Design for variety: developing standardized and modularized product platform architectures

Abstract. Developing a robust, product platform architecture brings an important competitive advantage to a company. The major benefits are reduced design effort and time-to-market for future generations of the product. This paper describes a step-by-step method that aids companies in developing such product platform architectures. Using the concept of specification "flows" within a product development project, the design for variety (DFV) method develops two indices to measure a product's architecture. The first index is the generational variety index (GVI), a measure for the amount of redesign effort required for future designs of the product. The second index is the coupling index (CI), a measure of the coupling among the product components. The design team uses these two indices to develop a decoupled architecture that requires less design effort for follow-on products. This paper describes the DFV method and uses a water cooler example to illustrate the method.

[1]  Stellan Gedell,et al.  Platform Product Development: Product Model - A System Structure Composed of Configurable Components , 2001 .

[2]  A. Mandelbaum,et al.  Getting the Most out of Your Product Development Process by , 2003 .

[3]  W. Sasser,et al.  The new product development map. , 1989, Harvard business review.

[4]  Kosuke Ishii,et al.  DESIGN FOR VARIETY: A METHODOLOGY FOR DEVELOPING PRODUCT PLATFORM ARCHITECTURES , 2000 .

[5]  K. Clark,et al.  Creating project plans to focus product development. , 1992, Harvard business review.

[6]  G. D. Galsworth.  Smart, Simple Design: Using Variety Effectiveness to Reduce Total Cost and Maximize Customer Selection , 1994 .

[7]  J. Beckham.  New product development. , 1985, Hospital forum.

[8]  Javier P. Gonzalez-Zugasti,et al.  A Method for Architecting Product Platforms , 2000 .

[9]  Jaap Van Brakel,et al.  Foundations of measurement , 1983 .

[10]  Kevin Otto,et al.  Product Architecture Definition Based Upon Customer Demands , 1999 .

[11]  Susan Walsh Sanderson,et al.  Cost models for evaluating virtual design strategies in multicycle product families , 1991 .

[12]  Mark V. Martin,et al.  DESIGN FOR VARIETY: DEVELOPMENT OF COMPLEXITY INDICES AND DESIGN CHARTS , 1998 .

[13]  Fj Freek Erens.  The synthesis of variety : developing product families , 1996 .

[14]  Jianxin Jiao,et al.  Design for mass customization by developing product family architecture , 1998 .

[15]  Kevin Otto,et al.  Incorporating lifecycle costs into product architecture decisions , 2001 .

[16]  K. Ulrich,et al.  Planning for Product Platforms , 1998 .

[17]  Susan Carlson Skalak.  House of Quality , 2002 .

[18]  Wheelwright Sc,et al.  The new product development map. , 1989 .

[19]  Paul S. Adler,et al.  From project to process management: an empirically-based framework for analyzing product development time , 1995 .

[20]  S. Kotha.  Mass Customization: The New Frontier in Business Competition , 1992 .

[21]  Mustafa Uzumeri,et al.  Managing Product Families , 1996 .