Building blocks for a decision‐based integrated product development and system realization process

A key requirement, in a distributed product development environment at General Motors, was to provide a series of quantitative and qualitative mechanisms for integrating competing information from distributed agents. Such mechanisms must also account for provisions for combining different opinions, for resolving conflicts, and for finding a feasible or optimal solution at the end. We, at Electronic Data Systems (EDS), General Motors Account, developed a Decision-based Integrated Product Development (DIPD) methodology to capture a system-level optimization formulation as part of a product design, development and delivery (PD3) process. The paper describes this methodology in the context of system-level optimization. DIPD employs the inputs, requirement, constraints, and output conventions to formulate the product realization problem in a distributed manner. The purpose of this DIPD methodology is to improve the performance characteristics of the product, process, and organization (PPO) relative to automobile consumer needs and expectations. DIPD builds the theory through a systematic revision and extension of the paradigms introduced earlier by optimization experts and practitioners including this author [Prasad, 1996]. The eight parts of this DIPD methodology, called building blocks, are discussed at length in this paper. The first four blocks, 1–4, provide a conceptual framework for understanding the challenges and opportunities in DIPD. The last four parts, 5–8, of this methodology provide the building blocks for an analytical and conceptual framework for decision-making, PPO improvements, and a large-scale system optimization. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng 5: 123–144, 2002

[1]  Per Joakim Agrell,et al.  A multicriteria approach to concurrent engineering , 1994 .

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

[3]  T. L. Saaty Exploring the interface between hierarchies, multiple objectives and fuzzy sets , 1978 .

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

[5]  George A. Hazelrigg,et al.  A Framework for Decision-Based Engineering Design , 1998 .

[6]  B. Prasad,et al.  Novel Concepts for Constraint Treatments and Approximations in Efficient Structural Synthesis , 1984 .

[7]  Jaroslaw Sobieszczanski-Sobieski,et al.  Multidisciplinary Design Optimization: An Emerging New Engineering Discipline , 1995 .

[8]  Deborah L Thurston,et al.  Multiattribute design optimization and concurrent engineering , 1993 .

[9]  Wolfgang Beitz,et al.  Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach , 1984 .

[10]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Product development performance : strategy, organization, and management in the world auto industry / Kim B. Clark, Tahahiro Fujimoto , 1991 .

[11]  D. V. Steward Systems Analysis and Management: Structure, Strategy and Design , 1981 .

[12]  Suzanne Berger,et al.  Toward a New Industrial America. , 1989 .

[13]  H. Raiffa,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives , 1993 .

[14]  Don Clausing Total quality development : a step-by-step guide to world class concurrent engineering , 1994 .

[15]  Shad Dowlatshahi,et al.  Product design in a concurrent engineering environment : an optimization approach , 1992 .

[16]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Heuristics : intelligent search strategies for computer problem solving , 1984 .

[17]  Mark Stefik,et al.  Planning with Constraints (MOLGEN: Part 1) , 1981, Artif. Intell..

[18]  George A. Hazelrigg,et al.  An Axiomatic Framework for Engineering Design , 1999 .

[19]  Andrew Kusiak,et al.  Decomposition of the Design Process , 1993 .

[20]  Kenneth N. Brown,et al.  A Parallel Multi-Attribute Transformation Model of Design , 1995 .

[21]  Stuart Pugh,et al.  Total Design: Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering , 1991 .

[22]  Kemper Lewis,et al.  Collaborative, sequential, and isolated decisions in design , 1997 .

[23]  Deborah L Thurston,et al.  A formal method for subjective design evaluation with multiple attributes , 1991 .

[24]  Farrokh Mistree,et al.  Configuring Systems Using Available Assets: A Conceptual, Decision-Based Perspective , 1996 .

[25]  Tyson R. Browning,et al.  Designing system development projects for organizational integration , 1999 .

[26]  Biren Prasad,et al.  Explicit constraint approximation forms in structural optimization. Part 2: Numerical experiences , 1984 .

[27]  John W. Wesner,et al.  Winning With Quality: Applying Quality Principles in Product Development , 1995 .

[28]  B. Chandrasekaran,et al.  A framework for design problem-solving , 1989 .

[29]  Biren Prasad,et al.  An integrated system for optimal structural synthesis and remodelling , 1985 .

[30]  Biren Prasad,et al.  Optimal structural remodeling of multi-objective systems , 1984 .