International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 2013

Vol. 26, No. 12, 1105–1116, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0951192X.2011.608723

Towards lean product and process development

Muhammad S. Khana, Ahmed Al-Ashaaba*, Essam Shehaba, Badr Haqueb, Paul Ewersc,
Mikel Sorlid and Amaia Sopelanad
a
Decision Engineering Centre, Manufacturing Department, Cranfield University, Cranfield, MK43 0AL, UK; bEngineering Systems
& Services, Rolls Royce Plc, Derby, UK; cElectronics Product Group, Visteon Engineering Services Ltd., Chelmsford, UK;
d
Innovation Systems Unit, Tecnalia, Bizkaia, Spain
(Received 31 January 2011; final version received 24 July 2011)

Successes in lean manufacture have led researchers and practitioners to consider extending ‘lean’ to different parts of
the engineering enterprise, including product and process development (PPD). Lean product development (PD) has
been understood to mean lean manufacture applied to PD, while the roots of lean PD – just like lean manufacture –
go back to Toyota. This article presents the methodology adopted in order to pave the way towards a coherent lean
PD model that combines lessons from the Toyota product development system (TPDS) with other best practises.
The article provides a unique review of the lean PD research area, and a reference framework for the enablers that
Toyota has employed for lean PD. An investigation of five engineering enterprises undertaken to search for evidence
of the implementation of lean PD enablers through observation, document analysis and interviews is also presented.
Some enablers have been informally applied, while few have been formally implemented, and no model was found to
formally combine lean PD enablers into a coherent whole. This is the first article to critique attempts to describe lean
PD and provide a definition for Lean PD.
Keywords: lean product development; Toyota development; product development; product design; set based
concurrent engineering; continuous improvement; process modelling; design for manufacture; process innovation;
knowledge based engineering

1. Introduction any product (Duverlie and Castelain 1999). One

The challenges faced by engineering companies are possible reason for this is the ‘room for creativity’
fierce and many find themselves struggling for mere and subsequent unstructured approach in traditional
survival. The entire engineering enterprise is being product design. Research undertaken to improve PPD
compelled to improve; some of the pressures include with lean thinking may prove instrumental in the
economic crises, evolving market demands, stiff global progress of engineering.
competition and the need to improve time-to market The term lean product development (PD) has been
(Yelkur and Herbig 1996, Murman et al. 2000, Molina understood to mean lean manufacturing applied to
et al. 2005, de Brentani 2010). Lean thinking – an PD, while the roots of lean PD – just like lean
improvement philosophy which focuses on the creation manufacturing – go back to Toyota. However,
of value and the elimination of waste – is a potential researchers and practitioners have taken various routes
weapon in this struggle. in their attempts to describe or propose an approach to
Lean thinking has been a subject of research for lean PD. Through this research, the authors seek to
nearly two decades, the focus of which has been on define lean PD and its supporting constituents.
improving manufacturing processes (Khalil and Stock- This article presents a review and analysis of the
ton 2010), as well as administration, management and lean PD research area, and investigates the various
the supply chain. However, new engineering products approaches taken by researchers and practitioners.
continue to under-perform in their lead times, cost and Based on the review, a framework for the enablers of
quality. There has been comparatively less research lean PD has been proposed, which provides a
done to apply ‘lean’ to product and process develop- foundation for the building blocks of lean PD. The
ment (PPD): the design process, from the concept stage article also describes the outcome of an industrial field
to the detailed development of products and their study of five engineering enterprises, which is under-
related manufacturing processes. This is rather strange, taken to search for evidence of the implementation of
as PPD has the greatest influence on the profitability of lean PD enablers.

*Corresponding author. Email: a.al-ashaab@cranfield.ac.uk

© 2013 Taylor & Francis

1106 M.S. Khan et al.

The research presented in this article has been

conducted as part of a collaborative European
research project titled ‘Lean Product and Process
Development (LeanPPD)’. The project – initiated in
January 2009 and expected to conclude by January
2013 – is supported by the European Commission for
research (FP7/NMP-2008-214090).
The structure of the article follows the sequence of
research, which begins with a description of the
research approach in Section 2, followed by a brief
background to lean manufacturing and subsequently
lean PD in Section 3. Different approaches to lean PD Figure 1. Research approach diagram.
are analysed in Section 4 and an overall analysis of the
research area and the research that is required to Five engineering companies from the automotive,
progress towards a holistic implementation of lean PD aerospace and home appliances sectors were visited
is provided in Section 5. The article then presents a and observed by researchers in order to develop an
reference framework for lean PD enablers in Section 6, understanding of the context. The needs and interests
followed by the results and analysis of an industrial of each company were understood through various
field study undertaken to search for evidence of the exercises involving both face-to-face and virtual tele-
implementation of lean PD enablers in Section 7. conference meetings. The purpose of these activities
Section 8 provides a number of conclusions drawn was to understand how lean PD could help the
from the research presented and recommendations for companies to improve their PD. This interaction with
future work. industry is part of the clinical methodology that has
been employed, wherein researchers adopted a colla-
borative approach with companies and plan to have an
2. Research approach active role in the implementation of theory and analyse
The authors have endeavoured to analyse the work the impact of their research.
done in the lean PD research area, understand the Based on the understanding gained from the
different approaches and identify some research trends literature review and industrial visits, a structured
in the field. Approaches have been classified in order to questionnaire was developed in order to search for
provide an overview of the research area, research gaps evidence of the implementation of lean PD enablers.
have been identified and future research in this area is This was a difficult task as the questions had to address
proposed. The employed research approach is depicted multiple lean PD enablers simultaneously and took
in Figure 1. over 3 months to develop. The questionnaire was used
In order to identify relevant literature, a number of to guide the explorative study through face-to-face
methods were employed. Keyword searches were used interviews with managers and engineers. Thirty seven
across a number of databases including Scopus, employees were interviewed from the five companies
ProQuest, Springerlink, Emerald and Science Direct. both in small groups and individually to get a rich set
Keywords that were used include: lean PD, lean model, of results. The results from these interviews were later
lean design, lean engineering, PD value, amongst analysed and conclusions were drawn.
others. The searches resulted in hundreds of journal
and conference papers which were reviewed and
filtered. Library searches and internet websites (e.g. 3. The foundation of lean PD
Amazon) were also used to identify other literature Lean has become one of the most popular words in
such as text books. engineering improvement initiatives. In the foundation
Another technique that was employed was back- book The machine that changed the world (Womack
tracking through the references of the relevant papers. et al. 1990), the term ‘lean’ was described as a
The resulting literature has been analysed in Section 4. combination of principles and ideas developed by
In order to develop a clearer understanding of lean Toyota and described earlier by Taichi Ohno (Ohno
PD, a framework was developed in order to structure 1988) to describe the Toyota production system (TPS).
the building blocks of lean PD (enablers). This Further work in 1996 titled ‘Lean Thinking’ detailed
framework was based on content analysis of the important aspects such as value, waste, and the five
reviewed literature and includes the techniques and core lean principles (Womack and Jones 2003).
tools that form the foundation of lean PD. The The term lean was initially used in reference to
framework is presented as a table in Section 6. manufacturing operations; lean is now being used
 International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 1107

across a spectrum of sectors. The term lean has become concurrent engineering (SBCE): a unique PD process
confusing as some label Toyota practise as lean (Sobek et al. 1999, Ward 2007).
(Womack et al. 1990), while others label good practise Allen Ward later joined UM and continued in this
as lean (Mynott 2000). Lean thinking is no doubt research area and he began a case study with a number
based on Toyota methods, and much of the lean of PhD students and later with Jeffrey Liker, a
literature describes Toyota practises. Baines et al. professor of industrial and operations engineering.
(2006) identified a difference between earlier works, Allen was considered as the leading US authority on
where the focus was on waste elimination and latter Toyota’s PD process and was the technical expert for a
works that which focused on value creation. One 2-year collaborative project with the National Centre
reason for this may be because earlier works focused for Manufacturing Sciences in Michigan. The project
on manufacturing operations, whereas latter works (initiated by GM/Delphi) titled ‘Product Development
attempted to apply the same principles to different Process – Methodology and Performance Measures’
settings. Browning (2003) draws a similarity between aimed to understand how to make substantial PD
engineering and an athlete, and argues that simply improvements by studying world class companies that
losing weight will not allow you to win a race. He had distinguished themselves with a combination of
quotes a number of cases where companies have over- high quality products and fast time to market
emphasised on efficiency which resulted in lost (Kennedy 2003).
production and sales, although such a causative
relationship is not easy to prove. Lean manufacturing
has evolved as its own discipline, and many have tried 4. Approaches to lean PD
to adopt lean manufacturing principles to other parts Researchers and practitioners took different journeys
of the engineering enterprise. However, one of the once they realised the potential benefit that PD could
questions addressed in this article is: should the source gain by becoming ‘Lean’. These approaches may be
of lean PD be the evolved lean manufacturing separated into five categories, as presented in Table 1:
discipline or Toyota PD?
The term ‘lean production’ was first published by (1) Those who rebranded concurrent engineering
John Krafcik in a Sloan Management Review article as Lean PD.
in 1988, (Krafcik 1988) based on his master’s thesis (2) Those who viewed ‘Lean’ as lean manufactur-
at the MIT. Krafcik (1988) had been a quality ing – as described in the various texts analysing
engineer in the Toyota-GM New United Motor TPS – and tried to adapt the various constitu-
Manufacturing (NUMMI) joint venture in California ents to make sense to PD; in some cases, lean
before his MBA studies at MIT. Krafcik’s (1988) manufacturing was mixed with other theories
research was part of the International Motor Vehicle and approaches in order to ensure the proposed
Program (IMVP) at MIT, which resulted in the Lean PD approach was relevant to PD.
aforementioned book The machine that changed the (3) Those who appreciated the foundation of Lean
world (Womack et al. 1990). Prior to the term ‘lean’, PD to be the Toyota product development
the TPS was referred to as ‘fragile’ perhaps due to system (TPDS), but – probably due to the lack
the scepticism of the US researchers who initiated of literature on the topic – incorporated some
the case study. The IVMP program actually had two elements of TPDS into the five lean principles
initial phases, both led by Professor Daniel Roos, combined with other ideas from lean manufac-
the founding director of MIT’s engineering systems turing and tried to apply this combination to
division. The first 5-year research program began in PD.
1979 aimed at understanding the future role of the (4) A fourth group that identified the foundation
automobile, while the second 5-year program began of ‘lean’ to be Toyota and went to great extents
in 1985 aimed at measuring and describing the gap to study TPDS from the Toyota Motor
between the Western World and Japan (Holweg Company and identified a more comprehensive
2007). set of principles and mechanisms directly
While the focus of research at MIT was on the TPS, related to PD that were argued to be theore-
Allen Ward, a professor of mechanical engineering at tically superior to any of the PD theory that
the University of Michigan (UM) was more concerned was previous identified.
with PD. Allen had initially completed his PhD at (5) A fifth group has recently emerged where
MIT – at the same time as the IVMP – in artificial practitioners have attempted to apply Toyota
intelligence for automating engineering design, wherein PD concepts in their companies; this group is
he realised that conventional PD was fundamentally reliant on group 4 for their principles and
flawed and stumbled upon what he coined set-based mechanisms.
1108 M.S. Khan et al.

Table 1. Approaches to lean product development.

Approach Author Year Title Source/Publisher

Rebranding concurrent Karlsson and Ahlstrom 1996 The difficult path to lean Journal of Product
engineering as Lean product development Innovation
PD Management
Adapting ideas from Mynott 2000 Lean product American Technical
Lean Manufacture to development Publishers
PD in combination Fiore 2003 Lean strategies for Quality Press
with other theories product development
Cooper and Edgett 2005 Lean, rapid and Product Development
profitable new Institute
product development
Anand and Kodali 2008 A conceptual framework International Journal of
for LNPD Product Development
Reinertsen 2009 The principles of Celeritas Publishing
product development
flow
Integrating elements of Haque and James- 2004 Application of lean Journal of Engineering
TPDS with Lean Moore principles to product Design
Manufacturing introduction
principles and Oppenheim 2004 Lean product Systems Engineering
methods and applying development flow
them to PD Huthwaite 2004 Lean design solution Institute for Lean
Innovation
McManus et al. 2005 Lean engineering: doing 1st International
the right things right Conference on
Innovation and
Integration in
Aerospace Sciences
Hines et al. 2006 Towards lean product Journal of
lifecycle management Manufacturing
Technology
Management
Mascitelli 2006 The lean product Technology Perspectives
development
guidebook
Schuh et al. 2008 Lean innovation: Proceedings to Portland
introducing value International
systems to product Conference 2008 on
development Management of
Engineering &
Technology
Describing Toyota Ward et al. 1995 The second Toyota Sloan Management
concepts based on a paradox: how Review
case study of TPDS delaying decisions can
make better cars
faster
Sobek et al. 1998 Another look at how Harvard Business
Toyota integrates Review
product development
Sobek et al. 1999 Toyota’’s principles of Sloan Management
set-based concurrent Review
engineering
Kennedy 2003 Product development for The Oaklea Press
the lean enterprise
Morgan and Liker 2006 The Toyota product Productivity Press
development system:
integrating people,
process, and
technology
Ward 2007 Lean product and Lean Enterprise Institute
process development
Kennedy et al. 2008 Ready, set, dominate: Oaklea Press
implement Toyota’’s
set-based learning for
developing products
and nobody can catch
you

(continued)
 International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 1109

Table 1. (Continued).
Approach Author Year Title Source/Publisher
Practitioners attempting Oosterwal 2010 The lean machine: how AMACOM
to apply Toyota Harley-Davidson
concepts in PD drove top-line growth
and profitability with
revolutionary lean
product development
Schipper and Swets 2009 Innovative lean Productivity Press
development: how to
create, implement and
maintain a learning
culture using fast
learning cycles

All of these groups used Toyota’s success to on a case study of Toyota PD – developed 13 principles
support their approaches; however, Toyota’s success which were specific to PD (Morgan and Liker 2006).
was not achieved by the approaches described by Based on the analysis that has been described, the
groups 1–3. Rather Toyota’s success was due to the authors believe that Lean PD should refer to PD
approach that they themselves adopted and their PD theory that is based on the critical elements of Toyota
practices may have contributed significantly. This PD and not lean manufacturing. Once lean PD is
means that only the researchers that focused purely established – based on Toyota PD – then it may evolve
on TPDS can justify such a claim (groups 4–5). into a discipline in its own right. This was the case with
Benchmarking is not a new practise. Its origin is lean manufacturing and similarly lean PD must not be
often quoted as the measurement of feet on a bench by constrained to Toyota practices, and must be a
cobblers, while later it was re-contextualised to dynamic system that is always improving and respond-
company performance measurement (Cooper and ing to the challenges that PD faces. Currently research
Kleinschmidt 1995). The Japanese – while initiating conducted in this area is limited and it must be steered
their automobile industry – used benchmarking when in the right direction, to avoid mistakes in theory and
they visited the US automobile giants, as well as other practice.
European companies (Ohno 1988). The US used
benchmarking in the IMVP and the University of
Michigan (UM) Toyota PD case study to evaluate and 5. Progressing towards lean PPD
learn from Toyota and other Japanese companies. The The Toyota-centric Lean PD research that has been
global community develops as a whole and learns from conducted describes Toyota PD principles and me-
each other to achieve excellence. This does not mean chanisms, and their advantages over typical PD
that one company will not outperform its competitors, approaches. The research provides minimal evidence
nor does it mean that a company will disclose its of the effectiveness of applying Toyota PD methods
advanced capabilities. Benchmarking, however, must outside of Toyota. One reason for this is that the area
be done properly, and once complete should not be of research is fairly new, and has been overshadowed
generalised as an all-encompassing solution. Those by lean manufacturing and lean enterprise research.
who adapted lean manufacturing to PD may have Another possible explanation may be a cultural barrier
witnessed some short-term benefits. However, lean that inhibits the ideas of ‘left-shifting work’ and
manufacturing was extracted from the TPS and not the developing multiple alternative designs instead of a
TPDS. single design, which is the foundation of SBCE.
When you try to apply manufacturing principles Based on the review of this research, the authors
and mechanisms to PD, there are a number of believe that there are five core enablers of Toyota and
inconsistencies: the output value is not a physical indeed lean PD:
product received by a customer, eliminating waste does
not identify poor quality, and value stream mapping (1) SBCE process;
(VSM) is based on the assumption that you have (2) Chief engineer (entrepreneurial) technical
already got all the required value-adding steps in your leadership;
process, etc. Another assumption is that five principles (3) Value-focused planning and development – this
are sufficient for PD as they were for manufacturing; includes customer value, profit, amongst other
however, Morgan and Liker – who based their work attributes;
1110 M.S. Khan et al.

(4) Knowledge-based (KB) environment; some academics who consider organisational strategies
(5) Continuous improvement (Kaizen) culture. to be the key to success (Cusumano 1994, Cusumano
and Nobeoka 1998). Although we do not dispute the
The authors propose the following definition for importance of organisational strategy, it is vital to
lean PD: translate organisational strategy into processes in
order to achieve enterprise success.
‘Lean PD is value-focused PD. Value is a broad term
used to define stake-holder needs and desires. SBCE is
a strategic and convergent PD process guided by 6. The building blocks of lean PD
consistent technical leadership throughout. SBCE
enables the focus on value and in particular knowledge A framework of lean PD enablers was developed to
and learning. Continuous improvement is the culture represent lean PD. Methods, tools and techniques that
and an outcome of the SBCE learning process’. have been described by the researchers and practi-
tioners who base their work on Toyota PD were
The authors believe that Toyota has developed documented and analysed. Twenty-one lean PD
their PD system to support these five core enablers and enablers are agreed upon by consensus of these
all other techniques and tools support them. Some may researchers (Ward et al. 1995, Morgan and Liker
contest that the combination and management of 2006, Kennedy et al. 2008), while 26 enablers were
people and tools are the foundation of Toyota PD; mentioned in a number of publications but not by
however, many other companies have advanced consensus. This may be due to the research manuscript
management and organisational methods as well as being incomplete such as in the case of Ward (2007),
state of the art tools that may be equivalent or superior restricted to part of the puzzle (Ward et al. 1995, Sobek
to their Toyota equivalents (Meyer 2008). The author et al. 1999), or constrained to a particular case study
believes that the chief engineer leadership system is, (Kennedy 2003, Kennedy et al. 2008). The framework
however, an important enabler. provides a categorisation of the 46 enablers; categories
Through this review the authors identified that include core enablers, techniques and tools. The core
there is no comprehensive model that describes an enablers for lean PD are depicted in Figure 2 and their
integrated lean PD process and framework. Subse- combination is referred to as the conceptual LeanPPD
quently, there have been no structured attempts to model.
perform a lean PD case study with an informative SBCE is a unique PD process, and is considered as
before and after measurement. A number of research- the main enabler for lean PD by some researchers
ers have identified this gap and mentioned it as an area (Ward 2007). Other enablers that have been described
of future work in their concluding statements. Ward are either embodied within or support this process.
et al. (1995) suggested that Toyota’s approach is not Design participants practice SBCE by reasoning,
well defined or documented, and that methodologies developing and communicating about sets of solutions
need to be tested in different companies before in parallel. As the design progresses, they gradually
formulating a complete theory. It may be said that narrow their respective sets of solutions based on the
significant effort has been made to define and docu- knowledge gained. As they narrow, they commit to
ment Toyota’s approach; however, different research- staying within the sets so that others can rely on their
ers have done so unilaterally. Further work is required communication (Sobek et al. 1999). The SBCE process
to define the parameters of the lean PD research area is illustrated in Figure 3. SBCE comprises of a number
and also to test the methodologies in different of characteristics including exploring multiple alter-
companies. Thus a complete and tested theory that natives, delaying specification, a minimal constraint
integrates Lean PD into a holistic system which is policy (‘delayed commitment’), extensive prototyping
transferable to other companies is yet to be established
(McManus et al. 2005). Sobek et al. (1999) went to
great lengths to study and document Toyota’s SBCE
approach; however, research is still required to
construct a methodology for SBCE, integrated into a
full PD process model that combines Toyota PD
principles and mechanisms. This integrated model
would require thorough investigation to substantiate
its effectiveness and would need to be applied to a
number of case studies across multiple engineering
sectors in order to claim its general effectiveness for
PD. Process-related factors have been downplayed by Figure 2. The conceptual lean PPD model.
 International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 1111

minor modifications, major modifications, new pro-

duct family, etc.). Each category has a standard
duration and follows a regular drumbeat with standard
intervals. These development projects extract mature
technologies from advanced technology teams that
focus on research. Once a design is sufficiently mature
for launch, its release may be staggered to align with a
multi-project plan that ensures the strategic launch of
new products. This process is symbolic of the holistic
systems thinking that Toyota applies to PD.
The Chief Engineer technical leadership is another
enabler in which a technical leader is involved prior to
Figure 3. Set-based concurrent engineering process. conception and remains at the helm throughout the
entire PD process. The chief engineer follows a shared
company vision and is responsible for the production
of a design concept document, which is used to
(or simulation), and convergence upon the optimum communicate the vision for the product system.
design. PD integration/target events are another Cross-functional module development teams also
important enabler. These events are unique design play a role in the chief engineer system.
reviews used to guide the set-based process. Supplier Another major enabler is a knowledge-based
strategy also resonates through the research, with the environment in which learning more about the design
focus being on inter-locking key suppliers (keiretsu). alternatives is the focus of PD activities. Ensuring
Empowering suppliers to develop their own set-based knowledge is pulled by upstream processes as opposed
approach can enable reduced supplier tracking and to pushed by downstream processes is another
provide more room for innovation. important factor which ensures that knowledge flows
A number of additional design techniques are and is received in the right place at the right time.
employed early in the design process, such as mistake Mechanisms for capturing, representing and commu-
proofing (Poke Yoke) and early problem solving, nicating knowledge support the KB environment.
considering potential action scenarios to ensure con- These include: trade-off curves, check sheets, technical
ceptual robustness, and designing in quality. A design design standards and rules, and A3 single-sheet
structures plan is also developed by each functional knowledge representations, which are primarily used
department to work out the main features of the for problem solving. These methods collectively
design. provide a means for rapid communication and
Another design technique that can support lean PD comprehension. Digital engineering including CAD,
is ‘test-to-failure’ (Ijiwara in Japanese), wherein pro- CAM, CAE and other simulation software also
totypes are tested to breaking point. The aim of this support the KB environment. A learning organisation
technique is to learn more about designs and their culture wherein employees are rewarded and appre-
thresholds, and produce ‘limit curves’ which capture ciated for their technical contribution is another
the results. This technique forms part of the ‘test-then- echoed enabler. Junior employees are mentored by
design’ approach, wherein decisions are made after senior employees who train their students how to
designs have been tested and factual knowledge approach technical problems in addition to passing on
(evidence) is provided. Matrices for comparing design a wealth of tacit knowledge. Learning cycles such as
concepts and quality (e.g. quality function deploy- plan-do-check-act (PDCA) and look-ask-model-dis-
ment) are also employed to aid in decision making. cuss-act (LAMDA) represent the general problem-
The concept of value-focus is mentioned by all solving approach. This collaboration sustains an
researchers, and the differentiation between product/ expert workforce which is empowered to make
customer value and process/enterprise value is also decisions and do their own responsibility-based plan-
echoed (an example of process value is knowledge). ning. Another enabler is a KB engineering system, also
VSM has also been mentioned briskly by all research- known as a ‘know-how’ database. The KB engineering
ers, which may be indicative of its limited application system captures knowledge in a centralised database,
in PD or lack of clarity as to how it should be applied. with the capability to locate and extract required
A strategic approach to PD is employed by Toyota information easily. Another frequently employed
which allows projects to be used to increase process technique is a lessons learnt process wherein experi-
value (knowledge, capabilities, etc.) A product portfo- ences are reflected upon (Hansei in Japanese) and
lio is categorised into project types (facelift projects, captured in the KB engineering system. Lessons learnt
1112 M.S. Khan et al.

may also be published in books and provided to includes some root-cause analysis and an investiga-
employees. tion known as ‘5 whys’ where the source of a
A culture for continuous improvement (Kaizen) in problem is identified.
addition to formal methods to incorporate improve- A number of other enablers have been mentioned
ments have been suggested to be part of lean PD. by a single researcher or group, and may be relevant
Standardisation of processes, skills and design enablers for lean PD. However, due to the unilateral
methods allows continuous improvement to be mention and based on the critical analysis conducted,
regularly considered upon review. The Toyota it is likely that they are not fundamental lean PD
approach to problem solving (Obeya in Japanese) enablers.
is a pertinent example, where an A3-single sheet The enablers for lean PD have been structured into
problem report is prepared and then used as the a framework, presented in Table 2. The five core
focal point of collaborative meetings in team rooms. enablers are composed of techniques (methods or sub-
The aim is to share the problem, take counsel and enablers) and tools (hardware, software, documents,
arrive at a consensus for decisions. This often etc.).

Table 2. Framework for lean PD enablers.

Core enablers Techniques Tools

Set-based concurrent engineering Multiple alternatives (designed) Design concepts matrix
Delaying specification Quality matrix (QFD)
Minimal constraint Design structures functional plan
Extensive simulation/prototyping Design concept document
(possibly including full-scale
models)
Early problem solving Digital engineering (CAD/CAM/
CAE/simulation, etc.)
Test-then-design
Supplier strategy (supplier types and
interlocking)
Supplier set-based concurrent
engineering
Mistake proofing
Design in quality
Robust design methods
Integration/target events
Value-focus (planning and Value-stream mapping
development) Customer-focus (customer needs/
wants)
Multi-project plan and strategy
Chief engineer technical leadership Cross-functional module
development teams &and
manufacturing involvement
Knowledge-focus (knowledge-based Knowledge/information flow/ Trade-off curves
environment) cadence/pull (in right place at right
time)
Knowledge reuse Check sheets/lists
KB engineering system (know-how
database)
Expert workforce development
Mentoring by senior employees Limit curves
Test-to-failure
Rapid learning/comprehension A3 single-sheet problem reports
A3 group problem solving
Learning cycles (PDCA/LAMDA)
Root-cause analysis and 5 whys
Continuous improvement (Kaizen) Employee empowerment/individual Technical design standards and rules
culture responsibility
Lessons learnt reflection process Standard architectures (and
modularity)
Standardisation of processes, skills,
and design methods
Separating research from
development
 International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 1113

In order to develop a complete LeanPPD model, all individual views and opinions. The survey was
or most of the above mentioned enablers should be conducted between March and July of the year 2010.
present, and in particular the core enablers. Some of Results from the interviews were analysed qualita-
the techniques and tools may, however, be replaced by tively. The following considerations were made during
an equal or superior equivalent. the analysis of results in order to ensure that the results
represent PD and not just the individual, without
neglecting individual opinions and perceptions:
7. Lean PD in industry
Five engineering companies have been analysed as part . Role in organisation: Responses from managers
of this research in order to search for evidence of the were weighted higher for questions that were
implementation of the lean PD enablers described in related to organisational processes, while re-
Section 6. These include the following: sponses from engineers were weighted higher for
design methods and tools employed in PD.
. one aerospace company that design and make . Years of experience: Responses from intervie-
engines for a number of sectors; wees who have been working for the organisa-
. one automotive original equipment manufac- tion for a longer duration were generally
turer company; weighted higher, as they often had a better
. two automotive first tier supplier companies; understanding of PD at their organisation.
. one home appliances original equipment manu- . Consensus: Where there was a consensus of
facturer company. responses, it was quite certain that the answer
was representative of the organisation, whereas if
All of the companies face a variety of challenges in the answers varied then further analysis was
PD, including barriers to innovation, late design required to provide a single representative result
changes, communication issues and knowledge-related or a combined result representing different
problems. The companies are interested in improving opinions or views.
their processes, and the application of new methods . Incorrect responses: Some interviewees guessed,
and tools. Each of the companies do, however, face or answered without the required knowledge,
resource restrictions mainly due to economical factors. such answers generally became apparent to the
Initial interaction with industry involved various interviewer and were logged during the interview,
discussions through virtual web-based meetings, and and in some cases became apparent when
face-to-face meetings at a number of European comparing results.
locations. Researchers also visited each of the five . Transcripts: Notes taken during the interviews
engineering companies at their locations and observed were consulted while analysing results, to ensure
both PD and production activities. This included over that the context of each answer was understood
100 h of interaction. PD documentation, depicting and in some cases the behaviour of the
processes and models were provided for analysis. interviewees.
Meetings were held in order to understand industrial
needs and to ensure an industrial-driven approach to The questionnaire was used to investigate whether
the research. or not the 46 enablers depicted in Table 2 have been
Based on the understanding gained from the formally implemented through direct and indirect
literature review and industrial visits, a structured questions. Examples of the question that were asked
questionnaire was developed. The questionnaire was include:
used to guide the explorative study through face-to-
face interviews with managers and engineers. It was (1) Do you have flexibility in how you do your job?
important for these interviews to be face-to-face so (2) Is there a technical leader who is responsible for
that the behaviours and expressions of the candidates the entire development of a product from
could be analysed and evidence could be requested by concept to launch?
the interviewer for the answers provided. Thirty-seven (3) Every specification is a compromise between
candidates have been interviewed from the five what customers want and what can be pro-
companies, including project managers, lead engineers, vided. How is a product specification stabilised
engineering managers and design engineers. Each in your PD process?
interview ranged from 90 to 120 min depending on (4) How do you select the design solution that will
the responses from the interviewees. Multiple inter- be developed?
views were conducted in the same company in order to (5) How are your current processes and work
gain a better overall picture, without losing the methods reviewed/improved?
1114 M.S. Khan et al.

(6) Do manufacturing (production) engineers play that lead different stages of PD. This implies that the
an active role in each stage of PD? demonstration of consistent technical leadership for
(7) Do your suppliers provide you with multiple the full product life-cycle could yield significant results.
alternatives for a single part (component)? All of the companies employ a systems engineering
(8) How are projects currently initiated, and the approach with a combination of specification and
does the PD process flow? requirements documents. Cross-functional module
development teams are only employed in one of the
The results show that a number of lean PD enablers companies, however, they are formed late in the design
have been employed in the companies that were process. Manufacturing engineers tend to be involved
studied. However, the companies have not formally in the design of products and their level of involvement
implemented the majority of lean PD enablers as can increases as the project develops, however, only three
be seen in Figure 4. of the companies involve them in the concept stage
One company has formally implemented a set- albeit minimally.
based approach in the concepts stage of their PD, Knowledge tends not to be pulled, rather it is pushed
considering multiple alternatives and performing onto engineers; however, almost all interviewees sug-
extensive simulation and prototyping. Two companies gested that most design problems would be solved if the
have tested a set-based approach informally, but do correct knowledge was in the right place at the right time.
not progress alternatives sufficiently. However, none of It was also found that most of the interviewees spend
the companies intentionally delay their specification of 80% of their time on routine tasks, with the exception of
products and they tend to work in a constrained design one company that puts special emphasis on innovation.
space that limits their innovation and prevents However, none of the companies focus primarily on
convergence upon optimum designs. This means that learning and increasing enterprise knowledge. Evidence
a SBCE process could be a significant contribution to for the use of trade-off curves was found in one
each of the five industrial partner companies. company; however, checklists were employed in all
Three of the companies employ a supplier strategy companies with varied usage and effectiveness.
in which some suppliers are interlocked with the Lessons learnt are captured by all of the compa-
company, while others are given less flexibility to nies, but are not used effectively. However, one
design components. Suppliers to these companies do company has a formal lessons learnt strategy which
not employ SBCE, but they do sometimes offer captures lessons from each project by employees who
alternative solutions based on a rough specification. are encouraged to make suggestions which are fed
One company formally implements a chief engineer back into the processes. The majority of interviewees
system, wherein a technical leader is personally stated that they were always overburdened by the
involved in market research and is technically respon- quantity of work, with the exception of one company
sible for a product from concept to launch. However, where the engineers did not agree that this was the case
as in the other companies, a non-technical project as opposed to the managers who thought it was.
manager is always managing the project. Another A3 group problem solving is employed by two of
company has trialled this approach informally and the companies during design, both of which follow a
witnessed substantial results. Other companies do PDCA learning cycle. One of these companies find it
employ technical leaders, but they tend to be appointed difficult to follow as the meetings are generally virtual
after the concept stage or there are multiple leaders and a single-sheet representation is not always used,
while the other company finds that different depart-
ments vary in their methodologies.
Mistake proofing is considered where possible in all
of the companies, but there is no evidence that it is
formally analysed as part of their PD processes. Design
for six sigma is used sometimes by three of the
companies to ‘design in’ quality to the designs, but it
is considered only somewhat effective by most. Robust
design and Taguchi methods are also used in two of the
companies.
It was found that at the systems level products
follow a drumbeat and are designed as part of a
strategy with different product types (redesign, major
Figure 4. Percentage of lean PD enablers that companies modification, minor modification, facelifts, etc.). How-
A–E have formally implemented in their PD processes. ever, first tier suppliers respond to customer requests,
 International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 1115

often in competition with other suppliers. Projects tend The building blocks of Toyota PD which support five
to run late, and activities are often sacrificed in order core enablers have been structured in a framework which
to meet launch dates. Only one of the companies has a can be used as a reference for the key constituents of
separate (dedicated) research department, which offers Toyota PD, which is our best reference for lean PD. The
mature technology to new products. Other companies authors have collaborated with five engineering compa-
have research and development departments that push nies and conducted structured interviews in each of them
their technology onto new products. to search for evidence of the implementation of lean PD
The results show that most of the lean PD enablers enablers. Some of these enablers have been informally
have a presence in industry, but different companies applied in the companies, and a few have been formally
excel in the implementation of specific enablers. These implemented. However, no PD model was found that
enablers tend to be developed in-house or imported formally combines the enablers into a coherent whole.
from a parent (or another) company and lack the This shows that there is a need to demonstrate the
benefits of academic support. Many of the lean PD conceptual LeanPPD model and assess its impact on
enablers are intuitive, which explains their informal PD. If a lean PD model is developed which addresses the
application; however, participants suggested that current challenges faced by industry, companies may
cultural and organisational barriers are likely to be consider adopting it. Through our interactions with
the main inhibitors. Another problem is the misunder- industry, we have identified a keen interest in the
standing that lean PD is lean manufacturing applied to combination of the core enablers. The companies did
PD. Once the participants were provided with infor- not want to be provided with isolated tools; rather they
mation about lean PD, they were welcoming to the would prefer to implement lean PD using their existing
new ideas, and they did, however, want to see the tools and techniques.
results of a real case study before considering any The impact of the individual lean PD enablers does,
formal implementation. There remains a need for however, needs to be investigated to determine their
generic and formal research-based methodologies, effectiveness and relevance within a lean PD model.
techniques and tools to embed Lean PD enablers Future work that is currently in progress involves
into PD. developing the LeanPPD Model based primarily on
the five core enablers. The model will facilitate the
integration of best practises from Toyota and other
8. Conclusions and future work companies that are best suited to support the core
This article provides the methodology adopted in order enablers. Future research may also include the develop-
to pave the way towards the development of a coherent ment and implementation of methods and tools that
lean PD model that is fundamentally based on the support the hypotheses in this article. While this research
Toyota PD system. A systematic review has been provides direction for developing a lean PD model,
conducted in which the various approaches towards organisational, human resource and cultural factors
lean PD have been analysed and categorised. Based on need also to be considered as processes are implemented
the review, lean PD has been defined as follows: by people.

‘Lean PD is value-focused PD. Value is a broad term Acknowledgements

used to define stake-holder needs and desires. SBCE is The research presented in this article has been conducted
a strategic and convergent PD process guided by as part of a European project titled ‘Lean Product and
consistent technical leadership throughout. SBCE Process Development (LeanPPD)’. The project involves
enables the focus on value and in particular knowledge multiple research and industrial partners from the UK,
and learning. Continuous improvement is the culture Spain, Germany, Italy and Poland. The project is
and an outcome of the SBCE learning process’. supported by the Commission of European Community
(contract number NMP-2008–214090) under the NMP
Previous research provides minimal evidence of the Programme (Nanosciences, Nanotechnologies, Materials
effectiveness of applying Toyota PD methods outside and new Production Technologies). The authors acknowl-
edge the European Commission for its support as well as
of Toyota. One reason for this is that the area of
the other partners in the consortium (http://www.leanpp-
research is fairly new and has been overshadowed by d.eu).
lean manufacturing and lean enterprise research.
Another possible explanation may be a cultural barrier
that inhibits the ideas of ‘left-shifting work’ and
References
developing multiple alternative designs instead of a
Anand, G., and Kodali, R. 2008. Development of a
single design, which is the foundation of SBCE. conceptual framework for lean new product develop-
Further research is required to progress lean PD into ment. International Journal of Product Development, 6
a discipline in its own right. (2), 190–224.
1116 M.S. Khan et al.

Baines, T., et al., 2006. State-of-the-art in lean design Mcmanus, H.L., Haggerty, A., and Murman, E., 2005. Lean
engineering: a literature review on white collar lean. engineering: doing the right thing right. In: Proceedings
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, of the 1st international conference on innovation and
Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 220 (9), integration in aerospace sciences, Queen’s University
1539–1547. Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK 2005.
Browning, T.R., 2003. On customer value and improvement Meyer, M.H., 2008. Perspective: how Honda innovates. Journal
in product development processes. Systems Engineering, of Product Innovation Management, 25 (3), 261–271.
6 (1), 49–61. Molina, A., ACA, J., and Wright, P., 2005. Global
Cooper, R.G. and Edgett, S.J., 2005. Lean, rapid, and collaborative engineering environment for integrated
profitable new product development. London: Product product development. International Journal of Computer
Development Institute. Integrated Manufacturing, 18 (8), 635–651.
Cooper, R.G. and Kleinschmidt, E.J., 1995. Benchmarking Morgan, J.M. and Liker, J.K., 2006. The Toyota product
the firm’s critical success factors in new product development system: integrating people, process, and
development. Journal of Product Innovation Manage- technology. New York: Productivity Press.
ment, 12 (5), 374–391. Murman, E.M., Walton, M., and Rebentisch, E., 2000.
Cusumano, M.A., 1994. The limits of ‘Lean’. Sloan Manage- Challenges in the better, faster, cheaper era of aero-
ment Review, 35, 27–27. nautical design, engineering and manufacturing. Aero-
Cusumano, M.A. and Nobeoka, K., 1998. Thinking beyond nautical Journal, 104 (1040), 481–489.
lean. London: Free Press. Mynott, C., 2000. Lean product development: the manager’s
De Brentani, U., Kleinschmidt, E.J. and Salomo, S., 2010. guide to organising, running and controlling the complete
Success in global new product development: impact of business process of developing products. Orland Park, IL:
strategy and the behavioral environment of the firm. Westfield Publishing.
Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27 (2), 143–160. Ohno, T., 1988. Toyota production system: beyond large-scale
Duverlie, P. and Castelain, J., 1999. Cost estimation during production. Cambridge: Productivity Press.
design step: parametric method versus case based reason- Oosterwal, D.P., 2010. The lean machine: how Harley-
ing method. The International Journal of Advanced Davidson drove top-line growth and profitability with
Manufacturing Technology, 15 (12), 895–906. revolutionary lean product development. New York:
Fiore, C., 2003. Lean strategies for product development: AMACOM/American Management Association.
achieving breakthrough performance in bringing products Oppenheim, B.W., 2004. Lean product development flow.
to market. Milwaukee, WI: American Society of Quality. Systems Engineering-New York, 7 (4), 352–378.
Haque, B. and James-Moore, M., 2004. Applying lean Reinertsen, D.G., 2009. The principles of product development
thinking to new product introduction. Journal of flow: second generation lean product development.
Engineering Design, 15 (1), 1–31. Redondo Beach, Canada: Celeritas.
Hines, P., Francis, M., and Found, P., 2006. Towards lean Schipper, T.H. and Swets, M.D., 2009. Innovative lean
products life cycle management. Journal of Manufactur- development: how to create, implement and maintain a
ing Technology Management, 17 (7), 866–887. learning culture using fast learning cycles. New York:
Hines, P., Packham, J., and Partners, S.A., 2008. Implement- Productivity Press.
ing lean new product development, 2008. 1462–1467. Schuh, G., Lenders, M., and Hieber, S., 2008. Lean
Holweg, M., 2007. The genealogy of lean production. Journal innovation: introducing value systems to product devel-
of Operations Management, 25 (2), 420–437. opment. In: Management of engineering & technology,
Huthwaite, B., 2004. The lean design solution: a practical 2008. PICMET 2008. Portland international conference
guide to streamlining product design and development. 2nd on 2008, 1129–1136.
ed. Mackinac Island: Institute for Lean Innovation. Sobek, D.K., Ward, A.C., and Liker, J.K., 1999. Toyota’s
Karlsson, C. and Ahlstrom, P., 1996. The difficult path to principles of set-based concurrent engineering. Sloan
lean product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management Review, 40 (2), 67–84.
Management, 13 (4), 283–295. Sobek, I., Durward, K., and Liker, J.K., 1998. Another look
Kennedy, M., Harmon, K., and Minnock, 2008. Ready, set, at how Toyota integrates product development. Harvard
dominate: implement Toyota’s set-based learning for Business Review, 76 (4), 36.
developing products and nobody can catch you. Richmond, Ward, A., et al., 1995. The second Toyota paradox: how
VA: Oaklea Press. delaying decisions can make better cars faster. Sloan
Kennedy, M.N., 2003. Product development for the lean Management Review, 36, 43–61.
enterprise: why Toyota’s system is four times more Ward, A.C., 2007. Lean product and process development.
productive and how you can implement it. Richmond, Cambridge, USA: Lean Enterprise Institute.
VA: Oaklea Press. Womack, J.P. and Jones, D.T., 2003. Lean thinking: banish
Khalil, R.A. and Stockton, D.J., 2010. Predicting the effects waste and create wealth in your organisation. London:
of cycle time variability on the efficiency of electronics Simon & Schuster UK Ltd.
assembly mixed-model, zero-buffer flow processing lines. Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., and Roos, D., 1990. The machine
International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufac- that changed the world. New York: Rawson Associates.
turing, 23 (12), 1149–1157. Yelkur, R. and Herbig, P., 1996. Global markets and the new
Krafcik, J.F., 1988. The triumph of the lean production product development process. Journal of Product &
system. Sloan Management Review, 30, 41–52. Brand Management, 5 (6), 38–47.
Mascitelli, R., 2006. The lean product development guidebook:
everything your design team needs to improve efficiency
and slash time-to-market. Woodside, CA: Technology
Perspectives.
Copyright of International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing is the property of
Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may
print, download, or email articles for individual use.