Design for availability : creating value for manufacturers and customers

This research introduces a newly developed continuous improvement methodology called Design for Availability that uses principles of Lean Sigma and Design for X to cost-effectively optimize the availability of capital goods, i.e. systems used in the production of other end-products or -services, throughout their entire lifetime. The absence of such a methodology in the literature is remarkable because many users of capital goods increasingly insist on high system availability levels against lower lifetime costs. Against this background this study develops an analytical framework that allows manufacturers to determine the current status of system availability and associated lifetime costs, and to identify opportunities to create additional value for both the manufacturer and its customers. The applicability of this Design for Availability framework is tested through a case study at a global manufacturer of capital goods in the food processing industry. The results show that applying the Design for Availability framework can provide substantial benefits for the manufacturer as well as its customers, as long as a number of critical key success factors are taken into account during implementation, such as organizational commitment to Design for Availability, good leadership and communication, and creating system availability and lifecycle awareness.

[1]  B. Blanchard,et al.  Life-cycle cost and economic analysis , 1991 .

[2]  John Crocker,et al.  Reliability, Maintenance and Logistic Support: - A Life Cycle Approach , 2000 .

[3]  Zahir Irani,et al.  Integrating continuous improvement and innovation into a corporate culture: a case study , 1997 .

[4]  Jezdimir Knezevic,et al.  Achieving quality through supportability ‐ part I: concepts and principles , 1996 .

[5]  Gerald M. Knapp,et al.  Some aspects of measuring maintenance performance in the process industry , 1998 .

[6]  Dinesh C. Verma,et al.  Maintainability: A Key to Effective Serviceability and Maintenance Management , 1995 .

[7]  Paul Grefen,et al.  An efficient method to construct minimal protocol adaptors , 2009 .

[8]  Herbert Kopfer,et al.  Analyzing combined vehicle routing and break scheduling from a distributed decision making perspective , 2009 .

[9]  Antti Saaksvuori,et al.  Product lifecycle management , 2004 .

[10]  Edward D. Arnheiter,et al.  The integration of lean management and Six Sigma , 2005 .

[11]  Dag Näslund,et al.  Lean, six sigma and lean sigma: fads or real process improvement methods? , 2008, Bus. Process. Manag. J..

[12]  Guo Q. Huang,et al.  Design for X : concurrent engineering imperatives , 1996 .

[13]  Alessandro Birolini Reliability Engineering: Theory and Practice , 1999 .

[14]  B. Flyvbjerg Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research , 2006, 1304.1186.

[15]  Øystein D. Fjeldstad,et al.  CONFIGURING VALUE FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE: ON CHAINS, SHOPS, AND NETWORKS , 1998 .

[16]  John Bessant,et al.  Rediscovering continuous improvement , 1994 .

[17]  Robert K. Yin,et al.  Applications of case study research , 1993 .

[18]  Marco Slikker,et al.  Spare parts inventory pooling games , 2009 .

[19]  T. O. Oyebisi,et al.  On reliability and maintenance management of electronic equipment in the tropics , 2000 .

[20]  Nadia Bhuiyan,et al.  An overview of continuous improvement: from the past to the present , 2005 .

[21]  Massimiliano Galli,et al.  Quality policies and value creation strategies in Italian manufacturing industry , 1997 .

[22]  Y. Asiedu,et al.  Product life cycle cost analysis: State of the art review , 1998 .

[23]  Rachna Shah,et al.  Defining and developing measures of lean production , 2007 .