the knowledge, understanding, or agreement of the for change, such as an implementation cycle, an participants. This is supported by the current study. organisational change, and management. The second The methodology provided support for utilising and part, implementation keys, is more specific and focuses collecting the knowledge of all team members and on certain areas in the change work. Beskow and Ritze´n the product model evolved by their co-operative work. have identified five keys for successful implementation; Most team members also reviewed the product model goal setting, knowledge development, anchoring at all Downloaded from http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
118
L. ALMEFELT
ET AL.
levels, suitable resources, and focus on the individual. 7. Conclusions and Recommendations They also mention that in implementing a tool or method the ability to use the tool or method has to be Below, we list conclusions derived from the use of secured. They suggest that, in addition to training, the methodology and the computer support in the knowledge sources such as method and application empirical study, along with recommendations for future specialists should be available in the company. This is applications. supported by the current study. There is a need, not only for method and tool specialists, but also for support to 7.1 Conclusions choose and adapt methodology application depending on the actual problem situation. This could be . The applied methodology resulted in more ideas and supported by introducing a ‘‘method champion’’, who solution proposals than would normally have been has expert knowledge of several methods and tools, the case. The computer support itself has no or besides having the talent of spreading enthusiasm. marginal effect on creative activities. However, the The applied working procedure promotes freedom of success is also highly dependent on the composition action, as every team member is free to present and of the team. motivate solution proposals and standpoints. There are . The product quality was increased in the sense that also, however, indications that the applied working fewer mistakes were made. This was due to the procedure might reduce freedom of action, e.g., hinderproblem situation and solution proposals being ing short cuts, and by making it more difficult to add studied from several perspectives and different and consider new ideas in late stages. Human problem parameters being considered. The overall working solving is characterised by trial-and-error procedures. procedure also leads to utilisation of the experience An experienced designer has knowledge of what is and expertise of each team member. important and what is less important, and has a working . The structured working procedure was perceived as procedure that focuses on the major working steps [7]. being time-consuming, in particular the Pugh evaluaThe experienced designer intuitively performs the steps, tion method. However, the study also indicated that and therefore feels that the working procedure is the actual time consumption in total could be reduced. hindering and reducing his freedom of action. . The product model can support systematic design by However, as stated by the team, a systematic design organising relevant information and by giving all procedure could also stimulate less creative personalities team members a common view of the design process to become more creative, and might be necessary to and emerging design. It can also be used for learning manage complex problems. and knowledge transfer. How valid are these observations in general? Firstly, it . The product model was regularly accessed for its should be noted that it is notoriously difficult to prove main use as source of information prior to review design process observations, due to the number and meetings. The requirements specification, concept dynamic nature of the factors involved. Previous proposals and evaluation matrices were found to be empirical studies (e.g., [7,12]) that have tried to make the most useful information to find. controlled observations of designers have studied . Although the product model supports a proper individual designers for short periods (a few hours or organisation of information, its size and complexity a few days). In this study, we have followed a tenmakes it difficult to overview. A typical example is member team for six months, and in the midst of a the F/M-tree. real design task. This extended time period has given us . The software tool has shown a limited ability to the opportunity to observe the problems and benefits handle sketches and images, which are central objects of the design process while a team is struggling with in early stages of product development. a design assignment. One example of data that is . The study indicated that having a dedicated specialist made available is responses concerning the perceived facilitating the application of the methodology time duration. Other earlier approaches include the use increases the team’s total efficiency. Furthermore, of post-project research interviews [4]. However, it can a dedicated individual should be responsible for be difficult to logically reconstruct the event afterwards managing the product model. [16], and a true depiction of events also requires some real-time data collection. Our action-based research approach allows real-time data collection. For example, 7.2 Recommendations Regarding Future a logbook was used to triangulate the response data. Industrial Applications However, the researchers’ presence also interferes with the process of the team, and may have affected some . Attempt to facilitate a more widespread application responses, e.g., concerning the possible benefits of the of systematic design methods and support tools, as methodology. Downloaded from http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
Computer Support for Systematic Design
119
2. Andreasen, M.M. (1980). Syntesemetoder pa˚ Systemgrundlag – Bidrag til en Konstruktionsteori (Synthesis Methods on a Systems Foundation – A Contribution to Design Theory) (in Danish), Doctoral Thesis, Lunds University, Lund, Sweden. 3. Araujo, C.S. et al. (1996). The Utilization of Product Development Methods: A Survey of UK Industry, Journal of Engineering Design, 7(3): 265–277. 4. Beskow, C. and Ritze´n, S. (2000). Performing Changes in Product Development: A Framework with Keys for Industrial Application, Research in Engineering Design, 12(3): 172–190. 5. Blanchard, B.S. and Fabrycky, W.J. (1998). Systems Engineering and Analysis, Prentice Hall International Ltd., London, U.K. 6. Buur, J. (1990). A Theoretical Approach to Mechatronics Design, Doctoral Thesis, Institute for Engineering Design, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark. 7. Ehrlenspiel, K. and Dylla, N. (1993). Experimental 8. Future Work Investigation of Designer’s Thinking Methods and Design Procedures, Journal of Engineering Design, 4(3): The study has indicated several possible future 201–212. research opportunities, for instance: 8. Ferguson, E.S. (1992). Engineering and the Mind’s Eye, The MIT Press, London, U.K. . Study of the practical applicability of requirements 9. Gustafsson, L. (1994). Snabbast Vinner (The Fastest Wins) traceability, to be conducted during the remainder of (in Swedish), Sveriges Verkstadsindustrier (The Associathe development project. Of specific interest is the tion of Swedish Engineering Industries), Stockholm, Sweden. ability to run analyses to find out, for example, 10. Hein, L. (1994). Design Methodology in Practice, Journal whether all requirements are fulfilled by a technical of Engineering Design, 5(2): 165–181. solution, or how properties and corresponding 11. Invention Machine Corp. (2001). www.invention-machine. requirements fulfilment are affected when the technicom. cal solution is changed. 12. Jensen, T. (1997). An Empirical Study of Variant Design . Development of the product model with focus on with A Designer’s Workbench, In: Proceedings of the 11th utilisation of pictures and images, interface interacInternational Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 97), tion, and functions supporting communication. Vol. 3, pp. 277–282, Tampere, Finland. . Survey of support methods to select and adapt the 13. Lundba¨ck, M., Almefelt, L. and Bra¨nnstro¨m, O. (2000). Organisation, ledarskap, samarbete och kreativitet i methodology to a particular problem situation. produktutvecklingsprocessen – en ja¨mfo¨relse av tva˚ . Practical study of the effects of additional technical branscher (Organisation, Management, Co-operation and means intended to facilitate a more efficient utilisaCreativity in the Product Development Process – A tion of the product model. For instance, during Comparison of Two Industrial Sectors) (in Swedish), creative sessions, each team member could be Report available at Product and Production Development, Chalmers University of Technology, provided with a sketcher to allow pictures to be Go¨teborg, Sweden. stored directly in the product model. 14. Nordstro¨m, K.A. and Ridderstra˚le, J. (1999). Funky Business – Talent Makes Capital Dance, BookHouse Publishing AB, Stockholm, Sweden. Acknowledgements 15. Norell, M. (1992). Sto¨dmetoder och samverkan i produktutveckling (Advisory Tools and Co-operation in Product This work was financially assisted by the Swedish Development), Doctoral Thesis, Department of Machine Elements, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), National Board for Technical Development (NUTEK, Stockholm, Sweden. now renamed VINNOVA), the Swedish foundation for 16. Ottosson, S. (1996). Dynamic Product Development: Strategic Research through the ENDREA Graduate Findings from Participating Action Research in a Fast School, and Volvo Car Corporation. New Product Development Process, Journal of Engineering Design, 7(2): 151–169. 17. Pahl, G. and Beitz, W. (1996). Engineering Design, A References Systematic Approach, 2nd edn, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany. 1. Arbnor, I. and Bjerke, B. (1994). Fo¨retagsekonomisk 18. Pugh, S. (1990). Total Design. Integrated Methods for Metodla¨ra (Methods in Business Economics) (in Swedish), Successful Product Engineering, Addison-Wesley 2nd edn, Studentlitteratur, Lund, Sweden. Publishing Company, Wokingham, UK. Downloaded from http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008
benefits are foreseen regarding, innovation, quality assurance, and utilisation of competence. . Apply systematic design procedures in cross-functional teams dealing with relatively complex tasks. Gain efficiency by appointing a ‘‘method champion’’ dedicated to support the application of suitable methods and tools. . Evaluate alternative methods prior to the application. Select methods to suit the actual problem complexity, the team members’ skills, the number of participants, etc. . Improve the computer-based product model to allow an efficient utilisation of pictures and images, provide better overview of the information content, and support communication.
© 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
120
L. ALMEFELT
19. Roozenburg, N.F.M. and Eekels, J. (1995). Product Design: Fundamentals and Methods, John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Chichester, UK. 20. SDRC, (2001), www.sdrc.com. 21. Suh, N.P. (1990). The Principles of Design, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA. 22. Sutinen, K., Almefelt, L. and Malmqvist, J. (2000). Implementation of Requirements Traceability in Systems Engineering Tools, In: Proceedings of Product Models 2000, pp. 313–328, Linko¨ping, Sweden. 23. Ulrich, K.T. and Eppinger, S.D. (2000). Product Design and Development, 2nd edn, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, USA.
Lars Almefelt Lars Almefelt is an industrial Ph.D. student at Chalmers University of Technology, Go¨teborg, Sweden. He holds an M.Sc. degree in Mechanical Engineering (1994) from Linko¨ ping University, Linko¨ping, Sweden. Since 1994, he has been an employee of Volvo Car Corporation. Before re-entering the academic world, he was a productive design engineer, using systematic design methods. This paved the way for his area of research: Methodology for concept development focusing on requirements management.
ET AL.
Krister Sutinen Krister Sutinen is a Ph.D. student at Chalmers University of Technology. His research is aiming at estimating the consequences of design modifications and requirements changes. He holds a Master of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering (1997) from Lulea˚ University of Technology, Lulea˚, Sweden, and a Licentiate of Engineering degree (2001) from Chalmers University of Technology, Go¨teborg, Sweden. Before returning to the academia, he has worked as consultant. Professor Johan Malmqvist Professor Johan Malmqvist holds the M.Sc. (1988), and Ph.D. (1993) degrees in Mechanical Engineering from Chalmers University of Technology, Go¨teborg, Sweden. His current research concerns design methodology, systems engineering and product and design process modeling.
Downloaded from http://cer.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008 © 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
