Abstract
The need for more knowledge intensifies the complexity of product development. To understand how knowledge contributes to designing products and how learning improves the product development process, this paper introduces an agent-based model that represents product development as the learning and application of knowledge. Product development consists of a complex network of interdependent agents, such as product functions, design activities and designers. Knowledge is the link connecting these elements, since product functions are the embodiment of knowledge, since design activities require knowledge, and since designers provide knowledge. The simulation of model activities and agent interactions at the micro-level generated project performance, which was measured in terms of project effort and duration at the macro level. The model used product and development process data from GE Hydro. Results demonstrated that design effort and project duration increased exponentially with product knowledge (complexity), that product development was more sensitive to the design of interfaces as compared to the design of components, and that designer knowledge played an important role in mitigating complexity. The implications for managers were that attention should be paid to the management of interfaces, to coordination thorough communication and consultation, and to increasing the rate of designer learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
A 95% level was chosen since a 100% level caused excessive looping that resulted in long simulation times. A 95% quality level did not make any difference in results.
Both authors worked at an aircraft manufacturer over a 1.5 year period. The model of consultation described in this paper is based on observations made during the study and improvement of an aircraft development process.
References
Baldwin CY, Clark KB (2003) Managing in an age of modularity. In: Garud R, Kumaraswamy A, Langlois R (eds) Managing in the modular age: Architectures, networks, and organizations. Wiley, New York
Bashir HA, Thomson V (1999a) Estimating design complexity. J Eng Des 10:247–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/095448299261317
Bashir HA, Thomson V (1999b) Metrics for design projects: a review. Des Stud 20:263–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(98)00024-6
Bashir HA, Thomson V (2004) Estimating design effort for GE hydro projects. Comput Ind Eng 46:195–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2003.12.005
Bonvoisin J, Halstenberg F, Buchert T, Stark R (2016) A systematic literature review on modular product design. J Eng Des 27:488–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2016.1166482
Braha D, Bar-Yam Y (2007) The statistical mechanics of complex product development: empirical and analytical results. Manage Sci 53(7):1127–1145
Brown SL, Eisenhardt KM (1995) Product development: past research, present findings, and future directions. Acad Manag Rev 20:343–378
Browning TR, Fricke E, Negele H (2006) Key concepts in modeling product development processes. Syst Eng 9:104–128. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20047
Bytheway CW (2007) FAST creativity and innovation: Rapidly improving processes, product development and solving complex problems J. Ross Publishing, Richmond
Chiva-Gomez R (2004) Repercussions of complex adaptive systems on product design management. Technovation 24:707–711. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(02)00155-4
Clarkson PJ, Hamilton JR (2000) Signposting, A parameter-driven task-based model of the design process. Res Eng Des 12(1):18–38
Davenport TH, De Long DW, Beers MC (1998) Successful knowledge management projects. Sloan manag rev 39(2):43–57
Davis J, Subrahmanian E, Westerberg A (2005) Knowledge management: organizational and technological dimensions. Physica-Verlag Heidelberg
Edmondson AC, Nembhard IM (2009) Product development and learning in project teams: the challenges are the benefits. J Prod Innov Manag 26:123–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2009.00341.x
Eppinger SD, Nukala MV, Whitney DE (1997) Generalised models of design interaction using signal flow graphs. Res Eng Design 9:112–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01596486
Gomes JF (2003) Order and disorder in product innovation models. Creat Innov Manag 12:174–187
Granstrand O, Bohlin E, Oskarsson C, Sjöberg N (1992) External technology acquisition in large multi-technology corporations. R&D Manag 22:111–134
Grogan PT, de Weck OL (2016) Collaboration and complexity: an experiment on the effect of multi-actor coupled design. Res Eng Design 27:221–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-016-0214-7
Hage J, Jordan G, Mote J, Whitestone Y (2008) Designing and facilitating collaboration in R&D: a case study. J Eng Tech Manage 25:256–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2008.10.005
Jin Y, Levitt RE (1996) The virtual design team: a computational model of project organizations. Comput Math Organ Theory 2:171–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00127273
Kim N, Im S, Slater SF (2013) Impact of knowledge type and strategic orientation on new product creativity and advantage in high-technology firms. J Prod Innov Manag 30:136–153. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00992.x
Kleinsmann M, Buijs J, Valkenburg R (2010) Understanding the complexity of knowledge integration in collaborative new product development teams: a case study. J Eng Tech Manage 27:20–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2010.03.003
Kline SJ (1985) Innovation is not a linear process research management 28:36–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/00345334.1985.11756910
Lawson B, Petersen KJ, Cousins PD, Handfield RB (2009) Knowledge sharing in interorganizational product development teams: the effect of formal and informal socialization mechanisms. J Prod Innov Manag 26:156–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2009.00343.x
Le HN, Wynn DC, Clarkson PJ (2012) Impacts of concurrency, iteration, design review, and problem complexity on design project lead time and error generation. Concurr Eng 20:55–67
Lenox M (2002) Organizational design, information transfer, and the acquisition of rent-producing resources. Comput Math Organ Theory 8:113–131. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016039916673
Lucke LE, Mickelson A, Anderson D (2009) Proving experience speeds medical device time to market. In: 2009 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, IEEE, pp 7057–7060
Madhavan R, Grover R (1998) From embedded knowledge to embodied knowledge: new product development as knowledge management. J Market 62:1–12. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252283
Markham SK, Lee H (2014) Marriage and family therapy in NPD teams: effects of We-ness on knowledge sharing and product performance. J Prod Innov Manag 31:1291–1311. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12184
McCarthy IP, Tsinopoulos C, Allen P, Rose-Anderssen C (2006) New product development as a complex adaptive system of decisions. J Prod Innov Manag 23:437–456. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2006.00215.x
McGrath JE, Argote L (2008) Group processes in organizational contexts. In: Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Group Processes. Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Chapter 25, pp 603–627. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470998458
McMahon C, Lowe A, Culley S (2004) Knowledge management in engineering design: personalization and codification. J Eng Des 15:307–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820410001697154
Nissen ME (2002) An extended model of knowledge-flow dynamics. Commun Assoc Inform Syst 8:251–266
Nissen ME, Levitt RE (2004) Agent-based modeling of knowledge dynamics. Knowl Manag Res Pract 2:169–183. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500039
Oberkampf WL, Helton JC, Joslyn CA, Wojtkiewicz SF, Ferson S (2004) Challenge problems: uncertainty in system response given uncertain parameters. Reliabil Eng Syst Safety 85:11–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2004.03.002
Pimmler TU, Eppinger SD (1994) Integration analysis of product decompositions. ASME Conference on Design Theory and Methodology, Minneapolis, MN, vol 68. pp 343–351
Pritsker AAB (1966) GERT—graphical evaluation and review technique NASA memorandum. RM-4973-NASA
Rahmani K, Thomson V (2012) Ontology based interface design and control for collaborative product development. J Comput Aided Des 44:432–444
Ritchie E (1972) Planning and control of R&D activities. Oper Res Quart 1970–1977(23):477–490. https://doi.org/10.2307/3007961
Smith RP, Morrow JA (1999) Product development process modeling. Des Stud 20:237–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(98)00018-0
Sosa ME, Eppinger SD, Rowles CM (2007) Are your engineers talking to one another when they should? Harv Bus Rev 85:133
Suss S, Thomson V (2012) Optimal design processes under uncertainty and reciprocal dependency. J Eng Des 23:829–851. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2012.704546
Terwiesch C, Loch CH, Meyer AD (2002) Exchanging preliminary information in concurrent engineering: alternative coordination strategies. Organ Sci 13:402–419
Torry-Smith JM, Mortensen NH, Achiche S (2014) A proposal for a classification of product-related dependencies in development of mechatronic products. Res Eng Design 25:53–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-013-0161-5
Verhagen WJC, Bermell-Garcia P, van Dijk REC, Curran R (2012) A critical review of knowledge-based engineering: an identification of research challenges. Adv Eng Inform 26:5–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2011.06.004
Whitney DE (1990) Designing the design process. Res Eng Des 2:3–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02029818
Wong S-S, Burton RM (2000) Virtual teams: what are their characteristics, and impact on team performance? Comput Math Organ Theory 6:339–360. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1009654229352
Yassine AA, Bradley JA (2013) A knowledge-driven, network-based computational framework for product development systems. J Comput Inform Sci Eng 13:011005. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4023166
Yassine A, Joglekar N, Braha D, Eppinger S, Whitney D (2003) Information hiding in product development: the design churn effect. Res Eng Des 14(3):145–161
Zhang X, Thomson V (2017) Measures and mitigation of complexity during product development. PhD thesis. McGill University, Montreal
Zhang X, Hao Y, Thomson V (2015) Taking ideas from paper to practice: a case study of improving design processes through detailed modelling and systematic analysis. IFAC-PapersOnLine 48:1043–1048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.06.221
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhang, X., Thomson, V. Modelling the development of complex products using a knowledge perspective. Res Eng Design 30, 203–226 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-017-0274-3
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-017-0274-3