International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET) Volume 8, Issue 5, May 2017, pp. 1092–1100, Article ID: IJMET_08_05_113 Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=8&IType=5 ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359 © IAEME Publication
Scopus Indexed
PERFORMANCE MODEL FORMATION FOR LEAN PRODUCT DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT Daniel O. Aikhuele Faculty of Manufacturing Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Pekan, Malaysia Richard Hannis Ansah Faculty of Industrial Management, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Gambang, Malaysia Shahryar Sorooshian Faculty of Industrial Management, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Gambang, Malaysia ABSTRACT Companies are faced with the need to address their product development challenges innovatively in order to stay competitive in today’s global market. One way of doing that is the integration of lean thinking in the product design and development process. However due to the lack of clear understanding of the lean performance measurements, lack of a holistic and unifying measuring method and the lack or nonexistence of an evaluating conceptual model to allow for the examination of the performance of the lean product design and development process, many companies are unable to fully implement the lean thinking principle in the product design and development process. In dealing with these issues, this study, therefore, proposes an evaluating conceptual model based on some core lean practices for the examination of the performance of the lean product design and development process and attempts to draw a link between the lean product design and development process and the lean performance. Keywords: Lean product design and development, Lean practices, Conceptual model, Performance measurement system. Cite this Article: Daniel O. Aikhuele, Richard Hannis Ansah and Shahryar Sorooshian. Performance Model Formation for Lean Product Design and Development. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 8(5), 2017, pp. 1092–1100. http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=8&IType=5
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
1092
[email protected]
Daniel O. Aikhuele, Richard Hannis Ansah and Shahryar Sorooshian
1. INTRODUCTION The increasing demands for hybrid and mass customized products by customers are driving companies around the world, to seek for cost effective and time efficient improvements in their product development process and this has increased the urgency for the adoption of new developmental tools and techniques for competitive advantage. Among such techniques and tools include the integration of lean thinking in the product design process. Lean is a way of thinking, an improvement philosophy which was first industrialized by the Toyota Motor Company. The primary goal was to eliminate waste[1, 2] from the production system, however, in recent decades, lean thinking has been mechanized into other product design and development environment. This is due to the fact that lean is effective in the product design and development process and has potentials to reduce the time to market new products, engineering hours, product development costs, and the elimination of non-value added activities in product design and development process[3–7]. In spite of the several attempts by companies to interpret and apply the lean product design and development techniques, many are still struggling with design quality issues, long lead times, and high product development costs, and these are mostly attributed to the lack of clear understanding of the lean performance measurements[8], the lack of a holistic and unifying measuring method to measure all aspects of the lean product design and development process[9]and the lack or non-existence of an evaluating conceptual model to allow for an examination of the performance of the lean product design and development process. It is said that“the things that get measured are the things that get done”. Performance measurement is an integral part of the management planning and control system, which has an impact on the environment in which it operates, and cannot be operated or perform in isolation, rather it is only relevant within a reference framework against which the efficiency and effectiveness of actions are judged[10]. In dealing with these performances related issues, the study, therefore, proposes an evaluating conceptual model based on some core lean practices for the examination of the performance of the lean product design and development process as well as drawing a link between the lean product design and development process and the lean product design and development performance. This is mainly to address the confusion and inconsistency associated with the lean performance measurements. As discussed in most performance assessment literatures and practiced in most leading product design and development companies, the performance measurement system which is the same as the evaluating conceptual model proposed in this study will be based on a multi-dimensional approach, and designed in a way that covers and captures all the main aspects of the lean product design and development process.
2. RELATED RESEARCH Academic researchers and industrial practitioners of lean product design and development performance assessment over the years have developed tools, technique, approaches, and models, however, they have been conceptualized to assess aspects of the lean product design and development performance. Similarly, assessment of these performance methods in literature difficult, as some of the assessment methods are just a brief description of a series of steps, a description of a single performance assessment tool, and a few complete processes, whilst others a consultancy techniques which are partially and in some case not published. Nonetheless, few methods and concepts were found in the literature for the assessment of the performance of lean practice in manufacturing and service operations and in product design and development process. For instance, Karlsson & Åhlström[11]developed a model for the operationalization of lean principles with the aim of assessing the change processes in the
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
1093
[email protected]
Performance Model Formation for Lean Product Design and Development
introduction of the lean production system in a work organization, by using a measurement system in the form of a checklist to assess the extent of leanness. Bayou & de Korvin[9], in comparing the performance (leanness) of the Ford Motor Company and the General Motors company, argues that systematic leanness measure has the following seven characteristics: relative, dynamic, long-term fuzzy logic, objective, integrative and comprehensive, and can be measured using the following three lean attributes: just in time (JIT), kaizen and quality control. Vinodh & Chintha[12] developed a conceptual model for measuring the leanness of a manufacturing organization; the model consists of three levels, where the first level consists of five leanness enablers; the second consist of twenty lean criteria, and the third several lean attributes. Wong et al.[13]and [14]developed a lean index for the purpose of assessing the leanness level of the organization in sustaining lean transformation and for assessing the leanness of wood products companies respectively; the lean index considers the interrelationships among the indicators of lean, and specifically, the lean index was designed to sustain ‘leanness’ of performance in a long run. Elnadi & Shehab [15]presented a conceptual model for the evaluation of the degree of Product Service System (PSS) leanness in the UK manufacturing companies, and the model was based on five lean enablers: supplier relationship, management leanness, workforce leanness, process excellence, and customer relationship, twenty-one criteria: supplier delivery, culture of management, process optimization, etc. and seventy-three attributes. The performance of lean practice in a product design and development process (which is the main theme of this study), has also been addressed by some few researchers which include; Al-Ashaab et al.[16]who deployed five lean enablers including value focus; knowledge-based environment; continuous improvement; chief engineer; and set-based concurrent engineering for the formation of performance assessment tool which is used for determining the actual status of the organizations as it relates to the implementation of the lean principles in the product design and development process. Mohammadi[17] through a theoretical framework argued that a performance measurement system should have five elements which include; objective, dimension, indicator, structure, and processes where the main dimensions of the performance in product development processes are efficiency and effectiveness and both dimensions should be measured to get the actual performance of the product development process. Sopelana et al.[18], in their exploratory research study presented a maturity model and self-assessment tool called SMART (Start, Motivate, Apply, Review and Improve, and Transform) for assessing the current and desired maturity levels of the organizational value stream and the model was used in determining opportunity area in the lean product development process. Al-Ashaab et al. [19]presented a conceptual model based on value creation, knowledge-based environment, and the set-based concurrent engineering for the evaluation of the lean product development. Although, these performance measurement systems and concepts in the reviewed literature have contributed to the science base of the lean product design and development performance in one way or the other, however, they mostly have been limited by their values as they focused on only a few aspects of the lean product design and development performance, while neglecting other aspects of the performance. Also, some have been developed jointly or separately, from theory and practice. Whilst a limited number of the performance assessment models and concepts have been tried extensively through their application in the industrial environment, others have remained theoretical models. Hence, the need for a new evaluating conceptual model that is generated from both theory (literature) and from the industrial environment, and that can present and capture the different aspects of the lean product design and development life cycle and also be used for the formation of the unified performance measurement system under a common platform.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
1094
[email protected]
Daniel O. Aikhuele, Richard Hannis Ansah and Shahryar Sorooshian
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY In forming the evaluating conceptual model, a thorough literature review of the lean practices and its performance models in the product design and development environment were conducted, and the existing model for the lean product design and development was identified. However, in aligning with the objective of the study, more emphasis was placed on the identification and analysis of the lean practices (enablers) suitable for the evaluation of the lean product design and development performances at the early phase of the product design and development process. Following the synthesis of the literature, a semi-structured interview was conducted to get the opinions of academic experts and researchers with special interest in lean management, lean product design and development, performance assessment and process modeling, on the feasibility of using the identified lean practices for the evaluation of the lean product design and development performance in an industrial scenario. The second stage of the formulation of the evaluating conceptual model starts with the refining of the model from the first stage using a semi-structured interview method. A number of industrial experts including product designers, product engineers, design managers, project managers and lean practitioner in different Malaysian Product manufacturing companies (mainly computers, electronic, food manufacturing, and automobile companies) were interviewed. The working experience of the engaged experts was within the range of 15 to 30 years, where each of the interviews took about 45 minutes in discussing the model and examining its ability to measure the lean product design and development performance at the early product design phase. The framework for the formation of the evaluating conceptual model is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 Framework for the formation of the evaluating conceptual model
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
1095
[email protected]
Performance Model Formation for Lean Product Design and Development
4. EVALUATING CONCEPTUAL MODEL The introduction of lean thinking principle in the product design and development environment provides a knowledge-based support for value creation for customers by considering the entire product life cycle. However, in aligning with the objective of this research, we will only be considering lean practices that can aid the evaluation of activities at the early product design and development stage and that can be used in forming its performance measurement systems. The lean practices here are chosen in such way that they can capture and cover all aspects or activities at the early product design stage (e.g. the creation of reusable knowledge, schedule of innovative technologies into product design, determining the customer expectation and value, innovation and learning, technical specification, cross-functional inputs, product and information value assessment, and the assessment of waste in the product design process), and to provide a scientific base for the study of the lean product design performance. The new model draws insights partly from the lean product development conceptual model developed byAl-Ashaab et al.[19] and from the different lean practice highlighted in the model. The performance measurement system which comprised of seven lean practices has been designed and developed in reference to literature and in conjunction with an academic expert panel as well as industrial practitioners in Malaysia. The evaluating lean product design and development conceptual model is shown in the Table1. Although each of the lean practice in the model is described and discussed separately, the lean product design and development approach is assumed to be an open system with relationships that lead to interaction and mutual adjustments among the practices. Table 1 Lean enabler and their attributes LPD Enabler 1 Visual management [20–22]
2 Trade-off analysis[4, 23]
3 Chief Engineer technical leadership [16, 24, 25]
4 Supplier integration [26–28]
Description Visualizations in product design are mainly related to the communication of products and design concepts. The visualization concept helps in supporting product managerial tasks at the early product design phase and plays a key role in supporting communication between cross-functional teams. A trade-off curve analysis is a powerful decision-making tool (graph) that describes the trend of crucial parameters within a given design approach in a simplified visual form. The trade-off analysis can be referred to asone of the best practice that improves early design decisions thereby reducing the costs later in the product development process. The Chief Engineer’s technical leadership is alean practice where technical leaders are placed at the helm of affair prior to the product conception and remain throughout the entire product development process. The Chief Engineer takes responsibility in ensuring the production of the design concept document, which is used in communicating the vision for the product system. In the lean product design context, the suppliers of the parts for the manufacturing of the product are actively involved in all aspect of the product development, right from the early stages of the design through to the product launch. This is to avoid misunderstanding and rework. Also, the involvement of the supplier in the product development process helps in speeding up the process. This is in contrast to the traditional product development practices where the suppliers only get involved when the detailed design specifications have been developed. Supplier integration as a lean enabler is based on the following; Supplier feedback, Supplier development, and Supplier
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
1096
[email protected]
Daniel O. Aikhuele, Richard Hannis Ansah and Shahryar Sorooshian
support/involvement. 5 Cross-functional teams [29–31] The cross-functional team is a business practice where a group of experts from different section/units with different functionality in a company are brought together to work as a team towards a common goal. 6 Knowledge-based engineering, Knowledge Based Engineering which is an innovative method [24, 32–34] allows businesses including design practitioners to capture product and process information and to reuse such information in automating all or part of the process. The main objective of this lean enabler is to reduce time to market the new product and for the reduction of product development cost. This is achieved through the automation of repetitive design tasks while capturing, retaining and re-using the acquired design knowledge. The Knowledge Based Engineering as a lean enabler is based on the following; Knowledge Identification, Knowledge Representation, Knowledge Capturing and Knowledge Re-Use. 7 Set-based concurrent The set-based concurrent engineering which is potentially one of engineering, [16, 24, 35–37] the main underlying cause for the successes recorded by the Toyota Motor Company [38] is an organized group of principles that allows design practitioners to reason, develop, and communicate about a sets of solutions in parallel, and gradually narrow them down based on the knowledge and information gained through customers relations and interaction, communication with the manufacturing departments, tests/design of prototypes, and other sources. The set-based engineering as a lean enabler comprises of five different major perspectives; Strategic value research and alignment, Mapping the design Space, Creation, and exploring of multiple concepts in parallel, Integrate by intersection and Establish feasibility before commitment.
5. DISCUSSION As established from the reviewed literature, the majority of the published research on lean product design and development performance has basically been focused on the implementation of some aspects of lean practices and performance, where a few of these works have tried to link the lean product design and development process to the lean performance such as in the area of assessment and planning. Likewise, research on generic lean practices in the product development[18, 25, 39–42]has focused primarily on the performance of lean practice (processes) rather than on the relationships between practice performance and other system such as structural capacity of the practice. Other researchers concentrated on the financial aspect of the performance [43] and have not considered the relationship between these financial aspects and actual lean practice performance. However, it is expected that the explication of the evaluating conceptual model for the lean product design and development as the basis for measuring lean product design and development performance will encourage researchers to examine the relationships between the different lean practices in the model. Similarly, the model could serve as a support base for performance management and improvement efforts in the implementation of the different lean practices. It could also facilitate continuous learning, generation of systematic and rigorous findings ofimplementation of the lean product design and development, as well as addressing the confusion and inconsistency associated with the lean performance measurements.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
1097
[email protected]
Performance Model Formation for Lean Product Design and Development
6. CONCLUSION The focus of this study was to develop an evaluating conceptual model that can capture all aspects of the lean product design and development under a common platform and that can stand as a unifying evaluating model for the evaluation of all aspects of the lean product design and development process. The proposed evaluating conceptual model presented in this research work explicates the relationships between the lean product design and development process and the lean performance and serves as a guide for the development of strategies and research tools for monitoring the lean product design and development, as well as in the improvement of the product development process. The model will allow lean product development researchers and practitioners to effectively examine the relationship between the lean product design and development process and the lean performance. It will also facilitate continuous learning, the generation of systematic and rigorous findings of the implementation of the lean product design and development as well as contribute to the development of a science base for the lean product design and development performance system.
Conflict of Interest: None
REFERENCES [1]
Ansah RH, Sorooshian S, Mustafa S Bin, Duvvuru G. Advancing Towards Delay-Free Construction Project: A Review. In: Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management Detroit, Michigan, USA, September 23-25 Detroit, Michigan, USA: IEOM Society International; 2016, p. 744–51. http://ieomsociety.org/ieomdetroit/pdfs/252.pdf
[2]
Ansah HR, Sorooshian S, Mustafa S Bin, Duvvuru G. Lean Construction Tools. In: Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Detroit, Michigan, USA, September 23-25. Detroit, Michigan, USA: IEOM Society International; 2016. p. 784–93.
[3]
Ansah RH, Sorooshian S, Mustafa S Bin. Lean Construction: An Effective Approach for Project Management. J Eng Appl Sci. 11(3):1607–12. www.arpnjournals.com
[4]
Aikhuele DO, Turan FM. A Hybrid Fuzzy Model for Lean Product Development Performance Measurement. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng. IOP Publishing; 2016 Feb;114(1):12048.
[5]
Anvari A, Sorooshian S. Lean Manufacturing Tools. Kuantan, Malaysia: UMP Publisher, Kuantan, Malaysia.; 2014.
[6]
Anvari A, Zulkifli N, Yusuff RM. A dynamic modeling to measure lean performance within lean attributes. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. 2013;66(5–8):663–77.
[7]
Ansah RH, Sorooshian S. Effect of lean tools to control external environment risks of construction projects. Sustain Cities Soc. 32:348–56. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210670716307168
[8]
Behrouzi F, Wong KY. Lean performance evaluation of manufacturing systems: A dynamic and innovative approach. Procedia Comput Sci. 2011;3:388–95.
[9]
Bayou ME, de Korvin a. Measuring the leanness of manufacturing systems-A case study of Ford Motor Company and General Motors. J Eng Technol Manag - JET-M. 2008;25:287–304.
[10]
Bourne M, Neely A. Implementing performance measurement systems : a literature review John Mills and Ken Platts. Int J Bus Perform Manag. 2003;5(1):1–24.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
1098
[email protected]
Daniel O. Aikhuele, Richard Hannis Ansah and Shahryar Sorooshian
[11]
Karlsson C, Åhlström P. Assessing changes towards lean production. Int J Oper …. 1996;16(2):24–41.
[12]
Vinodh S, Chintha SK. Leanness assessment using multi-grade fuzzy approach. Int J Prod Res. 2011;49(772815469):431–45.
[13]
Wong WP, Ignatius J, Soh KL. What is the leanness level of your organisation in lean transformation implementation? An integrated lean index using ANP approach. Prod Plan Control. 2012 Apr;25(4):273–87.
[14]
Ray C, Zuo X. The lean index: Operational“ lean” metrics for the wood products industry. Wood fiber .2006;32(2):238–55.
[15]
Elnadi M, Shehab E. A Conceptual Model for Evaluating Product-service Systems Leanness in UK Manufacturing Companies. Procedia CIRP. Elsevier B.V.; 2014;22:281– 6.
[16]
[16]. Al-Ashaab A, Golob M, Urrutia UA, Gourdin M, Petritsch C, Summers M, et al. Development and application of lean product development performance measurement tool. Int J Comput Integr Manuf. 2015;(October):1–13.
[17]
Mohammadi A. Lean Product Development -Performance Measurement System. Gothenbg Gothenbg Univ. 2010;1–64.
[18]
Sopelana A, Flores M, Martinez L, Flores K, Sorli M. The Application of an Assessment Tool for Lean Product Development : An exploratory study in Spanish Companies. Int Conf Eng Technol Innov. 2012;1–10.
[19]
Al-Ashaab A, Shehab E, Alam R. The conceptual LeanPPD model. In: Proceedings of the 17th ISPE International Conference on Concurrent Engineering Krakow, Poland, September 6-10, 2010. 2010. p. 303–10.
[20]
Carulli M, Bordegoni M, Cugini U. An approach for capturing the Voice of the Customer based on Virtual Prototyping. J Intell Manuf. 2013;24:887–903.
[21]
[21]. Jurado MC. Visual Planning in Lean Product Development. Master Thesis. 2012;
[22]
[22]. Parry GC, Turner CE. Application of lean visual process management tools. Prod Plan Control. 2006 Jan;17(1):77–86.
[23]
[23]. Maksimovic M, Al-Ashaab A, Sulowski R, Shehab E. Knowledge visualization in product development using trade-off curves. In: IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management. 2012. p. 708–11.
[24]
Khan M, Al-Ashaab A. Towards lean product and process development. Int J Comput Integr Manuf. 2013;26(12):1105–16.
[25]
Al-ashaab A, Andino A, Summers M. Lean product development performance measurement tool. Proc 11th Int Conf Manuf Res Adv Manuf Technol XXVII 19-20 Sept 2013 Cranfield, Bedfordshire, UK. 2013;(September):19–20.
[26]
Echtelt F Van, Wynstra F. Managing supplier integration into product development: a literature review and conceptual model. Futur Innov Stud. 2001;1–22.
[27]
Petersen KJ, Handfield RB, Ragatz GL. Supplier integration into new product development: Coordinating product, process and supply chain design. J Oper Manag. 2005;23:371–88.
[28]
Petersen KJ, Handfield RB, Ragatz GL. A model of supplier integration into new product development. J Prod Innov Manag. 2003;20:284–99.
[29]
Kim BY, Kang BK. Cross-functional cooperation with design teams in new product development. Int J Des. 2008;2(3):43–54.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
1099
[email protected]
Performance Model Formation for Lean Product Design and Development
[30]
Cooper RG, Kleinschmidt EJ. Winning Businesses in Product Development: the Critical Success Factors. Res Technol Manag. 2007;50:52–66.
[31]
Sethi R, Al. &. Cross Functional Product Development Teams Creativity and Innovativeness of New Consumer Products. J Mark Res. 2001;XXXVIII(February):73– 85.
[32]
Corallo A, Laubacher R, Margherita A, Turrisi G. Enhancing product development through knowledge-based engineering (KBE): A case study in the aerospace industry. J Manuf Technol Manag. 2009;20:1070–83.
[33]
Stenholm D, Mathiesen H, Bergsjo D. Knowledge Based Development in Automotive Industry Guided by Lean Enablers for System Engineering. Procedia Comput Sci. Elsevier Masson SAS; 2015;44:244–53.
[34]
Verhagen WJC, Bermell-Garcia P, Van Dijk REC, Curran R. A critical review of Knowledge-Based Engineering: An identification of research challenges. Adv Eng Informatics. Elsevier Ltd; 2012;26(1):5–15.
[35]
Khan M, Al-Ashaab A, Doultsinou A, Shehab E, Ewers P, Sulowski R. Set-based concurrent engineering process within the LeanPPD environment. Adv Concurr Eng. 2011(July):433–40.
[36]
Raudberget DS. Enabling Set-Based Concurrent Engineering in Traditional Product Development. Proc 18th Int Conf Eng Des (ICED11), Vol 1. 2011;(August):45–56.
[37]
Aikhuele DO, Turan FM. Proposal for a Conceptual Model for Evaluating Lean Product Development Performance: A Study of LPD Enablers in Manufacturing Companies. 2Nd Int Manuf Eng Conf 3Rd Asia-Pacific Conf Manuf Syst (Imec-Apcoms 2015). 2016;114.
[38]
Allen Ward, Jeffrey K. Liker, John J. Cristiano DKSI. The second toyota paradox: how delaying decisions can make better cars faster. Sloan Manage Rev. 1995;36(January):43– 61.
[39]
Graebsch M, Seering WP, Lindemann U. Assessing Information Waste in Lean Product Development. Proc Int Conf Eng Des. 2007;(August):1–12.
[40]
Vladu MR, Dobre G, Miric RF. Application of the fuzzy logic in the evaluation of solution variants in the product development process. 1ssn 1454-234x. 2013;75(1).
[41]
Lolas S, Olatunbosun OA, Steward D, Buckingham J. Fuzzy Logic Knowledge Base Construction for a Reliability Improvement Expert System. In: Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2007 Vol I WCE 2007, July 2 - 4, 2007, London, UK. 2007. p. 2–7.
[42]
Badizadeh A, Khanmohammadi S. Developing a Fuzzy model for assessment and selection of the best idea of new product development. Indian J Sci Technol. 2011;4(12):1749–62.
[43]
Kaplan RS, Norton DP. The Balanced Scorecard-Measures That Drive Performance. Harv Bus Rev. 1992;70:71–9.
[44]
Singh M.P., Ramphool Meena and Avinash Panwar, A Survey on the Adoption of Lean Practices in Indian Manufacturing Sector, International Journal of Industrial Engineering Research and Development, 7(2), 2016, pp. 52–62.
[45]
P. Abhiram and SS. Asadi and A.V.S. Prasad, Implementation of Lean Methodology in Indian Construction. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 7(6), 2016, pp. 641–649.
[46]
M.Indira and M. Venkata Jyothsna An Approach to Effective Construction Management Based on Lean Construction Techniques Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(4), 2017, pp. 1954-1959
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
1100
[email protected] 
