A case study of accelerated product development

A CASE STUDY OF ACCELERATED PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

by

CHRISTINA MAHLOMPHO NOKUJABULA NCHAPHA

DISSERTATION

submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree

of

MAGISTER IN PHILOSOPHIAE

in

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT

in the

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

at the

UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG

SUPERVISOR PROFESSOR L. PRETORIUS

Johannesburg July 2005

C. N. Nchapha Page 1 29/07/2005

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am grateful to the Boeing Company which provided information crucial to finish my research. I am mostly grateful to Isaac Nkama and William. H. A. Knight Jr., of Boeing Africa, who were instrumental in getting this information.

To Professor Leon Pretorius who guided and supervised me throughout this exercise I am most grateful.

To my dear husband - Katleho, who has always been supportive and to my beloved two sons - Hlompho and Lebakae, I am eternally grateful.

Last but not least, to the rest of my family

I thank you all.


DECLARATION

I declare that this research project is my own, unaided work. It is submitted in

partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Philosophy in

Engineering Management, University of Johannesburg. It has not been

submitted before for any degree or examination in any other university.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT 9

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Problem Statement 10

1.2 Research Objective 11

1.3 Research Design 12

Chapter 2 NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

2.1 Introduction 14

2.2 Human-centred Product Development 15

2.3 Product Development Process 16

2.4 Improvement of Product Development Process 21

2.5 Advantages of Early Launch 24

2.6 Disadvantages of Delayed Market Entry 24

2.7 Summary 26

Chapter 3 CONCURRENT ENGINEERING

3.1 Introduction 28

3.2 Cross-Functional Teams 32

3.3 Effective Management 36

3.4 Technology 39

3.5 Summary 40

Chapter 4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

4.1 Introduction 42

4.2 Purpose of Evaluation 0 42

4.3 Research Method 43

4.4 Case Study 44

4.5 Questionnaire Development 46

4.6 Summary 48

C. N. Nchipha Page 4 29/07/2005

Chapter . 5 ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS

5.1 Introduction 49

5.2 Results and Feedback from the Questionnaire 50

5.3 Analysis of Results 53

5.4 Summary of Research Findings 58

Chapter 6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Conclusion

61

6.2 Recommendations

64

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES

Appendix Al : Company Assessment Questionnaire

Appendix A2 Answered Company Assessment Questionnaire

Appendix B: The Methods Matrix

Appendix C: The Dimension Map


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

APD Accelerated Product Development

CAD Computer Aided Design

CAM Computer Aided Manufacturing

CATIA Computer Aided Three-Dimensional Interactive Applications

CE Concurrent Engineering

CIM Computer Integrated Manufacturing

DBT Design Build Team

DFM Design for Manufacturing

IPT Integrated Product Team

MLT Manufacturing Lead Time

PDP Product Development Process

PDT Product Development Team

QFD Quality Function Deployment


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Product Development Process

Figure 2.2 Rapid Market Development - Sales and Market

Figure 2.3 Rapid Market Development — Return on Investment

Figure 2.4 Rapid Market Development — Multiple Projects

Figure 2.5 Revenue Loss due to Delayed Market Entry

Figure 2.6 Revenue Loss Every Month of Delayed Product

Figure 3.1 Concurrent Engineering Model

Figure 3.2 Sequential Versus Concurrent Product Development

Figure 3.3 Cross-Functional Design Teams

Figure 5.1 Dimension Map


LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Factors Facilitating Concurrent Engineering

Table 3.2 Traits Associated with Effective Leadership

Table 5.1 Results Gathered Using the Company Assessment Questionnaire

Table 5.2 Results Gathered Using the Methods Matrix


ABSTRACT

Product development is very important to the survival of an engineering

organisation. It therefore needs to be carefully managed and completed

within planned time and allocated resources. The main focus in this

dissertation is therefore investigating how time could be reduced in the

product development process.

• Customers are not always patient enough to wait for the "best" products

that are still being developed; they want products immediately and would

therefore choose the "next best" products available. Some customers are

willing to pay high prices to get exactly what they need as soon as

possible.

This study looks at how to accelerate the product development process

without sacrificing quality and product performance. The study also

investigates the case of development of a Boeing 777 commercial aircraft

and contrasts the Boeing product development process against the

product development theory. Boeing 777 is a globally well known

commercial aircraft that was designed in the record time. Investigating the

Boeing 777 product development process will provide good indicators of

approaches that are currently most applicable in the real world.


Chapter 1: Introduction and Research Proposal

1.1. PROBLEM STATEMENT

The user needs are ever-changing at a rapid pace and hence it is imperative

for an engineering company to be able to react rapidly, effectively and

responsively. The challenge of product development is that a long

development time may result in company's losing markets to competitors;

changing technology and most of all customer requirements may change

during the development phase thus forcing a change to products resulting in

cost overruns. Therefore a company must be able to reduce products' time to

market.

South Africa has just joined the global village after years of isolation. This

puts pressure on performance of engineering companies in the country. In the

global world it is even more challenging to develop, produce and put products

on the market rapidly and before the competition. It is the author's assertion

that the best way of judging the most appropriate theories and technologies to

assist in rapid and improvement of product development is to assess the

practices of a leading global companies e.g. Boeing Company.

Time is a resource that cannot be replaced if wasted; once spent it cannot be

recovered. According to George Stalk Jr. of Boston Consulting Group, the .


traditional paradigm for corporate success was to provide the most value for

the lowest cost [3]. The new paradigm is to provide the most value for the

lowest cost in the least amount of time. The business' success will be the

result of understanding customer needs, developing products that meet those

needs and bringing those products to markets as soon as possible at a fair

value. Customer needs, technology, time and the competitive environment

are not constant, they keep changing. This imbalance forces the product

development process to continue changing.

Failure to monitor time in the product development process may lead to

product failure. Organisations and customers want product success, and the

key to success is choosing the best products to develop at the right time. In

this context best products are products that satisfy customer need i.e. easy to

use, safe and reliable, meet produ ict specifications and quality requirements.

1.2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

The product development process is full of challenges. For an example, a

slower product development process may lead to lost market and changing

customer needs. On the other hand accelerated product development may

lead to increased risk of mistakes and failure of internal processes coping

with the faster development requirements. It is therefore crucial to balance

time, quality and cost.


The objective of this study is to determine the correct way of balancing the

following three: quality of the product, the right cost and the right time. To

achieve this objective the author examined how the Boeing Company, as an

example of a global company, balanced these three issues when producing

its Boeing 777 commercial aircraft. Boeing 777 is the plane that was

engineered in the shortest time relative to all planes engineered before it, at

the cost way below budget and it is a high quality product [25].

The author also investigates why increasing the speed of the product

development process is important and how it can be achieved without

necessarily sacrificing quality or increasing costs. There are numerous ways

to achieve accelerated product development, but the focus of this dissertation

is on the use of concurrent engineering.

1.3. RESEARCH APPROACH

This research document is divided into six chapters. The first chapter introduces

the research problem and objective of this study. The second chapter reviews the

theory of new product development. It looks at what product development is all

about. This study reviews the traditional product development process and

contrasts it with the customer focused product development process. The third

chapter discusses a detailed literature review on concurrent engineering and its

enabling technology. It addresses at the basic tenets and goals of concurrent

engineering. It reviews how to properly implement concurrent engineering. This


chapter also looks at cross-functional teams and how they benefit the product

development process. The procedures and methods followed to investigate the

problem are dealt with in chapter 4. Chapter 5 examines analyses and interprets

the results collected in the preceding chapter. In addition, the summary of results

is presented. Some concluding remarks are made, applicable recommendations

formulated and recommendations for future research stated in the last chapter.


Chapter 2: New Product Development

2.1. INTRODUCTION

The product development process is a challenging and difficult task, but if

managed well it can accelerate the development of any product. It should be

implemented only when sound decisions and plans have been made. A well-

managed product development process should result in a product that is

developed in the shortest period of time and still have the greatest benefit at

the lowest cost. According to Steven Eppinger and Karl Ulrich, the product

development process is a sequence of steps that transforms a set of inputs

into a set of outputs [6]. It turns an opportunity into a company's profits.

Products are developed to meet customer needs. Products should be

developed when there is:

A market demand;

Special customer request;

Business need;

Technological advance;

Legal requirements.

Before products can be developed, every proposal is analysed in terms of

profits and risks. Product proposals with the greatest return and the lowest

risk are typically selected for development. There will always be an element of


risk in product development, but organisations that are willing to take a

calculated chance stand to be successful.

Successful global companies focus on reducing the development period [15].

To achieve this companies involve the right personnel, as time cannot be

wasted through training of unskilled personnel. They also view and continually

improve their production development process to make sure that there is

control of resources and that the products are of high quality.

2.2. HUMAN-CENTRED PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

According to Lorsch and Lawrence, engineers are overenthusiastic about the

technical improvements their ideas offer and insufficiently responsive to what

the market wants and is willing to pay for [14]. Technology alone can no

longer drive product development, but with the inputs from customers

organisations can develop high quality products faster, more efficiently and

more effectively than competition. Human-centred product development [11]

is a process of product development that starts with users and their needs

rather than with technology. At its core, human-centred product development

requires developers who understand people and the tasks they wish to

achieve. It starts with a multidisciplinary team that includes representatives

from marketing, technology, and user experience. The goal is to understand

the users' true needs and what they care about. Then the drive is to compile,

refine, and analyze the observations to determine what the product might be,


what role it would play, what actions it should perform.. To understand the

users' true needs one has to go beyond the specifics of the product to

understand how it is to be used in the full context of a complete activity.

2.3. PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS: THREE PHASES

Product development is a process that begins with the identification of a need

and ends with a manufactured product that is accepted by the user. Stoll

argues that "the process proceeds from the abstract to the concrete [23]." The

product development process can be divided into three main phases, namely:

Research and Planning Phase;

Design Phase; and

Production and Support Phase

2.3.1. Research and Planning Phase

For the product development to occur, a business must have ideas for

new or improved products. These come from a variety of sources;

research and development, employees, competitors and customers.

Marketing tap this source of ideas by using focus groups, surveys and

analysis of buying patterns. The following steps or activities are typically

executed [15]:

Gathering the customer requirements

Preparing the preliminary product specifications

Assessing the primary alternatives and the feasibility of each

alternative


Product design, development, engineering, manufacturing, sourcing

and distribution strategy.

Developing the resources required and project schedule

Final preparation of product plan.

Figure 2.1 shows the product development process [11]. The research and

planning phase combines the inception or planning and pre-development or

concept development processes. It begins with the corporate strategy and

includes assessment of technology developments and market objectives. The

need of the target market are identified, alternative product concepts are

generated and tested.


Inception

Pre-development

New Product Opportunity

IF Project field

Need Identification

Project specification

Research and Planning Phase Idea Generation

Screened ideas

Feasibility Assessment

Project definition

roject Plannin

Specification & schedule

Creation

Development

1 Design Phase

Concept

Concept definition

Design

Detailed design

Prototype

Testing

Design verification

Development

Design definition

Modelling

Realisation Post-development Product Preparation

Pilot build

Product Introduction

1

Manufacture

Production and Support Phase Distribution

Project launch

Operation

Project feedback

Evaluation

Figure 2.1: The new product development process [11]


2.3.2. Design Phase

A clear mission statement which specifies the target group and business

goal should be in place. Alternative product concepts are generated and

evaluated. Concepts are selected for further modification. The design

process begins once the most appropriate concepts have been selected

and goes on to the building of the prototypes and the mock-ups; through

to testing and revision of prototypes. The design phase follows the

following iterative and overlapping activities:

Concept development and definition;

Design;

Design definition;

Building of physical mock-ups and prototypes;

Testing and design verification.

Figure 2.1 depicts the second phase as the design phase. This phase

involves the creation and development processes. It includes the system-

level design which is the definition of the product architecture and

decomposition of the product into subsystems and components; and the

detailed design which is the complete specification of the geometry,

materials and the tolerances of all unique parts and the identification of all

standard parts. This phase also involves the testing and refinement

process which involves the construction and evaluation of multiple

prototypes.


2.3.3. Production and Support Phase

In this phase the production process is finalised and implemented. The

pilot product is built. The purpose of building a pilot product is to work out

the remaining problems in the production process, and carefully evaluate

them to check for any faults. The steps from building a pilot product to full

production are usually implemented gradually to familiarise the workforce

with production of the new product and to learn about the performance of

that product. Once the pilot production has been completed, marketing

takes control in preparation for the launch of the product and coordinates

promotion before final release.

The final phase is the production and support phase. It includes the

production ramp-up process, which is building of the pilot in order to train

the workforce and to work out any remaining problems in the production

processes. These pilot products could be distributed to preferred

customers for evaluation and identification of remaining flaws. The product

can then be launched and become available for widespread distribution.

Finally as part of a continuous incremental product improvement,

evaluation of the product takes place to check whether the productivity

goals and objectives have been met. Customer feedback is the most

effective way for organisations to understand the market. It can be used to

make rapid modifications in the product offering and to make


improvements in future products. A clear example is the use of customer

feedback gathered from development and use of the B777 aircraft to

develop a new Boeing 7E7.

2.4. IMPROVEMENT OF PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

New product development success can be found in businesses that

continually improve their product development process. The advantages of

improving the product development process (PDP) are as follows: [20]

Faster product development, as opportunities are found to adapt the

development process to the specific needs of a project and to overlap

activities.

Higher-value products, because the link between the customer and the

feature set is shortened and strengthened over time.

Lower-cost products, as manufacturability decisions are made ever earlier

in the product design phase.

More products per rand, because superfluous, non-value-adding activities

are rooted out of the process.

More responsiveness to turbulence in markets, technologies and the

regulatory environment, due to a process that is built to continually adapt

to change.

Having the right product for sale and having a very effective PDP are some

of the greatest strategic advantages a company can have. The following

section discovers how PDP improvement can be done. Product development


process improvement may be summarized in the five basic steps listed

below:

Observe and understand your current process;

Document the current process for future reference;

Critically evaluate the current process and find ways for improving the

process;

Implement the improvement:

There must be a plan of action

People should be assigned responsibilities

Proper follow-up must be made to check that the new process is

used. The improved process must indicate a potential cost savings or

an improved quality that is at least large enough to pay for its cost.

After a certain period, the new process should be evaluated to check

whether it is functioning as intended.

2.5.ADVANTAGES OF EARLY LAUNCH

The product can yield a reasonable profit over its life cycle if it is successful.

Figure 2.2 shows that an early product launch can result in increased market

share and sales [11]. The biggest share of market can go to the business first

introducing new . products.


Sales

Extra period of mature sales

Increased market share

Early launch

Figure 2.2: Rapid Market Development — Sales and Market share [11]

A short manufacturing lead time (MLT) means less manufacturing time and

effort and therefore less cost. The shorter the MLT, the sooner the product

can be sold. A company can have an early repayment of investment as

illustrated by figure 2.3 below.

Time saved by early launch

Eavber repayment of investment

Figure 2.3: Rapid Market Development — Return on Investment [11]

Page 23 29/07/2005 C. N. Nchapha

A product that has a very long development period and low total cost may not

be desirable. On the other hand, accelerated product development may be

costly. It is therefore important to balance costs and time.

By speeding up product development, organizations free their resources for

other projects. Products that are developed and introduced in a timely manner

may result in spare (extra) time which can be used to design, develop and

launch other new products. This increases products on the market, thus

increase the income from the sales as can be inferred from figure 2.4 [11]

r4

Original product Second

product

Figure 2.4: Rapid Market Development - Multiple Projects [11]

2.6. DISADVANTAGES OF DELAYED MARKET ENTRY

Every market has an introduction phase, growth phase, maturity phase and a

decline phase. The aim is to introduce a product as early as possible in the


market growth phase. Figure 2.5 shows the loss a company can suffer by

bringing a product late in the market.

Figure 2.5: Revenue Loss Due to Delayed Market Entry [2]

Companies can use the following formula to calculate the percentage revenue

lost due to market delays [2].

d (3w — d) 2w2

Where d = delay

(2.1)

w = market window (12 months in this example)

Month Late Revenue Lost 1 12% 2 24% 3 34%

4 , 44% 5 54%

Table 2.1: Percentage Revenue Lost [2]

C. N. Nchapha

Page 25

29/07/2005

2 3

Time (Months)

1 5

60%

50% U)

_1

•

40%

g

•

30%

te 20%

10%

0%

I 0 Series1

From table 2.1 it can be seen that 54% of revenue may be lost due to a

delay of 5 months in market entry.

Figure 2.6: Revenue Loss every Month

Figure 2.6 shows revenue loss for every month the product is late. Quality,

cost and lead time are three major determinants of market share and profit.

These three attributes must be balanced. Consequences of late market entry

are big. Every month the company loses the potential profits.

2.7. SUMMARY

Increasing the speed of the product development process can enable the

business to develop many more new products than it did before. According to

Carter and Baker [3], businesses need to be able to respond rapidly, flexibly

and imaginatively as the pace of events are getting faster and faster and

opportunities opening up. Businesses must view product development

processes as their competitive strength and in this view; they can invest in


continually sharpening their process to provide a competitive edge as

technology, customer needs and business needs change.

It should however be noted that if each functional area works separately, that

is in silos, the production development process would be lengthened, thus

losing the competitive edge the organisation may have over the competition.

It is very important for different functional areas to work harmoniously

together. The next chapter focuses on concurrent engineering.


Chapter 3: CONCURRENT ENGINEERING

INTRODUCTION

Concurrent Engineering is a method that can be used to help achieve a rapid

product development process [23]. Susan Carlson and Natasha Ter-

Minassian define concurrent engineering as a design philosophy that seeks to

improve the quality and usability of products, improve customer satisfaction,

reduce costs, and ease the transition of a new product from design to

manufacturing [26]. It brings many relevant skills, working in parallel to

develop a new product. Participants from functions as marketing,

engineering, production, purchasing and quality control work together as a

team. They look for ways to develop a product that serves customers' needs,

is easier or less costly to manufacture and will have desirable quality levels.

Many businesses now recommend concurrent engineering and try to

understand and follow this new approach of doing a number of activities

simultaneously during product development. Figure 3.1 shows concurrent

engineering model that represents collaborative multifunctional team with the

unity of purpose.


Market Analysis

Product Design

Sales & Distribution

Manufacturing

Purchasing

Figure 3.1: The Concurrent Engineering Model [23]

One way of building products better (increasing value), cheaper (reducing

costs) and faster (reducing time) is through concurrent engineering. It is

therefore important for organizations to adopt an appropriate structure and

culture to enable concurrent engineering to take place. The term "Concurrent

Engineering" can have different scope and meaning in different industries.

The author's focus will be on internal and external partners working as a solid

team, from product conception through to completion of the development.

These teams work in parallel instead of in series, thus shortening the Product

Development Process cycle. The main reason for concurrent engineering is

to reduce time to market while improving quality, performance and reducing

life cycle cost.

The traditional sequential approach also known as the "over the wall"

approach has been used for a longer time in the development of products


[22]. This series of steps has been found to cause several faults on the final

products and to greatly increase time needed to successfully produce a new

product. Typically the marketing department identifies the need and throws

the idea for a new or improved product over the wall to the Design-

Engineering department. After the engineering staff has completed their

work, it then passes the design to manufacturing which would try to produce

the product. Only rarely does the product move into production without

design changes; this causes the product to move from design to

manufacturing several times before the final product is manufactured within

established quality levels. This method of designing does not encourage the

interaction between functional departments within the company, instead it

causes the "us versus them" mentality [22].

As a means to overcome these faults and delays, an improved approach

known as concurrent engineering was introduced. This approach focuses

attention on product development and production as the whole rather than the

individual segments. Its emphasis is the on going development process in

parallel with the development of the production processes.


Requirements definition

Product definition •

Concept Embodiment Detail

Production and distribution

Process definition

Errors, changes and corrections

Requirements IP-definition

1

Errors, changes

i and corrections

Product definition

Concept

Embodiment

Detail

.101

Process definition

4

Production and distribution

3.0

)01.4.1(

CE life cycle time Time saved

Figure 3.2 Sequential vs. Concurrent Product Development [21

Figure 3.2 illustrates clearly that the use of concurrent engineering reduces

development period. Development teams are cross-functional teams. There

is a tendency of people forgetting from which function the others come from

and instead rely on each other's individual expertise. A concise summary of

the basics of the concurrent engineering is provided in the following

subsections

3.1.1. Basic Tenets of Concurrent Engineering

Doing things simultaneously

Focusing on the process


Converting hierarchical organisations to teams

3.1.2. Basic Goals of Concurrent Engineering

Dramatic improvements in time to market and costs

Improvements to product quality and performance

Do more with less

3.1.3. Implementing Concurrent Engineering

The following steps may be followed in implementing concurrent

engineering:

Establish unified goals and a clear business mission;

Analyse the market and know the customer

Develop a detailed plan early in the project

Break the project into its natural phases and set milestones

Suppress individualism and foster a team concept

Transfer technology between individuals and departments

Establish and cultivate cross-functional integration and collaboration

Complete tasks in parallel as shown in figure 3.2

3.2. CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMS

Thomas Foster defines concurrent engineering as "the simultaneous

performance of product design and process design. Typically, concurrent

engineering involves the formation of cross-functional teams. This allows

engineers and managers of different disciplines to work together

simultaneously in developing product and process design." [8]


Rapid product development can be achieved if organisations have effective

management and leadership in place, use enabling technologies and having

skilled development teams. Accelerated product development requires the

input of specialists from different functions. An effective team does not

happen automatically, but needs real effort from management. These teams

need to be built up by combining people with complementary talents and to

be maintained by effective leaders and managers.

The organisation must be in a position to provide continuous training at all

levels in order to develop the kind of skills and knowledge needed for future

growth. Training is needed because people who don't know their work won't

know how to speed it up. Training increases an employee's self sufficiency.

As teams work together to push new products through production to market

they are able to produce high creativity that may not exist in a single

individual. A product team is formed by members from different functions.

Successful products depend upon exchange of knowledge between cross-

functional teams. Each function presents its views on the design thus saving

time as the design does not have to go serially from one function to the other.

Successful product development needs the input of specialists throughout

development life cycle. The use of different skills minimises changes, thus

reduces the time and costly corrections and greatly increases the speed at


which products are brought to market. Decisions about product design are

quickly made by consensus of the development team members.

Team selection is critical to the success of any project [16]. Skilled personnel

can be able to deal with complexities of design that change as technology

changes. Beside their skills, these members must show full commitment that

will enable them to successfully finish what has been started. The contribution

of development teams should not be of technical knowledge only, but

interpersonal skills are essential. Each member should be willing to initiate,

seek information, compromise and recognise the contribution of others.

Figure 3.3 shows different team members' contributions at the beginning of

product design phase. All functions are represented and work together from

inception till the end of production. Development teams facilitate non-linear

interactions instead of series of over-the-wall interactions. Through proper

communication channels, teams are able to break these walls within the

organisation [23].


Marketing 1. Marketing gathers customer needs to specify desired product

Industrial Design Product Engineering Manufacturing

2. Industrial design converts need into

product concept 3. Marketing evaluate concept and cha design specs. 5a. Marketing tests prototypes until satisfied

4.Engineering converts specs into prototypes

6. Engineering revises design to satisfy customer and manufacturing needs

5b.M an ufactu ri ng suggests design changes to better match process capability

Functional Boundaries

Figure 3.3 Cross-functional Design Teams [22]

7. Manufacturing creates man ufactu rable version using revised design specs.

Factors Benefit Early customer involvement •

•

•

Capture customer needs Integrate customer needs prior to design Clarify fuzzy end

Use of available design •

•

Use existing components and systems Reduce testing and validation

• Facilitate system integration Design build teams • Facilitate cross functional

coordination • Enhance process ownership • Reduce failure and rework • Initiate advance action to reduce lead

time Digital product definition • Provide a concurrent product

development environment • Minimize engineering changes • Use of intensive simulation tools • Support online working and

reworking

C. N. Nchapha

Page 35

29/07/2005

Balancing risks •

•

Modify new systems to eliminates possible failure Manage risks in critical systems

Service readiness • Train pilots and service engineers ahead of induction

• Create a pool of critical spares Controlling variants • Plan variants well in advance so as to

derive scope economies • Use design commonality

Table 3.1: Factors Facilitating Concurrent Engineering [19]

Table 3.1 summarises the number of approaches that facilitated the

concurrent engineering process as experienced by Boeing in development

of the Boeing 777.

3.3. EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP

Effective management and leadership ensure that product development

objectives are met by monitoring and measuring progress, taking corrective

action when necessary. To facilitate accelerated development, managers will

prepare a plan that shows all tasks that need to be done in parallel and

sequential ways. He will also prepare budget and schedule, select

appropriate people to design products, to get to know the customer, to make

sure that the proper manufacturing facilities and suppliers are available when

needed.

"A popular definition of leadership is the ability to transform vision into results

[4]". The main objective for management is to maximise the value of the

organisation. Leaders and managers need to recognise and cope with ever


changing technologies. These changes must be harnessed to produce

improved or new products. Management should be able to select the right

products to be developed and have the right people to design and

manufacture them.

The successful leader encourages working together to reduce product

development time. It is his/her responsibility to keep the product development

process on time, within budget, and up to specifications.

The responsibilities of an effective leader include [16]:

Maintaining direct contact with customers

Leading the team to achieve winning product concept

Having responsibility for specification, product concept, cost, and schedule

Having responsibility for ensuring that the product concept is accurately

translated into technical detail

Having frequent and direct communication with all stakeholders

The Leadership Traits

Personality Motivation Ability • High energy level • Socialised power • Interpersonal skills • Stress tolerance orientation • Cognitive skill • Self-confidence • Strong need for • Technical skill • Emotional maturity achievement • ' Persuasive skill • Integrity • Weak need of

affiliation

Table 3.2: Traits associated with effective leadership [23]


A leader sets a good example by having a positive outlook, enthusiasm,

taking initiative and trusting people. An effective leader should have a strong

personality, which includes emotional maturity and integrity, as can be seen

from table 3.2. He is able to encourage individual thinking which makes

everyone on the team to present their views. He encourages interchange of

ideas; motivates and persuades employees to give full cooperation

irrespective of their personal clashes, and the team to focus on achieving the

common goals. Effective leaders know when to use logic, when to make a

concession and when to extract one. They are skilful in creating clarity out of

confusion, ambiguity and uncertainty. They do not become defensive when

others disagree with them. They learn to get along with many different

characters and try to incorporate mutual respect, openness and trust into their

leadership style.

Accelerated product development may be achieved when engineering

management and leadership is recognised and highly valued in

technologically based engineering companies. "A good engineering manager

is distinguished from other good managers by the fact that he simultaneously

uses an ability to apply engineering principles and a skill in organising and

directing resources, people and projects"[15]. He must be the facilitator and

have a reasonably high level of technical knowledge in order to be able to

deal with product development. In addition, he needs to be sufficiently well


versed in the following topics; management, finance, marketing and

purchasing to be able to make right decisions.

3.4. TECHNOLOGY

New technologies are available and others are being developed, which if

properly applied, could speed up the product development. Managers must

remain alert to technological changes that give an opportunity to improve

products. The use of computers enables the products to be introduced

rapidly. It also enables product developers to reduce flaws on the designs.

Customers and teams are able to view models on computer and to offer

suggestions on changes to be made before further work could be done.

"Successful products must have designs that serve the function and that can

be manufactured satisfactorily and' economically [22]." Planning of design and

manufacturing is done concurrently on computers. It is for this reason, that

computer aided, design (CAD) and computer aided manufacturing (CAM) are

combined to make a totally integrated package. CAD is used to create

drawings and product models that assist in part designs, tool designs and

product specifications. These drawings and models are quickly and

accurately produced and they have higher quality than those traditionally

produced manually. The drawings on the computer can be easily modified to

meet necessary design requirements or changes. Potential problems can be

easily identified as designers can enlarge, reduce or rotate parts of drawings.


Computer aided manufacturing is used to directly control the processing

equipment or materials handling equipment or any processing equipment that

indirectly support manufacturing operations. CAD/CAM integration is

supportive to concurrent engineering programs, and forms an important

component of CIM (computer integrated manufacturing)."CIM is a concept of

linking and coordinating a broad array of activities in a manufacturing

business through an integrated computer system [22]."

CAD/CAM data base stores all information, drawings, bills of materials,

routings and any other necessary data. The information is in principle

accessible to all functions and mixed discipline functions, thereby ensuring

coordinated use of the latest product definition.

3.5. SUMMARY

Concurrent engineering involves early and constant interaction between all

functions. Development activities overlap and are parallel thereby shortening

the development cycle. Concurrent engineering is best implemented by using

a team approach, effective management and leadership. The backbone of

concurrent engineering programs is effective team infrastructure. The

contribution of each member is crucial to success of the project. The team

that works towards a common goal and that functions as a single unit is more

likely to achieve better solutions. This team should be lead by a facilitator who


is able to guide rather than direct. This leader must be able to maintain focus

from beginning of the project until its completion.

Product designers formerly had to build a mock-up to determine the exact

dimensions of a product and to identify any assembly problems that might

occur. Presently, they use computers to design products, thus reducing cost

of mock-ups and shortening development time.

If concurrent engineering is implemented correctly it can provide competitive

advantage, increase performance and quality, reduce development time,

lower production costs and produce products that are of higher utility and

value to the customer.

After understanding what the literature says about product development and

concurrent engineering, in the following chapter, the author discusses the

methodology and the procedure followed in investigating whether Boeing, as

an example of a leading engineering company adheres to the tenets of

concurrent engineering in its product development process.


Chapter 4: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION

4.1. INTRODUCTION

The literature review presented in chapters two and three was done to

assess other work done on concurrent engineering and product development.

This assisted the author to identify important issues relating to how some

businesses react to the challenges of new product development in the

increasingly competitive environment. This chapter focuses on the research

methodology and the data collection process for a case study on accelerated

product development and concurrent engineering.

4.2. PURPOSE OF EVALUATION

The study has been conducted because sequential product development is

no longer efficient. The new process, that is, concurrent engineering is

necessary because of product complexity and increase of market demands.

The study investigated concurrent engineering concepts and how they were

applied to shorten the product development process in the case of

development of Boeing 777.


4.3. METHODOLOGY

4.3.1. Use of interviews

The author has decided to use interviews in gathering data as this is a

case study. Only one company, Boeing, is being analysed in order to

understand the company's uniqueness and idiosyncrasy. Boeing is a

typical innovative engineering company that could use the tenets of

concurrent engineering in its product development process. Two members

of the senior management of Boeing in South Africa were interviewed in

order to grasp the company's vision and processes. Isaac Nkama,

Boeing's Director of Economic Affairs - Africa was interviewed to find the

company's vision and the management perspective of the company's

product development process. William H.A. Knight Jr., the company's

Director of Business Management was interviewed to find a clear

understanding of the company's product development process.

4.3.2. Use of Concurrent Engineering Assessment Tool

The author has decided to use the concurrent engineering assessment

tool that combines elements from other assessment tools, including the

Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute (SEI)

Assessment Questionnaire, the Department of Defence CALS/CE Task

Group For Electronic System Self Assessment, and the Mentor Graphics

Corporation Process Maturity Assessment Questionnaire [3]. This tool was

used because it helps to analyse the current product development


environment; to suggest a vision for the concurrent engineering

environment that assists products to flourish; and what a company needs

to do to bring the concurrent engineering dimensions into balance.

This tool consists of the company assessment questionnaire, the methods

matrix, the dimension map and the priority roadmap. The author has not

used the priority roadmap as the focus of this research is on the current

state of Boeing's product development environment and not the

company's concurrent engineering vision yet to be implemented.

The company assessment questionnaire is used to assess where the

company stands in terms of the four key dimensions (organisation,

communication infrastructure, requirements and product development) in

concurrent engineering. The methods matrix assists in determining

dimension by dimension and approach by approach, the concurrent

engineering methods that Boeing needed to develop Boeing 777

successfully. The dimension map assists to see the variances between

where the company was and where it should have been in each

concurrent engineering dimension.

4.4. CASE STUDY

Boeing was chosen as the case study because it is one of the leading

manufacturing companies in the world. Boeing has been the leading


commercial jetliners manufacturer for more than 40 years. Boeing's

production facility in Everett, Washington, is one of the major producers of

aircraft in the world market. In 1997, it merged with McDonnell Douglas to

form one company. The company has nearly 13000 commercial Jetliners in

service. It provides products and services to customers in 145 countries, and

continues to expand its product line and capabilities to meet emerging

customer needs. [25]

With the advent of globalisation, engineering companies are faced with

increasing challenge to produce high quality products faster and cost

efficiently. A good example would be production of information technology

and communication products like computers, cellular phones, etc. These

products have to meet increasingly complex and demanding needs of the

customers. There are five forces that continuously interact to disturb or

stabilise the environment in which engineering companies are doing

business, namely technology, tools, tasks, talent and time [18]. Boeing

manages these forces on a daily basis and is transforming them into

resources for product development. Its Boeing 777 jetliner meets the highest

standards of quality, was designed and developed in record time and the cost

was below budget.

Boeing was chosen in order to investigate how world class leading

engineering companies battle with the above mentioned challenges. This may


give an understanding of how companies implement the theories of product

development. The emphasis is on concurrent engineering as a tool that would

assist engineers to meet these challenges.

4.5. QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT

The questionnaire used here was taken from Donald E. Carter and Barbara

S. Bakers book Concurrent Engineering [3]. It is used to assess where the

company stands in terms of the current state of the company's product

development environment in relation to the four dimensions of concurrent

engineering, namely organisation, communication infrastructure,

requirements and product development.

4.5.1. Organisation

An organisation is made up of management and development teams.

Managers must create development teams and empower these teams

with authority and responsibility to make decisions. Managers also need to

support these teams with training, education and tools that allow the

company to adapt and meet each new challenge. Members of

development teams should be from every appropriate discipline. They

should allow a free exchange of information between traditionally separate

disciplines. They should also relish accepting responsibility and authority.


4.5.2. Communication Infrastructure

Communication infrastructure consists of equipment and software

(system) that facilitates transfer of information throughout the company. It

has to link people, ideas, specifications, processes and feedback.

Relevant information from management, development teams, customers

and product development processes have to be accessible and available

to team members as they need it.

4.5.3. Requirements

Requirements are all product attributes that affect customer satisfaction. A

business has to convert customer needs upfront to the definitions,

specifications and product designs. Customer requirements are used to

measure quality and progress in every activity of product development.

4.5.4. Product Development

The product development dimension includes all processes that link the

activities or designing and building what requirements specify. The

development process must integrate all disciplines: the design process,

the development and use of component libraries, and the continuing

optimisation of the development process. The knowledge gained during

the concurrent product development must be captured to enhance the

process, thus creating the environment of continuous change and

improvement.


4.6. Summary

A case study was done to investigate concurrent engineering concepts

and how they were applied to shorten the product development process

in the case of development of Boeing 777. Interviews were initially used in

gathering data. Two members of the senior management of Boeing in

South Africa were interviewed in order to grasp the company's vision and

processes. The concurrent engineering assessment tool that combines

the company assessment questionnaire, the methods matrix, the

dimension map and the priority roadmap was used to assess where

Boeing stands in terms of organisation, communication infrastructure,

requirements and product development. While the questionnaire was

filled by one manager, a number of employees were consulted and their

responses included in answering the questionnaire.

The reason for the case study was to find out how Boeing deals with the

five forces that continuously interact to disturb or stabilise the

environment in which engineering companies are doing business, namely

technology, tools, tasks, talent and time. The data gathered was analysed

in the following chapter.


Chapter 5: ANALSYS AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS

5.1. INTRODUCTION

The results of the questionnaire are represented in a table format which

indicates all affirmative, negative and no answer responses to the

questionnaire. In addition, all yes responses are shown on the dimension map

by black dot. A summary of each category is given. The results of the

methods matrix are also represented in a table format. The respondent had to

read the descriptions across from each key factor and put 'X' against each

description whose methods were necessary for successful development of

Boeing 777.

Only one respondent, the Director of Business Management at Boeing Africa,

filled out the questionnaire. As earlier noted, the author has decided to

undertake a case study of Boeing as an example of a typical engineering

company.


5.2. RESULTS AND FEEDBACK

5.2.1. Results and Feedback from the Questionnaire

The original and completed questionnaires are found in Appendix Al and

A2 respectively. Table 5.1 tabulates responses from the company

assessment questionnaire

Dimension Question Number of

questions

Number of "Yes"

responses

Number of "No"

responses

No Response

Organisation Team Integration

1— 4 4 4 0 0

Empowerment 5 —18 14 10 2 2 Automation Support

19 — 22 4 2 0 2

Communication Infrastructure

Product Management

23 — 30 8 8 0 0

Product Data 31 — 38 8 8 0 0 Feedback 39 — 42 4 4 0 0

Requirements Requirements Definition

43 — 50 8 8 0 0

Planning Methodology

51 — 54 4 4 0 0

Planning Perspective

55 — 58 4 3 0 1

Validation 59 — 62 4 4 0 0 Standards 63 — 66 4 4 0 0

Product Development

Component Engineering

67 — 70 4 4 0 0

Design Process

71 — 78 8 7 0 1

Optimisation 79 — 83 5 4 0 1 Total 83 83 76 2 7

Table 5.1: Results Gathered Using the Company Assessment Questionnaire

5.2.2. Results and Feedback from the Methods Matrix

The original methods matrix is found in Appendix B while responses are

shown here in Table 5.2


The Methods Matrix

Key Factors Task Approach

Project Approach

Program Approach

Enterprise Approach

Organisation Team Integration X Empowerment X Training & Education X Automation Support X

Communication Infrastructure Product Management X X Product Data X X X Feedback X X X

Requirements Requirements Definition X X X Planning methodology X X Planning Perspective X X Validation X Standards X

Product Development Component Engineering X X X Design Process X X X X Optimisation X X X X

Table 5.2: The Results Gathered Using the Methods Matrix

The Dimension Map

The dimension map helps to see the variance between where the

company is and where it should be in each concurrent engineering

dimension [3]. Figure 5.1 is created by compiling the assessment data

from both the questionnaire and the methods matrix.


Figure 5.1: The Dimension Map [3]

The questionnaire has 83 questions. The "yes" answers from the

questionnaire are transferred to the dimension map by blackening the

white dots under the corresponding question. All outermost blackened

dots are then connected. A circle is drawn where there is majority of

blackened dots.


5.3. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

5.3.1. Organisation Dimension

5.3.1.1. Team Integration (Questionl — 4)

The team integrates members from the range of stakeholders. These

members are from management, suppliers, manufacturing, purchasing,

customers, service and all the abilities. Requirements, specifications,

interdependencies and priorities of the product development are

understood by the enterprise team.

5.3.1.2. Empowerment (Question 5 - 18)

Customers, design teams and suppliers are involved in decisions

about product specifications. Greater authority and responsibility are

given to cross-functional teams. The teams select a leader from

amongst themselves, thus turf and territory are destroyed. Teams are

rewarded for both individual team member and the overall team

performances. This encourages team cohesion without compromising

individual creativity and innovation.

5.3.1.3. Automation Support (Question 19 - 22)

Synergism is encouraged and supported by top management. All

changes, agreements and contributions from affected engineering

disciplines are fully supported and integrated within the whole

enterprise. Documentation is strictly controlled because of government

regulation.


From the dimension map it is clear that the organisation dimension is in

balance at the enterprise approach, as shown by the line joining all the

outermost dots being on the enterprise approach. This can be witnessed

from Table 5.2 which shows 'X's under the enterprise approach. This

means that Boeing organisation of its employees focuses on teams that

understand the product development process. Teams and individuals

were given authority to complete the tasks. Teams and individuals were

also supported with appropriate training and necessary tools to efficiently

complete their tasks. From the filled questionnaire it can be seen that most

questions have been answered positively especially questions dealing

with the enterprise approach.

5.3.2. Communication Infrastructure

5.3.2.1. Product Management (Question 23 — 30)

There is excellent and established use of computers with sophisticated

software to coordinate and facilitate fast and accurate flow of data.

Data is readily accessible and electronic mail is available to each team

member.

Computer networks were used to facilitate coordination among the 238

design teams. All teams were immediately notified when a design

change made by any team would have an impact on their task. As

problems were identified they were resolved before the manufacturing


phase. CAD was used to link Boeing to all its suppliers and to track the

flow of all parts through the product process. They did not need to

concentrate on coordination as it was well done through the computer

information system.

5.3.2.2. Product Data and Feedback (Question 31 — 42)

Computer aided engineering (CAE) helps to link dispersed team

members. It also provides rapid communication that facilitates design

concepts and ideas to be analysed. All details are stored in a decision

database which is used for future reference.

From the dimension map, the filled questionnaire and the methods matrix

it can be seen that Boeing uses sophisticated communication

infrastructure that allows individuals and teams to access information and

manage employees, tasks, and the product development process.

5.3.3. Requirements

5.3.3.1. Requirements Definition (Question 43 — 50)

Customer expectations were determined and converted to established

documented customer requirements. Boeing conducted research

through its tour centre which was visited by approximately 110,000

visitors in one year. These visitors were passengers from all over the

world. These passengers were involved in design of the plane interior.

200 to 300 passengers took up the survey daily. All this information


was statistically analysed and formed the basis of customer

requirements that were used to formulate upfront definitions,

specifications and designs of the product. These requirements were

made accessible to all team members in order to assist them with

planning, evaluation or creation of the product specifications.

5.3.3.2. Planning Methodoloay and Perspective (Question 51 — 58)

Tasks were performed in parallel by as much as 238 teams at one

point in time. Trade-offs were considered that might have changed the

product technology, design architecture, or development-to-

manufacturing process. Costs, functionality and supportability of the

product were regularly measured and checked.

5.3.3.3. Validation and Standards (Question 59 — 66)

Using the designs specifications, the CAD system helps to create a

digitised mock-up of the aircraft to address all customer requirements

and to eliminate the need for paper drawing and a physical model.

Each of the thousands' of components of B777 was first engineered

and tested in virtual space by means of three dimensional CAD

technologies to make sure that everything fits together. If components

did not fit or had to be modified because of changing customer needs,

they were redesigned on the computer. The result is that designing

and building the aircraft take much less time than usual as interlocking

parts can be designed at the same time rather than one at the time.


From the filled questionnaire one can see that all questions were

answered positively, and from the methods matrix it can be evidenced

that the Boeing is adopting an enterprise approach to all key factors of

requirements except for validation which is at program approach.

Boeing accomplished this by having representatives of four B777

customers working side by side with Boeing designers and engineers

to ensure that their needs were incorporated in the design of the new

plane.

5.3.4. Product Development

5.3.4.1. Design Process and Component Engineering (67 — 78)

Emphasis was put on integrated, concurrent design of products and

their related processes. Data libraries, reviews and product

architectures were linked to decision support tool that assisted each

designer in making component selection. Effective and efficient

product development processes were optimised by distributing the

organisation's resources into design and process development. The

goal and objective was to optimise product and process improvement.

The B777 is the first airliner 100% designed using 3D solid modelling

technology. CATIA (computer-aided, three-dimensional interactive

application) is the software that was used. More than 2,200 CATIA

workstations networked to eight mainframe computing clusters


requiring 3 Terabytes (3,000,000,000,000) of data to store the

information were used [24].

5.3.4.2. Optimisation (Question 79 — 83)

Goals for product and process development were set. One of the goals

was to find directly from the gate mechanics the information they need

to service the plane. Customer requirements were evaluated

continuously so that the product development teams produced a basic

product to which features could be added. An example is the B777

interior which offers operators configuration flexibility. A typical B777

configuration_ takes as little as 72hours while such change might take

two to three weeks on other planes.

5.4. SUMMARY OF RESEARCH FINDINGS

The building of a B777 requires above 132,500 engineered unique parts and

over 3million fasteners. Boeing worked with 238 design teams and about 900

suppliers that make and provide parts. The decision to procure parts from

numerous suppliers was made considering that these suppliers are the best

in the world, and doing business with them assisted the company to reduce

time and produce a high-quality airplane. The challenge was to design each

part so that everything fits perfectly together and works when the plane is

assembled. A change in the design of any part would cause a change in

many other related parts. Boeing launched a computer aided design (CAD)

program in 1989 in order to avoid costly redesigns. The company has been at


the forefront of development of CAD. In 1990 B777 was the first airliner to be

designed entirely by computer. CAD has been found to have the following

advantages:

Improvement of the quality of airplane designs

Components that fit together

Cut off expensive mock-ups

Shortening of development

Using the designs' specifications, the CAD system helps to create a digitised

mock-up of the aircraft and eliminates the need for paper drawing and a

physical model. Each of the thousands of components of B777 was first

engineered and tested in virtual space by means of three dimensional CAD

technologies to make sure that everything fits together. If components did not

fit, they were redesigned on the computer until they did. The result is that

designing and building the aircraft take much less time than usual as

interlocking parts can be designed at the same time rather than one at the

time.

A theme that runs throughout the case study is the Boeing 777, the most

innovative and technologically advanced airplane in the world. The B777 is

available in five models: The 777 — 200, a larger 777 — 300, a 777 — 200 ER,

777 — 300 ER (Extend Range), as well as two new longer — range models 777

— 200 LR. The goal for 777 programme was to reduce costs by 25%; defects

by 50%; and order — to delivery time by half, to six months. The B777 team .


achieved the actual reduction of defects by 75 — 80% thus surpassing the

target by a huge margin; and delivery time was achieved in a record time.

Products that fail when they reach the market do so because they are

designed with little or no customer involvement. Boeing 777 program has

been a great success because customers, suppliers and cross-functional

teams within Boeing worked together as one solid team. The use on

concurrent engineering methodology and technology resulted in B777 being

developed in less (record) time, at lowest cost and has met the highest quality

standard.


Chapter 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1. CONCLUSION

An organisation's success is determined by the capacity of its management to

formulate the vision of concurrent engineering and the ability to rally every

staff member around this vision. Management has to also be able to create

the environment that would foster concurrent engineering. This could be done

by creating and empowering product development teams. Members of these

teams have to be from every discipline and stakeholder. These cross-

functional teams should be given the authority to make decisions on product

development and the responsibility for working on it. Management has to

support these teams with training and education, and other resources.

Successful product development companies should possess the

communication infrastructure that would enable sharing of information and

knowledge among the members of the development teams. The

communication infrastructure should be able to track the decision process,

monitor and evaluate the progress and the quality of the decisions, track the

problems associated with product development, and maintain links with

external sources of information. This system should also be able to store

knowledge in the form of reference materials that can be accessed easily.

This knowledge should be updated as the development process unfolds.


In implementing concurrent engineering efforts should be made to satisfy

customers and exceed their expectations. The product teams have to broadly

describe a product by how it will behave in the environment. The product

team should also specify the product design constraints. The next step is to

create a list of detailed requirements against which the product would be

measured and validated. This could be done by thinking of each requirement

in terms of specific product behaviours. The team has to also understand how

the product should respond to and recover from errors. Finally the teams

must continuously think about how the components interact and how they

could be integrated and tested. It is important to note that these processes

should be initiated during the initial definition phase and throughout the entire

development process. Concurrent engineering gives a greater chance of

meeting customer needs by quickly redesigning products as customer

requirements and technology changes.

A best engineering company is the one that gives attention to how a product

is developed in order to have a good design and a timely product. It is

therefore important to note that at the centre of a product development and

the design process is a good design. A good design should reflect the

customer needs in a product. It is based on the company's engineering

requirements such as quality, development in time and cost considerations.

The use of existing databases and component libraries are key to designing

new products as the design process does not have to start from the scratch.


This speeds up the design process while improving reliability as previously

designed and tested products are used. Continuous evaluation of customer

requirements and the use of information that flows through the concurrent

engineering environment can indicate how to improve a product and its

development process.

Concurrent engineering has had a significant impact on the quality and

development cycle of products in large corporations. Scrap was reduced by

58% and rework by 29% at McDonnell Douglas, for example, while Boeing

gained a parts and material lead time reduction of 30% and AT&T

experienced a reduction in product defects of 30% [13].

It is very important for South Africa to learn how international companies

accelerate and succeed with their product development and to adopt these

processes. During the ten years of democracy, South Africa has joined the

international world and competition and opportunities are presenting

themselves to South African companies. Adopting proper use of concurrent

engineering procedure will enhance companies' competitive edge. The four

basic principles of concurrent engineering that flow throughout this research

are;

Do tasks simultaneously

Use tried and tested technology

Use cross functional teams


• Involve the customer as early as possible in the development process

and throughout the development process.

The implementation of these basic principles will minimise multiple design

errors, corrections and changes. Thus, increasing the quality of products, the

speed at which products are brought to the market while reducing the cost of

development of these products.

6.2 RECOMMENDATION

6.2.1 Technology and Reliability

If in future computer models can be built that can totally simulate the real

plane's behaviour will ensure that optimum reliability can be achieved,

engineers will be able to analyse possible engine failures and other

problems that may occur. Solutions would then be sought to prevent the

problem before it can even occur. It is therefore recommended that

business invests in new improved technology that would enhance

reliability testing of new products.

6.2.2 Product Development

Product development is a flexible process. It depends directly on customer

demands and technology. As time changes successful organisations

improve their product development process. They empower their

employees through motivation and training. They also change the way

they have been doing things, and look for new ways of improving their


methods of developing the products. It is then recommended that

business focus continually on ways to improve their product development

processes for enhanced productivity.

6.2.3 Concurrent Engineering Methodoloay

Organisations must take the opportunity to understand all the

components of concurrent engineering and integration tools. They should

be able to identify what is required for effective implementation.

Concurrent engineering is a broad topic with numerous attributes and can

be used effectively to shorten new product development life cycles.

6.2.3 Future Research

Future research could be extended to how principles of concurrent

engineering approach to product development could be adopted and

applied to any business especially small and medium enterprises.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Armstrong S.C. Engineering and Product Development Management: The

Holistic Approach. Cambridge University Press, 2001.

Browne J. and Mc Mahon C. Principle, Practice and Manufacturing

Management. Addison - Wesley Publishing Company, 1998

Carter E.D. and Baker S.B. Concurrent Engineering: The Product

Development Environment For The 1990's. Addison - Wesley Publishing

Company, 1992.

Clerand D. The Field Guide to Project Management. John Wiley & Sons,

1998.

Coombs C.F. Jr., Ireson G.W. and Moss R.Y. Handbook of Reliability

Engineering and Management. The McGraw - Hill Company, 1996.

Crawford C.M. New Products Management. Irwin McGraw Hill, 1997.

Eppinger S.D. and Ulrich K.T. Product Design and Development. The

McGraw - Hill Companies, inc., 2000.

Foster S. Thomas Managing Quality: An Integrative Approach. Upper Saddle

River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2001.

Fraidoon Mazda, Engineering Management. Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.,

1998.

George Stalk Jr. and Thomas M. Hout, Competing against Time: How Time

Based Competition is Reshaping Global Markets. Free Press, New York,

1990.


Groenewald J.P. Social Research: Design and Analysis. University of

Stellenbosch Publishers, 1989.

Jones Tim. New Product Development: An Introduction to a Multifunctional

Process. Butterworth — Heinemann Ltd, 1997.

Lake J. Implementation of Multi-Disciplinary Teaming. Engineering

Management Journal 4(2): 913, 1992

Lawrence P.R. & Lorsch J.W. Organising for Product Innovation. Harvard

Business Rev., volume 43 January- February, 1965.

Lock Dennis, Handbook of Engineering Management. Butterworth —

Heinemann Ltd, 1993.

Magrab E.B. Integrated Product and Process Design and Development: The

Product Realization Process. CRC Press LLC, 1997.

Norman, Donald A. The Invisible Computer. MIT Press, Cambridge MA,1998

Prasad B. Concurrent Engineering Fundamentals. Vol.1 Page167: Integrated

Product Development. Prentice Hall, 1996.

Sharma K.J. And Bowonder B. The Making of Boeing 777: A Case Study in

Concurrent Engineering. International Journal of Manufacturing Technology

and Management 2004, Vol. 6, Numbers 3 and 4,

Smith Preston G. Your Product Development Process Demands Ongoing

Improvement. Research - Technology Management March — April, 1996.

Smith, Preston G. and Donald R.G, Developing Products in Half the Time.

van Nostrand Reinhold New York, 1995.


Stevenson W. Production Operations Management. Irwin McGraw — Hill,

1999.

Stoll H.W. Product Design Methods and Practices. Marcel Dekker, /nc.1999

Yukl Gary. Leadership in Organisations. Prentice Hall, 1994

"The Boeing 777 Family: The Most Technologically Advanced Airplane in the

World" www.boeing.com/commercia1/777family/flash.html . 14/09/2004

Carlson S. E. and Ter-Minassian N. (1996): "Design: Planning for Concurrent

Engineering" http://www.devicelink.com/mddi/archive/96/05/023.html, 3/01/05.


Appendix At

QUESTIONNAIRE [3]

This part of the company assessment questionnaire explores where your company

presently stands in terms of the key factors that characterise the organisation dimension

in the concurrent engineering.

Team Integration

Were the specifications and priorities for the assigned tasks understood by the

individuals? M

Was the product development process understood by each single-discipline team? M

Were the common vocabulary, priority and purpose established for mixed-discipline

product development team?

Were the requirements, specifications, interdependencies, and priorities of the product

understood by the enterprise team?M

Empowerment .

Were design decisions made by supervisors and managers? M

Were design decisions made by the single-discipline team? M

Were design and trade-off decisions made by mixed-discipline team?N

Do representatives from the enterprise team (which include customers and third party

vendors) responsible for the system design specifications? M

Were individuals responsible for scheduling and then completing their tasks on time

and responsible for the outcome of their tasks? M

Was the single-discipline team responsible for development and engineering

specifications and their correlation to interdependent specifications?N s

Was the mixed-discipline team responsible for program-wide specifications,

scheduling, and correlation to requirements? Y

Was an enterprise team (which include customers and third party vendors)

responsible for the system design specifications? . M

Do you reward individuals for their contributions? M E


Do you reward teams for their contributions? M

Was adequate training provided for each individual on the procedures, tools, and

standards he/she should use? M

Does the single-discipline team have adequate cross discipline awareness regarding

procedures, tools, and standards? M

Was adequate team effectiveness training provided for the Mixed-discipline team

members? M

Was adequate team effectiveness training provided for the enterprise team members

(including the customer and third-party)? M

Automation support

Were the tools for each discipline provided as stand-alone tools? M

Were centralized tools provided for the single-discipline team? M

Were the tools for each individual integrated within the mixed-discipline team? MI

Were the tools for each individual integrated within the enterprise team (including

any vendor-supplied parts or assistance being available on-line)? MI

Please comment:


This part of the questionnaire explores where your company stands in terms of the key

factors that characterise the communication infrastructure dimension in a concurrent

engineering environment.

Product Management

Were electronic mail capabilities available to each individual? M

Were query and online reporting capabilities available to each individual?

Were interactive product data browsers available to each individual? ly Was decision support available to each individual? M g Were technical reviews and inspections conducted at the appropriate milestones? M

Was disciplined and consistent product management used for a project effort? M

Was there a communication path between all aspects of project management and

system requirements? M

Were managers and interdependent project teams automatically and concurrently

informed of problems and their status? iy

Product Data

Was product development data controlled by the individual? M

Do individuals on the single-discipline team have access to all the product

development data related to their discipline? iy Do individuals have electronic access to the product development data related to the

different disciplines involved in product development? Y Do individuals and teams have electronic access to company-wide product

development data that includes data from customers and third-party vendors? M IN1

During the development process, Were the product development specifications and

designs utilized and documented in an established manner? yi Was the product development data stored, controlled, changed, and versioned in a

similar or common computer database? M


Was the data in the product development database interoperable among the various

design automation tools? M

Were evolving product requirements, specifications, and development data under

automatic change and versioning controls? ty

Feedback

Were problems analyzed as to their root cause and then corrected? IM

Were problem reports logged, prioritized, scheduled for correction (or rejected), and

tracked until the problems were corrected? M

Were action items, problems reports, and enhancement requests stored in a decision

database and then used as indicators for customer satisfaction? M

Were the trends of action items, problem reports, enhancement requests, and all other

decisions analyzed to continuously improve the product development process? M

Please comment:


This part explores how your company handles the key factors that characterise the

requirements dimension in a concurrent engineering environment.

Requirements Defmition

Were customer expectations determined and converted to established, documented

customer or marketing requirements? IY

Was the customer or marketing requirements partitioned into established, documented

functional specification? M

Was there traceability from the individual functional specifications back to customer

or marketing requirements? M

Can the enterprise team access the customer or marketing requirements as part of

decision support? M

Were internally imposed expectations determined and converted to established,

documented product life cycle (PLC) specifications? M

Were the internal requirements partitioned into established, documented PLC

specifications? M

Was there traceability from the individual functional specifications back to the PLC

requirements? M

Can the enterprise team access the PLC requirements as part of decision support? M

Planning methodology

Was there a button-up design process in which all individuals contribute to the

planning, evaluation, or creation of the product or functional specifications? M

Was there a top-down design process in which customer, product, or system design

requirements lead to documented specifications for the functional subsystem design?

Was it required that the mixed-discipline team consider tradeoffs that may change the

product technology, design architecture, or development-to-manufacturing process?

RI SI


Do the product requirements and system design requirements lead to interrelated

tasks and process? M


Do individuals document short-term planning prior to the start of task? M

Does your company require documented long-term planning product? RI Does your company use multi-phased, multi-year planning methods for each product

family? M

Does your company measure best-value product designs for cost, functionality,

fitness for use, reliability, performance, and supportability? MI

Validation

Were the individual functional subsystem specifications validated according to the

customer requirements? M

Were the discipline-specific requirements validated according to the customer

requirements? MI

Were the mixed-discipline and process requirements validated to the customer

requirements? M

Were interactive methods used to monitor and warn the enterprise team when a

requirement mismatch occurs? M

Standards

Does your company have a mechanism to monitor compliance with applicable design

standards? M

Does your company use design standards to ensure product reliability?

Does your company use design standards to ensure product testability,

• manufacturability, supportability, and usability? M

Does your company regularly review and improve its design standards? M

C. N. Nchapha Page. 74 29/07/2005

Please comment:

This part of the company assessment questionnaire explores how your company handles

the key factors that characterise the product development dimension.


Were individuals responsible for the development of their own components and

component libraries? M

Were company-wide standards used to represent the component data? M

Was a single library system used to manage the component data of all the different

disciplines involved? M

Was the library system database linked to a decision support tool to assist each

designer in making component or unit selections? M

Design Process

Were design process specifications methodically documented so that function-

specific designs (system, software, hardware, or mechanical) were both repeatable

and consistent? M


Was deterministic analysis used to measure how well the product functions-for

example, logic, simulation, for gauging functionality, fault simulation for determining

the ability to detect failure, analogue simulation for verifying parameters, finite

element analysis for measuring mechanical tolerances? M E

Was there adequate evaluation of the reuse and shared use of product technology and

product design units? M

Were adequate methods used to integrate the product and process? M

Was information extracted from the physical design (back-annotated) to perform

more detailed analyses of the product features and process?

Were analysis methods used to account for downstream process, such as cost,

testability, reliability, manufacturability, and supportability at the conceptual or

detailed design stage? M

Were the computing environment and the product development tools interoperable for

all discipline? M

Were decision support and process management systems in use? M

Optimization

Were the goals for product and process improvements? M

Were major project decisions and the factors leading to the documented, distributed,

and analyzed for guidance on other projects? M

Were process modelling and simulation tools used in planning and improving the

design process? M

Were product designs, development processes, requirements, and tools concurrently

analyzed and continuously improved as part of a company-wide optimization

strategy? M

Was a supplier qualification program used to select third-party vendors for products

or tools?


Appendix A, COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE

This part of the company assessment questionnaire explores where your company

presently stands in terms of the key factors that characterise the organisation dimension

in the concurrent engineering.

Team Integration

Were the specifications and priorities for the assigned tasks understood by the

individuals? M

Was the product development process understood by each single-discipline team? RI

Were the common vocabulary, priority and purpose established for mixed-discipline

product development team? IM

Were the requirements, specifications, interdependencies, and priorities of the product

understood by the enterprise team? M

Empowerment

Were design decisions made by supervisors and managers? M

Were design decisions made by the single-discipline team?

Were design and trade-off decisions made by the mixed-discipline team?N

Do representatives from the enterprise team (which include customers and third party

vendors) responsible for the system design specifications? M

Were individuals responsible for scheduling and then completing their tasks on time

and responsible for the outcome of their tasks? M

Was the single-discipline team responsible for development and engineering

specifications and their correlation to interdependent specifications? E

Was the mixed-discipline team responsible for program-wide specifications,

scheduling, and correlation to requirements?N

Was an enterprise team (which include customers and third party vendors)

responsible for the system design specifications? M

Do you reward individuals for their contributions? M

Do you reward teams for their contributions? y


Was adequate training provided for each individual on the procedures, tools, and

standards he/she should use? M

Does the single-discipline team have adequate cross discipline awareness regarding

procedures, tools, and standards? M

Was adequate team effectiveness training provided for the Mixed-discipline team

members? M

Was adequate team effectiveness training provided for the enterprise team members

(including the customer and third-party)? M

Automation support

Were the tools for each discipline provided as stand-alone tools? SI

Were centralized tools provided for the single-discipline team?

Were the tools for each individual integrated within the mixed-discipline team?

Were the tools for each individual integrated within the enterprise team (including

any.vendor-supplied parts or assistance being available on-line)? M

Please comment: The concept and design are preliminary until all the various teams and

the customers provide input. At that time a Preliminary Design Review is conducted. All

changes and agreements are documented and signed off. The next step is a Critical

Design Review. At that time all the design is signed off and changes are

minimal.


This part of the questionnaire explores where your company stands in terms of the key

factors that characterise the communication infrastructure dimension in a concurrent

engineering environment.

Product Management

Were electronic mail capabilities available to each individual? M

Were query and online reporting capabilities available to each individual?

Were interactive product data browsers available to each individual? y Was decision support available to each individual? M

Were technical reviews and inspections conducted at the appropriate milestones? M

Was disciplined and consistent product management used for a project effort? M

Was there a communication path between all aspects of project management and

system requirements? M

Were managers and interdependent project teams automatically and concurrently

informed of problems and their status?

Product Data

Was product development data controlled by the individual? M

Do individuals on the single-discipline team have access to all the product

development data related to their discipline? M

Do individuals have electronic access to the product development data related to the

different disciplines involved in product development? Y

Do individuals and teams have electronic access to company-wide product

development data that includes data from customers and third-party vendors? M

During the development process, Were the product development specifications and

designs utilized and documented in an established manner? M

Was the product development data stored, controlled, changed, and versioned in a

similar or common computer database? M

Was the data in the product development database interoperable among the various

design automation tools? M


Were evolving product requirements, specifications, and development data under

automatic change and versioning controls? M

Feedback

Were problems analyzed as to their root cause and then corrected? IM

Were problem reports logged, prioritized, scheduled for correction (or rejected), and

tracked until the problems were corrected? M

Were action items, problems reports, and enhancement requests stored in a decision

database and then used as indicators for customer satisfaction?

Were the trends of action items, problem reports, enhancement requests, and all other

decisions analyzed to continuously improve the product development process? M

Please comment:

Government regulations require that all documentation is strictly controlled.

This part explores how your company handles the key factors that characterise the

requirements dimension in a concurrent engineering environment.

Requirements Definition

Were customer expectations determined and converted to established, documented

customer or marketing requirements? M

Was the customer or marketing requirements partitioned into established, documented

functional specification?


Was there traceability from the individual functional specifications back to customer

or marketing requirements?

Can the enterprise team access the customer or marketing requirements as part of

decision support? M

Were internally imposed expectations determined and converted to established,

documented product life cycle (PLC) specifications?

Were the internal requirements partitioned into established, documented PLC

specifications? M

Was there traceability from the individual functional specifications back to the PLC

requirements? M

Can the enterprise team access the PLC requirements as part of decision support? MI

Planning methodology

Was there a button-up design process in which all individuals contribute to the

planning, evaluation, or creation of the product or functional specifications? M

Was there a top-down design process in which customer, product, or system design

requirements lead to documented specifications for the functional subsystem design?

Was it required that the mixed-discipline team consider tradeoffs that may change the

product technology, design architecture, or development-to-manufacturing process?

Do the product requirements and system design requirements lead to interrelated

tasks and process?


55: Do individuals document short-term planning prior to the start of task? M

Does your company require documented long-term planning product? M

Does your company use multi-phased, multi-year planning methods for each product

family?


Does your company measure best-value product designs for cost, functionality,

fitness for use, reliability, performance, and supportability? M

Validation

Were the individual functional subsystem specifications validated according to the

customer requirements? M

Were the discipline-specific requirements validated according to the customer

requirements?

Were the mixed-discipline and process requirements validated to the customer

requirements?

Were interactive methods used to monitor and warm the enterprise team when a

requirement mismatch occurs? M

Standards

Does your company have a mechanism to monitor compliance with applicable design

standards?

Does your company use design standards to ensure product reliability?

Does your company use design standards to ensure product testability,

manufacturability, supportability, and usability? Mi

Does your company regularly review and improve its design standards? MI

Please comment:


This part of the company assessment questionnaire explores how your company handles

the key factors that characterise the product development dimension.


Were individuals responsible for the development of their own components and

component libraries? M

Were company-wide standards used to represent the component data? MI

Was a single library system used to manage the component data of all the different

disciplines involved? M

Was the library system database linked to a decision support tool to assist each

designer in making component or unit selections?

Design Process

Were design process specifications methodically documented so that function-

specific designs (system, software, hardware, or mechanical) were both repeatable

and consistent?

Was deterministic analysis used to measure how well the product functions-for

example, logic, simulation, for gauging functionality, fault simulation for determining

the ability to detect failure, analogue simulation for verifying parameters, finite

element analysis for measuring mechanical tolerances? MI

Was there adequate evaluation of the reuse and shared use of product technology and

product design units? M

Were adequate methods used to integrate the product and process? M

Was information extracted from the physical design (back-annotated) to perform

more detailed analyses of the product features and process? MI

Were analysis methods used to account for downstream process, such as cost,

testability, reliability, manufacturability, and supportability at the conceptual or

detailed design stage? MI

Were the computing environment and the product development tools interoperable for

all discipline?


Were decision support and process management systems in use?

Ontimization

Were there goals for product and process improvements? M

Were major project decisions and the factors leading to then documented, distributed,

and analyzed for guidance on other projects?

Were process modelling and simulation tools used in planning and improving the

design process? MI

Were product designs, development processes, requirements, and tools concurrently

analyzed and continuously improved as part of a company-wide optimization

strategy?

Was a supplier qualification program used to select third-party vendors for products

or tools? M


M. P

hil (

Eng

inee

ring

Man

agem

ent)

t E sa. =— 0 4, a. >

s"'

E U 0 C-)

cr.

`4■4 cf1

O

ch

U a) r..) a> v

at° I

0 >,

E g E 6

•

-

O0 0

G. . rn

C.) CA 0 V • -0 tin

,-4, C.) CC

tu En

+.■ ci)

•

COc0) CZ 6) bi) RS -e•-'

C•1■1 ° 4 0

a> O „ U at

c).; ›, 0 E cn

bi) V0 z

a) w) at

E ° -

•

5

2

•

E 0 a)

0 t--: a>

bk 'fl

-0 a> 0 2

gr-1

O

•

0.)

0 9, :..., co t El 0 o E. 0

.ot cn

M. P

hil (

Eng

inee

ring

Man

agem

ent)

M. P

h il (

Eng

inee

ring

Man

agem

ent)

h 00 w 00 al

0-4

C. N

. Nch

apha

M. P

hil (

Eng

inee

ring

Man

agem

ent)

00 00 a) by cci

gt4

Plea

se g

ive

com

men

ts (

if an

y).

C. N

. Nch

apha

M. Phil (Engineering Management)

Appendix C

The Dimension Man [3]


Documents

A case study of accelerated product development