An Introduction to Modeling and Analyzing Complex Product Development Processes Using the Design Structure Matrix (DSM) Method

The design and development of complex engineering products require the efforts and collaboration of hundreds of participants from diverse backgrounds resulting in complex relationships among both people and tasks. Many of the traditional project management tools (PERT, Gantt and CPM methods) do not address problems stemming from this complexity. While these tools allow the modeling of sequential and parallel processes, they fail to address interdependency (feedback and iteration), which is common in complex product development (PD) projects. To address this issue, a matrix-based tool called the Design Structure Matrix (DSM) has evolved. This method differs from traditional project-management tools because it focuses on representing information flows rather than work flows. The DSM method is an information exchange model that allows the representation of complex task (or team) relationships in order to determine a sensible sequence (or grouping) for the tasks (or teams) being modeled. This article will cover how the basic method works and how you can use the DSM to improve the planning, execution, and management of complex PD projects using different algorithms (i.e., partitioning, tearing, banding, clustering, simulation, and eigenvalue analysis). Introduction: matrices and projects Consider a system (or project) that is composed of two elements /sub-systems (or activities/phases): element "A" and element "B". A graph may be developed to represent this system pictorially. The graph is constructed by allowing a vertex/node on the graph to represent a system element and an edge joining two nodes to represent the relationship between two system elements. The directionality of influence from one element to another is captured by an arrow instead of a simple link. The resultant graph is called a directed graph or simply a digraph. There are three basic building blocks for describing the relationship amongst system elements: parallel (or concurrent), sequential (or dependent) and coupled (or interdependent) (fig. 1) Fig.1 Three Configurations that Characterize a System Relationship Parallel Sequential Coupled Graph Representation A B A

[1]  S D Eppinger,et al.  Innovation at the speed of information. , 2001, Harvard business review.

[2]  Tyson R. Browning,et al.  Use of Dependency Structure Matrices for Product Development Cycle Time Reduction , 1998 .

[3]  John N. Warfield,et al.  Binary Matrices in System Modeling , 1973, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[4]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Product Design and Development , 1995 .

[5]  Sean M Osborne,et al.  Product development cycle time characterization through modeling of process iteration , 1993 .

[6]  Carlos Iñaki Gutierrez,et al.  Integration analysis of product architecture to support effective team co-location , 1998 .

[7]  Robert P. Smith,et al.  A model-based method for organizing tasks in product development , 1994 .

[8]  Steven D. Eppinger,et al.  Integration analysis of product decompositions , 1994 .

[9]  Ali A. Yassine,et al.  Engineering design management: An information structure approach , 1999 .

[10]  D. V. Steward,et al.  The design structure system: A method for managing the design of complex systems , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[11]  Daniel E. Whitney,et al.  Do-It-Right-First-Time (Draft) Approach To Design Structure Matrix (DSM) Restructuring , 2002 .

[12]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  A Genetic Algorithm for Developing Modular Product Architectures , 2003 .

[13]  Ali A. Yassine,et al.  A Framework for Design Process Specifications Management , 1999 .

[14]  Tyson R. Browning,et al.  Modeling impacts of process architecture on cost and schedule risk in product development , 2002, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[15]  D. Grose,et al.  Reengineering the aircraft design process , 1994 .

[16]  Tyson R. Browning,et al.  Applying the design structure matrix to system decomposition and integration problems: a review and new directions , 2001, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[17]  Andrew N. Baldwin,et al.  Application of the Analytical Design Planning Technique to Construction Project Management , 2000 .

[18]  Steven D. Eppinger,et al.  Managing the integration problem in concurrent engineering , 1993 .