LECTURE ONE: INTRODUCTION

After this lecture you should understand the following:

Stages in the life cycle of a product
Characteristics of global competition
Characteristics' of a competitive product
Role of research and development in the design of products
Factors influencing forward move of a product

1.0 The life cycle of a product

With customer requirements changing over time, demand for particular product eventually falls and the organization
should stop making it (e.g. computer software - upgraded every year, motor vehicles modified year after year). As a
result almost all products have a limited life span. Demand for most products follows a standard life cycle. This has five
stages as shown in Figure l .1

Figure 1.1

Life cycle of a product

I - Introduction
A new product appears on the market and demand is low while people learn about it, try it and see if they like it (e.g.
colour photocopiers, colour laser printers etc), at this stage the marketing department has a task of promoting the product
and ensuring that sales growth begins.

II - Growth
New customers buy the product and demand rises quickly (i.e. the new product is accepted by the market and
experiences exponential growth. During this period however, competitors will have observed the success of the new
product and this stimulates them to produce their own competing design.

III-Maturity
Most potential customers know about the product and are buying it in steady numbers. Demand stabilizes at a constant
level for instance motor vehicles, colour televisions sets.

IV-Decline
Sales fall as customers start to buy new alternative products that become available.

V- Withdrawal
Demand declines to the point where it is no longer worth to make the product (e.g. black and white television sets, three
wheel cars.
Global competition
Up until the 60s when international competition was less fierce, product design from both the technological and
operations point of view was relatively simple. Engineers designed what they felt the customer needed. They had the
notion that the customer was not part and parcel of the design process. With time the scale of human activities has
1

multiplied many fold bringing with it enormous business opportunities. This naturally provoked competition among
manufacturers, forcing design to be customer driven.
Many manufacturers in developed countries decisively responded to this fierce competition by incorporating strategies
which would ensure success within a competitive environment, where the buying public has come to expect near perfect
products with a high degree of dependability. Less industrialised regions have been slow to incorporate such strategies
for several reasons, hence their poor showing on both the domestic and international markets.
Highly specialised fields such as the automotive sector are dominated by products from regions such as Japan. This is
because they have advanced product development systems in place. Their good performance is due to the fact that they
attach great importance to scientific and technological education - an inevitable precondition to compete successfully.
Characteristics of a competitive product
From an investor's perspective, a successful product development process must yield products that can be produced and
sold profitably, yet profitability is often difficult to assess quickly and directly. Five specific dimensions, all of which
relate to profit, are commonly used to assess the performance of a product development effort.

Product quality - how is the product resulting from the development effort? Does it satisfy customer needs? Is it
robust and reliable? Product quality is ultimately reflected in market share and the price that customers are willing to
pay
Product cost - what is the manufacturing cost of the product? This cost includes expenditure on capital equipment and
tooling as well as the incremental cost of producing each unit of the product. Product cost determines how much
profit accrues to the firm for a particular sales volume and a particular sales price.

Development time - how quickly did the team complete the product development effort? Development time
determines how responsive the firm can be to competitive forces and to technological developments, as well as how
quickly the firm receives the economic returns from the team's efforts.
Development cost - how much did the company have to spend to develop the product? Development cost is usually a
significant fraction of the investment required to achieve the profits.
Development capability - are both team and firm better able to develop future products as a result of their experience
with a product development project? Development capability is an asset the firm can use to develop products more
effectively and economically in the future.
High performance along these five dimensions should ultimately lead to economic success however, other performance
criteria are also important.
Research and development: its role in product development
The role of research and development (R&D) in a company setting is essentially to enhance overall performance by
ensuring that new products are developed and existing ones redesigned to match changes in levels of technology and
customer requirements. Companies that commit substantial resources towards R&D naturally keep abreast with the latest
technologies. Such technologies in turn support the development of great products. Investing in R&D has numerous
advantages as can be seen in Figure 1.2.

BUSINESS AS USUAL
Shrinking Markets
Higher Costs
Loss of Profits

INVESTMENT IN R&D
Increased Market share
Lower Costs
Greater Profitability

Current Position

Figure 1.2

Benefits of investing in R&D

R&D is a process via which a company identifies market requirements and uses these ideas to design new products.
Such a process improves overall company productivity and ensures a substantial rise in total turnout. Research and
development achieves this via a wide range of its functions. To understand some of these functions, we take a look at the
life cycle of a product - office printers, Figure 1.3.

Figure 1.3:
Life-cycle of a product (office printers)
As can be seen from Figure 1.3, while typewriters were a hit in the printing industry, today they are the oldest
technology and slowest, not very user friendly as compared to the other ranges of printers. Investing in R&D enabled
companies to come up with more versatile and reliable printing machines (e.g. laser printers)
Theoretically, a company which delays to launch new products after the decline and withdrawal of older products must
run out of business. Figure 1.4 illustrates product life cycle by looking at related products that are at different stages. The
need to keep a range of products at different stages is also apparent. This gives long-term stability with new customer
driven products being introduced while older ones are declining and being withdrawn. As s result overall production is
smoothed rather than fluctuating as shown in Figure 1.4.

Figure 1.4:

Introduction and withdrawal of products (A - E )

R&D maintains stable total output by on the one hand carrying out surveys to establish market requirements in terms of
product specifications which determine phasing in of new products, redesigning of already existing products and
withdrawal of older and declining products. On the other hand it researches on the latest trends of development in terms
of product design techniques.
Clearly, as illustrated in Figure 1.5, two sets of forces influence the forward move of a product:
Technology push
Market pull
TECHNOLOGY
PUSH

PRODUCT
DEVELOPMENT

Possible Technological Improvements

Design for Manufacture
CAD/CAM
Quality Function Deployment
Rapid prototyping
Microprocessor

Figure 1.5:

MARKET PULL
Possible Market Demands
Low Cost
High Quality
User Friendliness
Dependability
Environmental Friendliness
Availability

Technology push and market pull forces

3

Exercises
1
2
3
4
5

Discuss the phases in the life cycle of a product and say what implications they have in the design activity.
Discuss the role of R&D in product development and say what its bottom line implications are in a manufacturing
enterprise
What are the major characteristics of a competitive product?
Give a brief description of technology push factors in product development and say how they influence the forward
move of a product
Give a brief description of market pull factors in product development and say how they influence the forward move
of a product

Reading list
1
2
3
4
5

D. Waters, Operations Management, Addison Wesley, 1996.

S. D. Eppinger, K. T. Ulrich, Product Design and Development, McGraw Hill, 1995.
B. Prasad, Concurrent Engineering Fundamentals, Prentice Hall PTR, 1997.
B. Lilly, Design for Manufacturing: Lecture Notes, Ohio State University, 1999.
S. Kambani, N. J. Kwendakwema, The Role of R&D in Economic Development, The Engineering Institution of
Zambia, 1995.

LECTURE TWO:

CONCURRENT ENGINEERING

The definition of concurrent engineering is a much-disputed subject. The essence of concurrent engineering is the
simultaneous rather than serial, execution of various phases in the product development process. The most important aim
of concurrent engineering is shortening the development lead-time. Shortening development lead-time is in itself not a
goal. A short development time has to be combined with competitive advantages. These advantages determine the
success of a product in the market place. Consequently, better customer orientation is a second goal of concurrent
engineering. Most of the time this means improved quality. Lower development cost is a third goal of concurrent
engineering. This, of course has a strong relationship with a shorter development lead-time. These three goals are the
basic elements of the definition of concurrent engineering
Definitions of concurrent engineering vary, but most agree that the key concepts include:
The use of a team approach to represent all aspects of the life cycle of the design
A focus an customer requirements, and
Use of concurrent design process that includes early design of production and field support systems.
Design methodology literature shows that the concept of concurrent engineering has not yet been fully understood. Most
phase models present the product development process as a serial chain of activities.
Figure 2.1 shows the descriptive model of Pahl and Beitz that is representative for most of the phase models of the
product development process.

Figure 2.1 - Pahl and Beitz phase model of product development.

The concurrent engineering model can be represented by the model in Figure 2.2.

CUSTOMER
REQUIREMENTS

DESIGNS

DESIGN

PRODUCT

MANUFACTURING

CUSTOMER
(PRODUCT
GOALS)

DESIGN
CRITERIA

Cp=2
FEWER PARTS

MANUFACTURABILITY
MEASURES

DEFECT LEVELS

Figure 2.2 Manufacturability System Model

More recent literature deals with the concurrency of various phases. The integrated Product Development (IPD) model
of Andreasen and Hein (see Figure 2.3). This model clearly shows the concurrency of market development, product
development and process development.
Figure 2.3 Integrated Product Development (IPD) model
The IPD-model still distinguishes different phases in the development process. It shows, however, also concurrent flows
of activities. Each flow is dealing with specific subjects, resulting in one goal: putting a great product on the market fast.

Organizing for Concurrent Engineering

Implementing concurrent engineering implies restructuring the product development process. The order of activities in
time has to be reconsidered. An analysis can indicate which tasks can be carried out in parallel. The interaction between
the various tasks has to be defined. These interactions provide the necessary consensus and a check on the integrity of
the product.

Concurrent Engineering Toolbox

Taking into account all life cycle perspectives requires structured working methods. Various tools have been developed
to support these working methods:
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is a tool to translate customer demands into functional requirements.
Rapid prototyping is a tool to produce prototypes in a matter of hours instead of weeks.
Failure mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) is a method to detect possible failures of the product as early as
possible in the product creation process.
Value Analysis / Engineering
Quality assurance - if a development process wisely specifies the phases a development project will pass through then
following the development process is clearly one way of assuring the quality of the resulting product.
Co ordination - a clearly articulated development process acts as a master plan which defines the roles of each of the
players on the development team.
Planning - a development process contains natural milestones corresponding to the completion of each phase. The timing
of these milestones anchors the schedule of the overall development project.
Management - a development process is a benchmark assessing the performance of an ongoing development effort. By
comparing the actual events to the established process, a manager can identify possible problem areas.
Improvement - the careful documentation of an organizations development process often helps to identify opportunities
of improvement.
Phase 1
Concept
development
Figure 2.2

Phase 2
System-Level
Design

Phase 3
Detail
Design

Phase 4
Testing and
Refinement

Phase 5
Production
Ramp-Up

A product development process

A typical product design process, generic product development process, is illustrated in Figure2.3. The process consists
of five phases. The input is a mission statement and the output of the process is the product launch. One way of imaging
6

the product development process is as the initial creation of a wide set of alternative product concepts and then
subsequent narrowing of alternatives and increasing specifications of the product until the product can be reliably and
repeatedly produced by the production system.
Figure 2.3 also identifies the key activities and responsibilities of the different functions of the organisation during each
development phase.
The testing and refinement phase involves the construction and evaluation of multiple pre-production versions of the
product. Prototypes are usually built at this phase. Usually these prototypes come in two versions:
Alpha prototype - which are built with production intent parts i.e. parts with the same geometry and material
properties as intended for the production version of the product but not necessarily fabricated with the actual
processes to be used in production. Such prototypes are used to determine whether or not the product will work as
designed and whether or not the product satisfies the key customer needs.

Beta prototypes - usually built from parts supplied by the intended production processes but not necessarily
assembled using the intended final assembly process. The goal of beta prototypes is usually
to answer questions about performance and reliability in order to identify necessary changes for the final product.
In the production ramp-up phase the product is made using the intended production system. The purpose of the ramp-up
is to train the workforce and to workout any remaining problems in the production processes. The artefacts produced
during production ramp-up are sometimes supplied to preferred customers and are carefully evaluated to identify
remaining flaws. The ramp-up is soon followed by the launching of the product and an increase in production.

Concept
Development
Marketing
Define market
segments.

Identify
lead users.

Identify
competitive
products.

System-Level
Design

Detail Design

Testing
Refinement

and Production
Ramp-Up

Develop plan for Develop

product options marketing plan.
and
extended
product family.

Develop
Place early
promotion
and production with
launch materials. key customers.
Facilitate field
testing.

Generate
alternative
product
architectures.
Define major
sub-systems and
interfaces.

Refine
industrial design.

Do reliability Evaluate
early
testing, life testing, production
and performance output.
testing.
Obtain regulatory
approvals.

Implement
design changes.

Design
Investigate
feasibility
of
product
concepts.
Develop
industrial design
concepts.
Build and test
experimental
prototypes.

Define part
geometry.

Choose
materials.

Assign
tolerances.

Complete
industrial design
control
documentation

Manufacturing
Estimate
manufacturing
cost.
Assess
production
feasibility.

Figure 2.3

Identify
suppliers for key
components.
Perform makebuy analysis.
Define
final
assembly
scheme.

Define piece
part production
processes.
Design tooling.
Define quality
assurance
processes.

Begin
procurement of
long-lead
tooling.

Other Functions

Finance:
Finance:
Facilitate
Facilitate makeeconomic
buy analysis.
analysis.

Service:

Legal: Identify service

Investigate
issues
patent issues
A generic product development process

Facilitate
supplier ramp- up.

Refine
fabrication
and
assembly
processes.
Train work force.
Refine quality
assurance
processes.

Begin operation
of
entire
production
system.

Sales: Develop
sales plan.

The generic development process is most likely the process to be used in a market-pull situation. A firm begins product
development with a market opportunity and then seeks out whatever technologies are required to satisfy the market need
(i.e. the market pulls the product development decisions). Besides the market pull process several other variants are
common and these correspond to technology push products, platform products, process-intensive products and
customised products.
Technology push products - the firm begins with a new technology, then finds an appropriate market in
which to apply this technology. This approach is however perilous. Unless the assumed technology offers a
clean competitive advantage in meeting customer needs, the product is unlikely to succeed.

Platform products - the firm assumes that the new product will be built around the same technological
subsystem as an existing product ( e.g. computer operating systems, instant film technology used in Polaroid
cameras) huge investments went into these projects and therefore every attempt is made to incorporate them
into several different products. To some extent platform products are similar to technology push products in that
the team begins the development effort with an assumption that the product concept will embody a particular
technology.

Process intensive products - examples here include foods, chemicals and paper. In such products the
production process places strict constraints on the properties of the product, so that the product design cannot be
separated from the production process design. In many cases these are high volume products as opposed to
discrete products. Usually a new product is developed simultaneously with the process e.g. snack food, potato
crisps etc
Customised products - these are products developed in response to a specific order by a customer. When a
company requests an order the company executes a structured design and development process to create the
product that meets the particular customer's needs.
Executing the product development process
The execution of the product development process has evolved from sequential (i.e each step conceived of as a unit with
clear inputs and outputs), to what is called simultaneous engineering where all product development steps are started as
early as possible (simultaneously) in the product development process.
Sequential product development
This is an old and costly approach of designing products. The design process in this system starts from identification of
market requirement through to detailed product design, manufacture, ending up with product launch / introduction as
shown in Figure 2.4.

Figure 2.4 sequential product developments

8

This approach can also be represented with a model as shown in Figure 2.5.

PRODUCT
DESIGN

KKUIUI IKC
PRODUCT

DESI6
NS

->

CUSTOME
R

> CUSTOMER
COMPANY
X
(PROD.
60ALS)
t

MANUFACTU
RING
MANUFACTU
RED

Figure 2.5
Sequential product development model
In this system, the primary output is a prototype product delivered to customers, which meets their requirements. The
secondary output is a design delivered to manufacturing for production. The designer receives very little feedback
about how well the product meets customers' goals downstream when it is being manufactured.
The little involvement the designer has is directed at design modification. The timing of these product design changes
during the product lifecycle has an enormous effect on overall business objectives. Major changes in a product are
cheaply and easily made during the initial design stages. As the product moves through its development stages, the
cost and difficulty of making changes increases steadily.
Improving effectiveness of new product development requires that the design manufacturing interface be viewed
differently. This approach is known as concurrent engineering.
Concurrent engineering - a paradigm shift
Concurrent engineering is an approach where the product and all its associated processes, such as manufacturing,
distribution, and service, are all developed in parallel. Typically this involves cross-functional involvement early in
the product development project. Concurrent engineering has also come to be known as simultaneous engineering.
The major goal of this approach is to progress in the design process concurrently (simultaneously) to avoid costly
modifications downstream. Figure 2.6 shows a manufacturability system model
Manufacturability system model
In this approach, Figure 2.6, the design function is customer requirements. However the output is a manufacturable
design and the customer of that product is internal - the manufacturing department. This model has a key feedback
loop that provides measures of the design manufacturability to the design function. The difference from the traditional
approach is that in this model manufacturing is the primary customer of the product design. Business objectives are
directly influenced by manufacturing's ability to meet customer's product goals.
DEFECT LEVELS
MANUFACTURABILITY MEASURES
Figure 2.6

Manufacturability system model

Manufacturability measures are the factory's indicator on how well it is producing products that meet product goals.
Design criteria strongly affect product manufacturability. A product's technical performance is always by design and
manufacturing. If a customer requests a product that has a dimension of 10mm, the product must be designed and
manufactured to that dimension. Other manufacturability measures that are strongly affected by design include: yield,
scrap, inventory, cycle time, manufacturing costs
Overall, all manufacturability measures are interrelated. Yield affects cost and inventory levels. Defect levels, or
defects per unit is one measure that has a strong influence on all manufacturability measures. It affects product quality,
reliability, availability, cost etc.
Figure 2.7 shows how traditional design core has transformed into a simultaneous engineering based one.
9

Figure 2.7

Simultaneous Engineering- using concurrency to develop fast cycle capability in product development.

Exercises
1
Describe the phases of a generic product development process
2
Describe the phases of a generic product development process
3
Discuss the benefits of a well defined product development process
5
Explain, giving examples, the following terminology with respect to product design and development:
Customer driven products
Technology push products
Platform products
Customised products
Process intensive products
6
With the aid of a manufacturability system model, explain what you understand by Concurrent engineering
7
Discuss the advantages of Concurrent Engineering over Traditional Design approach
8
In what way are the following manufacturability measures affected by design quality:
Scrap level
Availability
Yield
Defects
Inventor
Manufacturing cost
9
Briefly explain how the following manufacturability measures interrelate:
Yield and cost
Defect levels and quality
Defect levels and availability
Defect levels and reliability
Reading list
1
D. Waters, Operations Management, Addison Wesley, 1996.
2
S.D. Eppinger, K. T. Ulrich, Product Design and Development, McGraw Hill, 1995.
3
B. Prasad, Concurrent Engineering Fundamentals, Prentice Hall PTR, 1997.
4
B. Lilly, Design for Manufacturing: Lecture Notes, Ohio State University, 1999.
6
L.Cohen, Quality Function Deployment, Addison Wesley, 1995.
7
C. McMahon, CAD/CAM, Addison Wesley, 1998.

10

LECTURE THREE CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

At the end of this lecture you should understand the following:
Stages in the concept development phase
Importance of mission statement in product development
Process of identifying customer requirements/needs
The Quality Function Deployment (QFD) method

3.0 Concept Development

The concept development phase is the starting point of product development. It contains the distinct activities shown
in Figure 3.1.

Mission
Statement

Identify
Customer
Needs

Establish
Target
Specifications

Analyze
Competitive
Products

Figure 3.1:

Generate
Product
Concepts

Select a
Product
Concept

Perform
Economic
Analysis

Refine
Specifi
cations

Plan
Remaining
Developmen
t Project

Development
Plan

Concept Development

3.1 The Mission Statement

The mission statement (Figure 3.2) also called a charter or design brief specifies which direction to go in but generally
does not specify a precise destination or a particular way to proceed. The mission statement could for instance specify
a particular market opportunity and lay out the broad constraints and objectives for the project. It may include some of
the information:
Brief- usually one sentence giving description of the product. This description usually specifies customer
benefits without necessarily giving product concept.
Key business goals- these include timing of new product introduction, market share targets, and desired
financial performance.
Stakeholders- one way to ensure that many of the subtle issues are addressed is to explicitly list all of the product's
stakeholders i.e. all groups of people affected by the product's attributes.
Product Description
Key Business Goals
Primary Market
Secondary Markets
Assumptions
Stakeholders

Mission Statement: Screwdriver Project

A hand-held, power-assisted device for installing threaded fasteners
Product introduced in fourth quarter of 1997
50% gross margin
10% share of cordless screwdriver market by 1999
Do-it-yourself consumer
Casual consumer
Light-duty professional
Hand-held
Power-assisted
Nickel-metal-hydride rechargeable battery technology
User
Retailer
Sales force
Service center
Production
Legal department
11

Figure 3.2: Mission statement for a new product

3.2 Identifying Customer Needs

The results of this activity are the input into the Needs/Benefits section of the Quality Function Deployment
Technique

3.2.1 Quality Function Deployment

Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is a method for structured product planning and development that enables a
development team to specify clearly the customer's wants and needs and then to evaluate each proposed product or
service capability systematically in terms of its impact on meeting those needs.
The process involves constructing one or more matrices (sometimes called quality tables). The first of these matrices
is called the House of Quality (HOQ). It displays the customer's wants and needs (Voice of Customer) along the left
and development team's response to meeting these wants and needs along the top. The matrix consists of several
sections or sub-matrices joined together in various ways, each containing information relating to others. Each of these
labelled sections A through F is a structured systematic expression of a product or process development team's
understanding of an aspect of the overall planning of product or process. The lettering sequence as illustrated in
Figure 3.3 suggests a logical sequence for filling in the matrix.

Figure 3.3: The House of Quality

A - Customer Needs/Benefits
This is the starting place for all QFD activities. The common source of customer phrases representing their wants and
needs is the customer interview. The usual steps in identifying customer needs are:
Gathering raw data from the customer- this is usually done by conducting interviews, where the result of
such an activity is a set of customer phrases representing the customer's wants and needs. Most companies
have special departments for handling complaints since they represent a major nightmare to any company the nightmare of customer dissatisfaction. Too often companies regard complaint management as their
quality control mechanism. Kano suggests that it is not enough to make a company competitive - however
removing dissatisfiers from a product is a necessary if not a sufficient step to competitiveness. Hence it is
very useful to include customer complaints in the complete voice of the customer.
Interpret raw data in terms of customer needs - customer needs are expressed as written statements. They
result from interpreting the need underlying the raw data gathered from the customers. Each statement can be
translated into several needs. General guidelines of expressing the need could be for instance:
12

o
o
o

express the need in terms of what the product has to do, not in terms of how it may do it
express the need as specifically as the raw data
express need as attribute of product

Organise the needs into a hierarchy - the result of the preceding steps is a list of numerous need statements.
This is captured in the affinity diagram - Figure 3.4. such a large number of detailed statements is awkward
to work with and also difficult to summarise for use. The goal of this step is to organise these (statements
from affinity diagram) into a hierarchical list called the tree diagram - Figure 3.5

Figure 3.4: Affinity Diagram

The tree diagram typically consists of a set of primary needs, each of which will be further characterised by a set of
secondary needs. In cases of very complex products the secondary needs may be further broken down into tertiary
needs as well.

13

Figure 3.5

Tree Diagram

B- Planning Matrix
Just as the Customer Needs/Benefits section is a repository of qualitative customer data, the Planning Matrix,
illustrated in Figure 3.6, is the repository for quantitative data about each customer need. The development team will
use this data to decide what aspects of the planned product or service will be emphasized during the development
project.
The Planning Matrix is the tool that helps the development team to prioritize customer needs. The planning matrix
asks the following key questions for each customer need:
How important is this need to the customer?
How well are we doing in meeting this need today?
How well is the competition doing in meeting this need today?
How well do we want to do in meeting this with the product or service being developed?
If we meet this need well could we use that fact to help sell the product?

14

Figure 3.6

Planning Matrix

C - Technical Responses
Just as the Voice of the Customer had qualitative and quantitative components (entered into the Customer
needs/Benefits section and Planning Matrix) so does the translation of the Voice of the Customer into the Voice of the
Developer. This will be placed in qualitative form on top of the relationship Matrix, and in quantitative form at the
bottom (Target Values and Competitive Benchmarks). In simple terms Technical Responses - Hows are a set of quality
characteristics through which a set of Customer Needs - Whats can be realized. Hows thus represent an array of
design variables or alternate solutions, which may or may not be independent.

D - Relationships (Between Customer Needs and Technical Reponses Whats vs Hows)

To get a relationship between market requirements and quality characteristics a matrix is created by placing the Whats
list along the column of a matrix and the Hows list along its rows as illustrated in Figure 3.7. The intersection of the
rows and the columns then depicts the relationships between the set of Whats and the Hows. The matrix thus
developed is called a Relationship Matrix. It correlates what customers want in a product and how an enterprise can
achieve those objectives. Relationships within this matrix are usually defined using a level procedure:- strong,
medium, weak, or none. The matrix maybe densely populated ( more than one row or column affected). This results
from the fact that some of the quality solutions may affect more than one customer Need (What).

15

Figure 3.7

Relationships Whats vs Hows

E- Technical Correlation or Sensitivity Matrix (Hows vs Hows)

This is the matrix firming the roof of the "House of Quality" i.e. QFD chart. The purpose of this matrix is to identify
the qualitative correlation between the technical responses (Hows). This is a very important feature of the quality
house since, at times the possible solutions could be redundant and may not add much value to customer wants. At
times it may be at cross purpose (in disagreement) with each other. If two Hows help each other meet their target
values (How-Muches), they are rated as positive or strong positive. If meeting one How target value makes it harder
or impossible to meet another How target value (How Much), those two Hows are rated as negative or strongly
negative. A case in point is where 0-100 kmh time and fuel economy are two quality items. Efforts to decrease 0100kmh time would have an adverse effect on the fuel economy item. In this case, the two Hows have a negative
correlation? Fuel economy and gross weight have a positive correlation because reducing gross weight will increase
fuel economy keeping all other remaining parameters constant. These relationships are weighted, and standard QFD
uses the weights (for strong, 3 for medium and 0 for none). After all relationship matrices are developed, care is taken
in reviewing its constructs. Blank rows or columns call for closer scrutiny. A blank row implies a potential unsatisfied
customer and emphasises the need to develop one or more Technical responses for that particular customer
requirement. A blank column implies that the corresponding Technical Response does not directly relate to any of the
customer requirements.

F- Technical Matrix (How-Muches):

This is a list vector and normally identifies the bounds on the feasibility on Technical Responses (Hows). These
represents the target values for each Technical Response. In other words for each technical (How) the e I a co7espondi
Q 2 for a How - Much entry. The idea is to quantify the solution parameters into achievable ranges or specifications,
thereby creating a criterion for assessing success. This information is often obtained through market evaluation and
research.
What are target specifications- Customer needs, in the manner they are expressed, leave too much margin this reason,
development teams usually establish a set of specifications, which spell out in precise, measurable detail what the
product has to do.

16

Figure 3.8

A completed QFD chart (Houses of Quality) for Mouse Trap

Beyond the House of Quality

Most organizations that use QFD stop after developing their customized version of the House of Quality. Some groups
however extend their analysis to an additional matrix in which performance measures from the matrix are deployed
against features of a product or service. One of the reasons for not exploiting the full possibilities of QFD is the lack
of specificity in the literature as to how to use downstream QFD matrices.
The trick is to turn the technical responses (engineering characteristics) into the desired attributes (side of a new
matrix) for the parts characteristics (top of the new matrix). Full extension of this concept then allows the "Voice of
the Customer" to be cascaded down through the product introduction process via process planning to production
planning, as illustrated in Figure 3.9. At each level the matrix relates the important elements of 'How' to the important
elements of 'What' needs to be done. New, difficult to meet and important requirements are passed from one matrix to
the next, thereby keeping effort correctly focused.

17

Figure 3.9: QFD - the Houses Beyond

Limitations of QFD
When many Japanese producers became successful in bringing cars to market in record time, many automotive world
leaders mistakenly assumed that their success was solely because of technical tools. This explains the initial flurry of
activities (QFD, Taguchi, Pugh, Kaizen etc) that American industries went through during the 1980s. As many
companies failed on this front. They discovered that many of the barriers to global competitiveness were rooted in
their assumptions that are, basing their PD3 decisions on quality while ignoring other important aspects such as cost,
design for X-ability, tools and technology, and infrastructure that have not been deployed simultaneously.
QFD does not specifically address the cost, tools and technology, responsiveness (time-to-market), and organizational
aspects in the same vein as it addresses the quality aspect. While some consider the product design process as being
independent from technology, design for X-ability, cost and responsiveness, the reality is that these are tied together
by a common set of product and process requirements. The design process only provides a product design from the
perspectives of performance (i.e. quality). The product design performance requirements drive the product selection
process, including system, subsystems, components, parts and material selection, and influence the selection of the
fabrication method, process and production. Others have argued that while performing Quality FD, designers could
choose to include requirements that belong to considerations other than quality in the original customers' list of HOQ.
Accomplishing this through a conventional deployment process is not simple. Working on the multiple lists of
requirements as part of a single function deployment is much tougher problem.
First, it would be a complex undertaking considering just the size of the resulting relational matrices
Second, deploying them serially would be a long, drawn-out process
Third, cascading the requirements all together as we did in the case of Quality functions would be so large that it
would be difficult to handle.
Fourth, there is no way of insuring that the design obtained through this combinatorial Quality FD process would
not result in a sub-optimised design, that is a product particularly designed for characteristics related to quality.
What is required in optimising an artifact is designing with respect to all important functions that characterise a
world-class product today. Major pitfalls of QFD approach are:
Conventional deployment is mainly Quality focused: one of the pitfalls of conventional deployment is that it is
based on a single measurement, which has mostly been quality. Today manufacturing sectors are more fiercely
competitive and global than ever. Consumers are more demanding, competition is more global, fierce, and
ruthless, and technology is advancing and changing rapidly. The quality based philosophy inherent in Quality FD
style does not account for the time factor inherent in today's complex PD3 process. Competitors are always
finding better ways of doing things-catching up in quality is not enough. It only makes a company at par with its
competitors in terms of inheriting some of their product characteristics. What is required is a total control of one's
process - identifying and satisfying the needs and expectations of consumers better than the competitors and
doing so profitably faster than any competitor.

Conventional deployment is a phased process: the conventional deployment process prescribes a set of structured
cross-functional planning and communication matrices for building quality as specified by customers into a
product. This is often represented in a cascade time bound process where characteristics of a prior phase feed as
requirements for a subsequent phase. The serial nature of deployment tends to make the QFD process sequential.
If each phase of deployment is a multi-part prcess, the elapsed time can be significantly large. This elongates the
total time this QFD would take for an artifact realisation process
Conventional deployment is one-dimensional: the roles of the organisation and engineers are changing toady, as
are the methods of doing business. Competition has driven organisation to consider concepts such as time
compression (fast-to-market), concurrent engineering, design for X-ability, and tools and technologies (such as
Taguchi, Value engineering) while designing and developing an artifact. Quality FD addresses major aspects of
18

quality with reference to the functions a product has to perform but this is one of the many functions that need to
be deployed during product development. With conventional deployment, it is difficult to address all aspects of
total values management (TVM) such as X-ability, cost, tools and technology, responsiveness and organisation
issues. It is not enough to deploy Quality into the product and expect the outcome to be b world-class. TVM
efforts are vital in maintaining a competitive edge in today's world marketplace. The question is how to deploy all
the aspects of this TVM.
The method of deploying many competing values simultaneously is called Concurrent Function Deployment. The
intent of CFD is to incorporate Voice of the Customers into all nine phases of the product development cycle,
through mission definition, concept definition, engineering and analysis, product design, prototyping, production
engineering and planning, production operations and control, manufacturing, and finally into continuous
improvement, support and delivery. In other words CFD is a customer driven PD3
Exercises
1. In QFD there are 4 phases that deploy Voice of the Customer (VOC) to get to an improved product. What are
the components of QFD? Explain each of the four QFD phases and give examples
2. How can the Kano model be used to prioritise a set of customer requirements (CRS)? How does a CR shift
character? When dose this happen
3. What are the rooms of HOQ? Why are Technical Importance Ratings (TIRs) listed under a HOW-MUCH list
vector
4. What is the significance of weighting factors in computing TIRs? How can manufacturers use TIRs to
prioritise the quality characteristics of a product yet to be launched.
5. What are the limitations of deploying QFD? What is required in optimising an artifact to be recognised as the
best in every class
6. In what way is QFD a concurrent engineering tool?
7. What is CFD? How does it differ from QFD?
8. Prepare a Quality Function Deployment chart for a commercial product of your choice and comment on the
results.
Reading List
1) S.D. Eppinger, K. T. Ulrich, Product Design and Development, McGraw Hill, 1995.
2) B. Prasad, Concurrent Engineering Fundamentals, Prentice Hall PTR, 1997.
3) D. Waters, Operations Management, Addison Wesley, 1996.
4) B. Lilly, Design for Manufacturing: Lecture Notes, Ohio State University, 1999.
5) L.Cohen, Quality Function Deployment, Addison Wesley, 1995.
6) C. McMahon, CAD/CAM, Addison Wesley, 1998.
7) J.R. Hauser and Don Clausing, The House of Quality, Harvard Business Review, 1988

19

LECTURE FOUR CONCEPT GENERATION

After this lecture you should understand the following:
Concept generation methodology
Problem decomposition scheme
Importance of patent search as an information source
Application of the concept classification tree

4.0 The task of Concept Generation

A product concept is an approximate description of the technology, working principles, and form of the product. It is a
concise description of how the product will satisfy the customer needs. A concept is usually expressed as a sketch or
as a rough three-dimensional model and is often accompanied by a brief description. The degree to which a product
satisfies customers and can be successfully commercialized depends to a large measure on the quality of the
underlying concept. A good concept is sometimes poorly implemented in subsequent development phases, but a poor
concept can rarely be manipulated to achieve commercial success. In most cases, depending on the capability of the
development team, numerous concepts are generated. Of these only a few merit serious consideration during the
concept selection activity.
Thorough exploitation of alternatives early in the development process greatly reduces the likelihood that the team
will stumble upon a superior concept late in the development process or that a competitor will introduce a product
with dramatically better performance than the product under development.
Common dysfunctions exhibited by development teams during concept generation include:
Consideration of only one or two alternatives often proposed by the most assertive members of the team.
Failure to consider carefully the usefulness of concepts employed by other firms in related and unrelated
products.
Involvement of only one or two people in the process, resulting in lack of confidence and commitment by the
rest of the team
Ineffective integration of promising partial solutions
Failure to consider entire categories of solutions
Concept generation methodology usually follows a five step methodology as illustrated in Figure 4.1

4.1 The five-step methodology

Different product development teams can always modify it to match their own requirements. The methodology breaks
complex problems into simpler sub-problems, which are easier to analyse.
Solution concepts are then identified for the problems by external and internal search procedures, Classification trees
and concept combination table are used to explore systematically the space of solution concepts and to integrate the
sub-problem solutions into a total solution.

20

1. Clarify the Problem

Understanding
Problem decomposition
Focus on critical sub-problems
Sub-problems
2. Search externally
Lead users
Experts
Patents
Literature
Benchmarking

3. Search Internally
Individual
Group

New Concepts
Existing Concepts
4. Explore systematically
Classification tree
Combination table

Integrated Solutions
5. Reflect on the solutions and the process
Constructive feedback

Figure 4.1 Five step concept generation methodology

Step 1 -Clarify Problem

Clarifying the problem consists of understanding the problem and then breaking it down into sub-problems where
more focus is placed. Most designs are too complex to solve as a single problem and hence the need to divide them
into several simpler sub-problems. The breaking down of a problem into sub-problems is called problem
decomposition approach.
The first step in decomposing a problem functionally is to represent it as a single black box as shown in Figure 4.2.
The black box represents the overall function of the product.

Input

Output

Energy(?)

Energy (?)
Hand-Held Nailer

Material (nail)
Signal (tool trip)

Material (driven Nail)

Signal (?)

Figure 4.2 Problem decomposition - "overall" "black box"

The next step is to divide the single black box into sub-functions to create a more specific description of the functions
of different elements in the product. See Figure 4.3. Each sub-function can be further broken down until it is simple
enough to work with. The goal of these decomposition techniques is to divide a complex problem into simpler
21

problems such that these simpler problems can be tackled in a focused way.

Energy

Store or
accept
external
energy

Convert energy to
translational energy

Store nails

Isolate nail

Nails

Trip
of Tool

Figure 4.3

Sense trip

Apply
translational
energy to
nail

Driven
Nail

Trigger tool

Problem decomposition into sub-functions

Once the decomposition is complete, the team chooses the sub-problems that are most critical to the success of the
product and that are likely to drive the overall solution to the problem.

Step 2 - Search Externally

External search is aimed at finding solutions to both the overall problem and to the sub-problems identified during the
problem clarification step. Although it comes as a second step in the methodology, external search actually occurs
throughout the development process. Implementing an existing solution is usually quicker and cheaper than
developing a new solution. Using the existing solution allows the team more time to focus on the critical subproblems, which have no existing solutions. External search is an information gathering process. Five typical ways of
gathering information from external sources include:
Lead user interviews: lead users are those users of a class of product. Usually, lead users go out of their way to
modify, if a product does not fulfil a given design function. Sometimes they could simply modify the product to
accommodate a function initially not designed into the product. These lead users stand to benefit substantially from
product innovation.
Consulting experts: experts with knowledge of one or more of the sub-problems not only can provide solution
concepts directly but also can redirect the search in a more fruitful area. Generally experts may include professionals
at firms manufacturing related products, professional consultants, university faculties and technical representatives of
suppliers. While finding experts consumes time, it is less time consuming than re-creating existing knowledge.
Search patents: patents are a rich source of technical information containing detailed drawings and explanations of
how products work. Their disadvantage however is that concepts found in recent patents are protected, so they may be
a royalty involved in using them. They are however very useful to see what concepts are already protected and hence
must be avoided or licensed. Concepts contained in expired patents or patents without global coverage can be used
without paying royalties.
Search published literature: published literature includes journals; conference proceedings; trade magazines;
government reports; market, consumer, and product information, and new product announcements. Electronic
database searches are also available for search purposes.
Benchmark related products: benchmarking is the study of products with functionality similar to that of the product
under development by the team. Benchmarking provides information on the strengths and weaknesses of the
competition. In the process of benchmarking teams can even go on to obtain and disassemble most of the related
products in order to discover the general concepts on which they were based, as well as other more detailed
information, including names of suppliers of specific components.

Step 3 - Search Internally

Internal search is the use of personal and team knowledge and creativity to generate solution concepts.
Guidelines for improving both individual and internal search include:
Suspend judgement - because we have to live with the consequences if product concept decisions for years
22

there is need to take time to evaluate our concepts. A better approach is for individuals perceiving
weaknesses in concepts to channel suggestions into improvements or alternative concepts.
Generate a lot of ideas - the more ideas a team generates, the more likely the team is to explore fully the
solution space.
Welcome ideas that may seem infeasible - ideas that initially seem infeasible may be improved by other
members of the team
Use graphical and physical media - reasoning about physical and geometric information with words is
difficult. Text and verbal language are inherently inefficient vehicles for describing physical entities.
Abundant sketching is necessary. Foam, clay, cardboard, and other three- dimensional media may also be appropriate
aids for problems requiring a deep understanding of form and spatial relationships.
Individual and group sessions - formal studies of group and individual problem solving suggests that a set of people
working alone for a period of time will generate more and better concepts than the same people working together for
the same time period ( McGrath - 1984). Group sessions are more ideal for building consensus, communicating
information and refining concepts.

Step 4 - Explore systematically

The result of the search activities are a collection of hundreds of concepts fragments - solutions to the sub-problems.
Systematic exploration is aimed at navigating the space of possibility by organising and synthesising the solution
fragments. In a typical product development project a team may come up with many concept fragments to each subproblem. One approach to organising and synthesising these fragments would be to consider all of the possible
combinations of the fragments associated with each sub-problem. This approach would be very tedious. Lets suppose
there were three sub-problems to be considered and for each of these sub-problems fifteen fragments are generated.
This implies that 3375 combinations of fragments will have to be considered by the team. Among these, many of the
combinations might not make sense. There are two specific tools for managing this complexity and organising the
thinking of concept generating team:
Concept classification tree
Concept combination table

Concept classification tree

The tree helps the team divide the possible solutions into independent categories. Dividing the solutions into several
distinct classes facilitates comparison and pruning. Figure 4.4 shows an example of classification tree for the hand
held nailer. The branches of this tree correspond to different energy sources.
Chemical

Pneumatic

Fuel-Air Systems

Explosive Systems

Store or
Accept
Energy
Hydraulic
Wall Outlet

Battery
Nuclear

Electrical
Fuel Cell

Figure 4.4

Classification tree for nailer energy Product Design, Development and Management
23

The classification tree has a number of benefits which include:

Pruning of less promising branches - if a solution approach does not appear to have much merit, then this
solution approach must be "pruned" allowing the team to focus its attention on more promising branches of
the tree. Pruning must be done with a high degree of evaluation and judgement.
Exposure of inappropriate emphasis on certain branches - once the tree is constructed, the team is able to
reflect quickly on whether the effort applied to each branch has been appropriately allocated. In the nailer
example, the team realised that they had applied very little effort to thinking about hydraulic energy sources
and conversion technologies. This recognition guided them to focus on this branch of the tree for a few days.
Refinement of the problem decomposition for a particular branch - sometimes a problem decomposition can
be usefully tailored to a particular approach to the problem. Consider the branch of the tree corresponding to
the electrical energy source. Based on additional investigation of the nailing process, the team determined
that the instantaneous power delivered during the nailing process was about 10 000 watts for a few
milliseconds and so exceeds the power which is available from a wall outlet, a battery or a cell (of reasonable
cost, size and mass). They conclude that energy must be accumulated over a substantial period of the nailing
cycle (say 100 milliseconds) and then suddenly released to supply the required instantaneous power to drive
the nail. This quick analysis led the team to add a sub- function -accumulate translational energy- to their
function diagram as indicated in Figure 4.5. The sub- function in this case was added after the conversion of
the energy to mechanical energy. Figure 4.5 identifies sub-problems of the electrical energy source.

Electrical
Energy

Convert Energy
to Translational
Energy

Accumulate
Translational
Energy

Apply
Translational
Energy to Nail

Energy
Applied
to Nail

Figure 4.5 Electrical energy source sub-problem

Concept Combination Table

The concept combination table provides a way to consider combinations of solution fragments systematically. Figure
4.6 shows an example of a combination table that the nailer team used to consider the combinations of the fragments
for the electrical branch of the classification tree. The columns in the table correspond to the sub-problems identified
as indicated in Figure 4.5. The entries in each column correspond to the solution fragments for each of these subproblems derived from external and internal search. For example, the sub-problem of converting electrical energy to
translational energy is the heading for the first column. The entries in this column are a rotary motor with a
transmission, a linear motor, a solenoid, and a rail gun as illustrated in Figure 4.7a-4.7d
Potential solutions to the overall problem are formed by combining one fragment from each column. In the nailer
example there are 24 possible combinations. The combination of fragments must be developed and refined before an
integrated solution emerges.
Convert
Electrical
Energy to Translational
Energy

Accumulate Energy

Apply Translational Energy to

Nail

Rotary
motor
transmission

Spring

Single impact

Moving mass

Multiple impacts

with

Linear motor
Solenoid

Push nail

Rail gun

Figure 4.6 Concept combination table

24

Figure 4.7a Combination of: Solenoid - Spring - Multiple Impacts

Figure 4.7b Combination of: Rotary Motor - Spring - Single Impact

Figure 4.7c

Combination of: Rotary Motor - Spring - Multiple Impacts

Figure 4.7d

Combination of: Linear Motor - Moving Mass - Single Impact

25

Exercises
1.
What do you understand by problem decomposition with respect to the concept generation methodology?
Discuss one scheme by which a problem can be decomposed.
2.
Decompose the problem of designing a new coffee/ tea maker. Try using the functional decomposition
approach.
3.
Develop a classification tree for any two sub-problems for the coffee/teamaker
4.
Explain the purpose of the concept combination table and draw up the same for a sub-problem of the
coffee/tea maker
5.
What are the prospects of computer support for the concept generation activities?
6.
Discuss the five step concept generation methodology
Reading List
1) D. Waters, Operations Management, Addison Wesley, 1996.
2) S.D. Eppinger, K. T. Ulrich, Product Design and Development, McGraw Hill, 1995.
3) B. Prasad, Concurrent Engineering Fundamentals, Prentice Hall PTR, 1997.
4) B. Lilly, Design for Manufacturing: Lecture Notes, Ohio State University, 1999.
5) L.Cohen, Quality Function Deployment, Addison Wesley, 1995.
6) C. McMahon, CAD/CAM, Addison Wesley, 1998.

26

LECTURE FIVE CONCEPT SELECTION

After this lecture you should understand the following:
The importance of concept selection in the concept development process
Concept selection methodology
The six-step concept screening process
The six-step concept scoring process
Advantages of a structured concept selection methodology

5.0 Concept selection an integral part of the product development

process
After identification of customer needs, the product development team generates alternative solution concepts in
response to these needs. Concept selection is the process of evaluating the generated concepts with respect to set
criteria. The process involves comparing the relative strengths and weaknesses of the concepts, and selecting one or
more concepts for further investigation or development.
While many stages of the concept development process benefit from unbounded creativity and divergent thinking,
concept selection is the process of narrowing the set of concept alternatives under consideration. The concept
selection process is iterative and usually does not produce a dominant concept immediately. Large set of concepts is
initially winnowed down to a smaller set, but these concepts may subsequently be combined and improved. Through
several iterations, a dominant concept is finally chosen. Figure 5.1 illustrates this successive narrowing and temporary
widening of the set of options under consideration during the concept selection activity.

Figure 5.1: Narrowing of concept options

Whether or not the concept selection process is explicit, all teams use some method to choose among concepts. Even
those teams generating only one concept are using a method: choosing the first concept they think of. Figure 5.2
shows several concepts generated by a design firm for a medical supply company. The medical supply company
tasked the design firm to develop a reasonable syringe with precise dosage control for outpatient use. To focus the
development effort, the first step was for the supply company to identify major problems with its current product: Cost - existing model was made of stainless steel
Accuracy of the dose metering - existing model did not have a very accurate dose metering system.
Target market- the company also requested that the product be tailored to the physical capabilities of the
elderly, an important segment of the target market.
To summarise the needs of its clients and intended users, the team established seven criteria on which the choice of a
product concept would be based: Ease of handling
Ease of use
Readability of dose settings
27

Dose metering accuracy

Durability
Ease of manufacture
Portability

Figure 5.3

Concepts for outpatient syringe

28

Figure 5.3

Concepts for outpatient syringe

29

5.1 Structured Concept Selection Methodology

All of the early phases of product development are influential on eventual product success. A structured concept
selection process helps to maintain objectivity throughout the concept phase of the development process and guides
the product development team through a critical and difficult process. The structured concept selection methodology
offers the following potential benefits:
A customer-focused product
A competitive design
Better product-process co ordination
Reduced time to market
Effective group decision making
Documentation of the decision process

5.2 Concept Selection Methodology

A two-stage concept selection methodology, (proposed by Ulrich and Eppinger) is discussed. This methodology is
illustrated in Figure 5.2. The first stage is called concept screening and the second is called concept scoring. Each is
supported by a decision matrix which is used by the team to rate, rank and select the best concept(s). The
methodology of concept selection helps to manage the complexity of evaluating dozens of product concepts.
Screening is a quick, approximate evaluation aimed at producing a few viable alternatives, while scoring is a careful
analysis of these relatively few concepts in order to choose the single concept most likely to lead to product success.
During concept screening rough initial concepts are evaluated relative to a common reference concept using the
screening matrix. At this stage detailed quantitative comparisons are difficult to obtain and may be misleading, so a
comparative rating system is used. After some alternatives are eliminated, the team can then move on to concept
scoring and conduct more detailed analysis and finer quantitative evaluation of the remaining concepts using the
scoring matrix as a guide.
Throughout the screening and scoring process, several iterations may be performed, with new alternatives arising
from the combination of the features of several concepts. Both stages, concept screening and concept scoring follow a
six-step process which leads the team through the concept selection activity. The steps are: prepare the selection matrix
rate the concepts
rank the concepts
combine and improve the concepts
select one or more concepts
reflect on the results and process

5.2.1 Concept Screening

Concept screening is based on a method developed by the late Stuart Pugh in the 80s - Pugh Concept Selection. The
purposes of this stage are to narrow the number of concepts quickly and to improve the concepts. Figure 5.1.4 shows
the screening matrix used during this stage.

Step 1 - Prepare the selection matrix

Here a matrice similar to one illustrated in Figure 5.1.4 may be used. Selection criteria are chosen based or customer
needs the team will have identified as well as on the needs of the enterprise (eg. Low manufacturing cost or minimal
risk of product liability). After careful consideration, the team chooses a concept to become the benchmark or
reference concept against which all other concepts are rated. This reference is generally either an industry standard or
an obvious solution to the problem. It can be a commercially viable product, an earlier generation of the product, any
one of the concepts under consideration, or a combination o subsystems combined to represent the best features of
different products.

Step 2 - Rate the concepts

A relative score of "better than" (+), "same as" (0), or "worse than" (-) is placed in each cell of the math) depending
upon how the concept rates in comparison to the reference concept relative to the particular criterion.

Step 3 - Rank concepts

After rating all the concepts, the team sums the number of "better than", "same as" scores and enters the matrix sum
for each category in the lower rows of the matrix. A net score can be calculated by subtracting the number of" worse
than" ratings from the "better than" ratings.
Once this summation is completed, the team rank-orders the concepts and hence concepts with more pluses than
30

minuses are selected.

Selection Criteria

A
Master
Cylinder
0
0
0

B
Rubber
Brake
0
0

Ease of handling
Ease of use
Readability of
settings
Dose metering
0
0
accuracy
Durability
0
0
Ease of
+
manufacture
Portability
+
+
Sum +s
2
1
Sum 0s
5
4
Sum s
0
2
Net Score
2
-1
Rank
1
6
Continue?
Yes
No
Figure 5.4 Concept Screening Matrix

C
Ratchet
+

Concepts
D
E
(reference)
Swash Ring
Plunge Stop
0
0
0
0
0
+

F
Lever Set

G
Dial Screw

+
0

0
+

0
-

0
0

0
0

+
-

0
0

0
1
3
3
-2
7
No

0
0
7
0
0
3
Combine

+
2
4
1
1
2
Yes

0
2
3
2
0
3
Combine

0
1
5
1
0
3
Revise

Step 4- Combine and Improve the concepts

Having rated and ranked the concepts, the team verifies that the results make sense and then considers if there are ways
to combine and improve certain concepts. Two issues considered in concept combination
are: Is there a good concept which is degraded by one bad feature? Can a minor modification improve the overall
concept and yet preserve a distinction from the other concepts?
Are there two concepts which can be combined to preserve the "better than" qualities while annulling the
"worse than" qualities?
From the example in Figure 5.1.4 concepts D and F could be combined to remove several of the "worse than" ratings to
yield a new concept, DF, to be considered in the next round. Concept G was also considered for revision. The revised
concepts are shown in Figure 5.1.5.

Step 5 - Select one or more concepts

Once the team members are satisfied with their understanding of each concept and its relative worth, they decide which
concepts are to be selected for further refinement and analysis.

31

Figure 5.5

New and Revised Concepts for Syringe

Step 6 - reflect on the results and the process

All of the team members should be comfortable with the outcome. If an individual is not in agreement with the decision
of the team, then perhaps one or more important criteria are missing from the screening matrix. An explicit consideration
of whether the results make sense to everyone reduces the likelihood of making a mistake and increases the likelihood
that the entire team will be solidly committed to the subsequent development activities.

5.2.2 Concept Scoring

In this stage, the team weigh the relative importance of the selection criteria and focuses on more refined comparisons
with respect to each criteria. The concept scores are determined by the weighted sum of the ratings. Figure 5.6 illustrates
the scoring matrix used in this stage.

Step 1 - Prepare the selection matrix

As in the screening stage, the team prepares a matrix and identifies a reference concept. Concepts finding their way to
this stage are refined to some extent and may be expressed in more detail. In conjunction with more detailed concepts,
the team may wish to add more detail to the selection criteria. The use of hierarchical relations is a useful way to
illustrate the criteria. For the syringe example, suppose the team decided that the criterion "ease of use" did not provide
sufficient detail to help distinguish among the remaining concepts. "Ease of use" could be broken down, as shown in
Figure 5.7 to include " ease of injection"' "ease of cleaning"' and "ease of loading".
After the criteria are entered, the team adds importance weights to the matrix. Different schemes can be used to weigh
the criteria, such as assigning an importance value from 1 to 5, or allocating 100 percentage points among them, as in
Figure 5.6.

32

Concepts

Selection
Criteria

Weigh
t

DF

G+

(reference)
Master Cylinder
Rating Weighte
d Score

Lever Stop

Swash Ring

Dial Screw +

Rating

Weighte
d Score

Rating

Weighte
d Score

Rating

Weighted
Score

Ease of handling

5%

0.15

0.15

0.2

0.2

Ease of use
Readability of
settings
Dose metering
accuracy
Durability
Ease
of
manufacture
Portability

15
10

3
3

0.45
0.3

4
3

0.6
0.3

4
5

0.6
0.5

3
5

0.45
0.5

25

0.75

0.75

0.5

0.75

15
20

3
3

0.45
0.6

5
3

0.75
0.6

4
2

0.6
0.4

3
2

0.45
0.4

10

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

Figure 5.6

Total Score
Rank

3.00
4

3.45
1

3.10
2

3.05
3

Continue?

No

Develop

No

No

Concept Scoring

The matrix in Figure 5.6 uses concept A as a reference concept.

Ease of Injection

EASE OF USE

Ease of Cleaning

Ease of Loading
Figure 5.7 Hierarchical decomposition of selection criteria

Step 2 - Rate the concept

As in the screening stage, one way to rate the concept is to compare them to the reference concept. Because of the need
for additional resolution to distinguish among competing concepts, a finer scale is now used. A scale of 1 to 5 is
recommended as below:
Relative Performance
Rating
Much worse than reference concept
1
Worse than reference concept
2
Same as reference concept
3
Better than reference concept
4
Much better than reference concept
5

Step 3 Rank the Concepts

Once the ratings are entered for each concept, weighted scores are calculated by multiplying the new scores by the
criteria weights. The total score for each concept is the sum of the weighted scores:
n

S j rij wi
i 1

where rij -raw rating of concept j for the ith criterion

wi; - weighting for i th criterion
n- number of criteria
Sj - total score for concept j
33

Finally, each concept is given a rank corresponding to its total score, as shown in Figure 5.6

Step 4 - Combine and Improve the concepts

As in the screening stage, the team looks for changes or combinations that improve concepts. Although the formal
concept generation process is typically completed before concept selection begins, some of the most creative
refinements and improvements occur during the concept selection process as the team realises the inherent strengths and
weaknesses of certain feature of the product concepts

Step 5 - Select one or more concepts

For the syringe example, the team agreed that concept DF was the most promising and was likely to lead to a successful
product.

Step 6 - Reflect on the results and the process

The final step is to reflect on the selected concept and the concept selection process

Exercises
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Discuss the concept selection process as an integral part of the product development process.
Discuss the six-step process followed in narrowing the number of concepts generated during product
development.
Discuss the six-step process followed in selecting the most promising concept in the process of developing a
product. What is the purpose of a reference concept?
Using the concept selection methodology, select the most promising from concepts you generated in
proceeding exercise (concept generation).
What are the prospects for computer support of concept selection activities
Outline the concept selection methodology, with particular reference to concept screening and concept
scoring matrices.

34

LECTURE SIX PRODUCT ARCHITECTURE

After this lecture you should understand the following :
Product architecture
Implications of product architecture on the enterprise
Procedures for establishing architecture

6.0 What is product architecture?

A product is always thought of in both functional and physical terms. The functional elements of a product are the
individual operations and transformations that contribute to the overall performance of the product. Functional elements
are usually described in schematic form before they are reduced to specific technologies, components or physical
working principles.
The physical elements of a product are the parts, components, and subassemblies that ultimately implement the product's
functions.
The physical elements of a product are typically organised into several major physical building blocks, which we call
chunks. Each chunk is made up of a collection of components that implement the functions of the product.
The architecture of a product is therefore the scheme by which the functional elements of the product are arranged into
physical chunks and by which the chunks interact.
A very important characteristic of a product's architect is its modularity. A modular architecture has the following two
properties: Chunks implement one or a few functions
Interactions between chunks are well defined
Such a modular architecture allows a design change to be made to one chunk without generally requiring a change to
other chunks for the product to function correctly. The chunks may be designed quite independently of one another.
The opposite of a modular architecture is an integral architecture. An integral architecture exhibits one or more of the
following properties: Functional elements of the product are implemented using more than one chunk
A single chunk implements many functional elements
Interactions between chunks are ill-defined
An example of modular and integral architecture is shown in Figure 6.1

Figure 6.1

Bicycle brake and shifting controls on the left-modular and on the right integral architecture.

Implications of the architecture

Decisions about how much modularity to impose on the architecture are linked to several issues of importance to the
entire enterprise: Product performance
Product change
Product variety
Component standardisation
Manufacturability
Product change
chunks are physical blocks of the product, but the architecture of the product defines how these blocks relate to the
35

function of the product. The architecture of the product defines how these blocks relate to the function of the product.
The architecture therefore also defines how the product can be changed. Modular chunks allow changes to be made to a
few isolated functional elements of the product without necessarily affecting the design of other chunks. Changing an
integral chunk may affect many functional elements and requires changes to several related chunks. Some of the motives
for product change include:- product upgrade, addons, adaptation and wear. In each of these cases a modular architecture
allows the firm to minimise the physical changes required to achieve a functional change.
Product variety
variety refers to the range of product models the firm can produce within a particular time in response to market demand.
Products built around modular product architecture can be more easily varied without adding tremendous complexity to
the manufacturing system. A good example is the swatch range of watches.
Swatch produces hundreds of different watch models, but can achieve this variety at relatively low cost by assembling
the variants from different combinations of standard chunks (Figure 6.2)
A large number of different hands, faces and wristbands can be combined to create endless combinations.

Figure 6.2
Swatch uses a modular design
Component standardisation:- component standardisation is the use of the same component or chunk in multiple products.
Such standardisation allows the firm to manufacture the chunk in higher volumes than would otherwise be possible. This
in turn leads to lower costs and increased quality. Component standardisation may also occur outside the firm when
several manufacturer's products all use a chunk or component from the same supplier. A good example is the battery of
the watch in Figure 6.2, made by a supplier and standardised across several manufacturers' product lines.
Product performance:- product performance is how well a product implements its intended functions. Typical
performance characteristics are speed, efficiency, life, accuracy and noise.
An integral architecture facilitates the optimisation of those performance characteristics that are driven by the size and
mass of a product. Such characteristics include; acceleration, energy consumption, aerodynamic drag, noise and
aesthetics. The practice of implementing multiple functions using a single physical element is called function sharing.
An integral architecture allows for redundancy to be eliminated through function sharing and allows for geometric
nesting of components to minimise the volume a product occupies. Clearly material utilisation is minimised and so are
manufacturing costs.
Manufacturability:- One important design of manufacturing (DFM) strategy includes the minimisation of the number of
parts in a product through component integration. However, to maintain a given architecture, the integration of physical
components can only be easily considered within each of the chunks. Component integration across several chunks is
different, if not impossible, and would alter the architecture dramatically.
Establishing the Architecture
Because the product architecture will have profound implications for subsequent product development activities and for
the manufacturing and marketing of the completed product, it should be established in a cross-functional effort by the
development team the end result of this activity is an appropriate geometric layout of the product, descriptions of the
major chunks, and documentation of the key interactions among the chunks. A four step methodology is recommended
to structure the decision process:i. create a schematic of the product
ii. cluster the elements of the schematic
iii. create a rough geometric layout
36

iv. identify fundamental and incidental interactions

Exercise
What are the implications of degree of modularity to product architecture. What do you understand by product
architecture? Explain using suitable examples

Reading List
1
2
3
4
14
15

D. Waters, Operations Management, Addison Wesley, 1996.

S.D. Eppinger, K. T. Ulrich, Product Design and Development, McGraw Hill, 1995.
B. Prasad, Concurrent Engineering Fundamentals, Prentice Hall PTR, 1997.
B. Lilly, Design for Manufacturing: Lecture Notes, Ohio State University, 1999.
L. Cohen, Quality Function Deployment, Addison Wesley, 1995.
C. McMahon, CAD/CAM, Addison Wesley, 1998.

37

LECTURE SEVEN INDUSTRIAL DESIGN

After this lecture you should understand the following:
industrial design and its role in product design
the industrial design process
the management of the industrial design process

7.0 Industrial design and its importance to products

The birth of Industrial Design (ID) is often traced to western Europe in the early 1980s. Europeans believed a product
should be designed "from the inside out". Form should follow function. In the United States the product's exterior was
held more important and its insides mattered little. This is evidenced in US products of the 1930s. From fountain pens to
baby buggies, products were designed with non-functional aerodynamic shapes in an attempt to create product appeal.
The auto industry provides another example. The shapes of European automobiles of the 1930s were fairly simple and
smooth, while US cars of the same era were decorated with such non-functional features as tailfins and chrome teeth.
By the 1970s European influence had strongly influenced American ID thinking. Heightened competition in the
marketplace forced companies to search for ways to improve and differentiate their products. Increasingly companies
accepted the notion that the role of ID needed to go beyond mere shape and appearance.
Today the Industrial Designers Society of America (IDSA) defines industrial design as the "professional service of
creating and developing concepts and specifications that optimise the function, value and appearance of products and
systems for the mutual benefits of both user and manufacturer" Clearly the definition is broad enough to include the
activities of the entire product development team. In fact, Industrial Designers focus their attention upon the form and
user interaction of products. Five critical goals that industrial designers can help a team to achieve when developing new
products include utility, appearance, ease of maintenance, low costs, communication
Most products on the market can be improved in some way or another by good ID, and all products that are used,
operated, or seen by people depend critically on ID for commercial success. A convenient means for assessing the
importance of ID to a particular product is to characterise importance along two dimensions: ergonomics and aesthetics.
Ergonomic Needs - We ask:
How important is ease of use?
How important is ease of maintenance?
How many user interactions are required for the product?
What are the safety issues?
Aesthetic Needs - We ask:
Is product differentiation required?
How important are pride of ownership, image, and fashion? an aesthetic product motivate the design team?
Industrial design process
Most companies have internal industrial design departments. Small companies tend to use contract ID services provided
by consulting firms. In either case, industrial designers should participate fully on cross-functional product development
teams. Within these teams, engineers follow an established procedure to generate and evaluate concepts for the technical
features of a product. In a similar manner Industrial designers follow an established procedure for designing the
aesthetics and ergonomics of a product.
Specifically the ID process is made up of the following phases:
Investigation of customer needs
conceptualisation (see Figure 7.1)
preliminary refinement
further refinement and final concept selection (see Figure 7.2)
control drawings (see Figure 7.3)
co-ordination with engineering, manufacturing, and vendors

38

Figure 7.1

Figure 7.2

Concept sketches showing two of the early concepts in the MicroTAC development project

Hard model - after further refinement and final concept selection

39

Figure 7.3

Micro!AC - Control drawing showing the final shape and dimensions.

Management of the industrial design process

Industrial design may be incorporated into the overall product design process at any time during a development
programme. The timing of the ID effort depends upon the nature of the product being designed. To explain the timing of
the ID effort it is convenient to classify products according to the nature of the dominant challenges facing the
development team: achieving technological performance, designing the exterior and user interfaces, or both.
Technology Driven Products
The primary characteristics of a technology-driven product is that its core benefit is based on its technology, or its ability
to accomplish a specific technical task, while such product may still have important aesthetic and ergonomic
requirements, consumers will most likely purchase the product primarily for its technical performance.
It therefore follows that for the development team of a technology-driven product, the engineering or technical
requirements will be paramount and will dominate development efforts. Accordingly the role of ID I often limited to
packaging the core technology, which entails determining the product's external appearance and ensuring that the
product communicates its technological capabilities and modes of interaction to the user.
User - Driven Products
The core benefit of a user -driven product is derived from its interface and/or its aesthetics appeal. Typically there is a
high degree of user interaction for these products. Accordingly the user interfaces must be safe, easy to use, and easy to
maintain. The product's external appearance is often important to differentiate the product and create pride of ownership.
While these products may be technically sophisticated, the technology does not differentiate the product; thus, for the
40

product development team, the ID considerations will be more important than the technical requirements. The role of
engineering may still be important to determine any technical features of the product: however, since the technology is
often already established, the development team focuses on the user aspects of the product.
Technology-and- User-Driven Products
A technology-and -user-driven product is simply the combination of the above two categories. These products have a
high degree of user interaction and have stringent technical performance requirements. Figure 7.4 classifies a variety of
popular products.

Figure 7.4 Classification of some common products on the continuum from technology-driven to user-driven.
Note: rarely does a product fit exactly into a given category. Instead most products fall somewhere along the continuum.
These classifications can be dynamic. For instance, when a company develops a product based on a new core
technology, the company is often interested in bringing the product to market as quickly as possible. Since little
emphasis is placed on how the product looks or is used, the initial role of ID is small.
However, as competitors enter the market, the product may need to compete more along user or aesthetic dimensions.
The product's original classification shifts, and ID assumes an extremely important role in the development process.
A walkman provides a good example of a technology-and-user-driven product. The core benefit of the first Walkman
( e.g. Sony) was its technology ( miniature tape player). As competition entered this market, however, Sony relied very
heavily on ID to create aesthetic appeal and enhanced utility, adding to the technical advantages of subsequent models.

41