Resource optimization of product development projects with time-varying dependency structure

  • Masaki OguraEmail author
  • Junichi Harada
  • Masako Kishida
  • Ali Yassine
Original Paper


Project managers are continuously under pressure to shorten product development durations. One practical approach for reducing the project duration is lessening dependencies between different development components and teams. However, most of the resource allocation strategies for lessening dependencies place the implicit and simplistic assumption that the dependency structure between components is static (i.e., does not change over time). This assumption, however, does not necessarily hold true in all product development projects. In this paper, we present an analytical framework for optimally allocating resources to shorten the lead time of product development projects having a time-varying dependency structure. We build our theoretical framework on a linear system model of product development processes, in which system integration and local development teams exchange information asynchronously and aperiodically. Utilizing a convexity result from the matrix theory, we show that the optimal resource allocation can be efficiently found by solving a convex optimization problem. We provide illustrative examples to demonstrate the proposed framework. We also present boundary analyses based on major graph models to provide managerial guidelines for improving empirical PD processes.


Project management Resource management Resource allocation systems Time/cost/performance trade-offs Project planning 



This work is funded in part by JSPS KAKENHI Grant number 18K13777 and the open collaborative research program at National Institute of Informatics (NII) Japan (FY2018).


  1. Adler P, Mandelbaum A, Nguyen V, Schwerer E (1995) Project to process management: empirically-based framework for analyzing product development time. Manag Sci 41(3):458–484zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmadi R, Wang RH (1999) Managing development risk in product design processes. Oper Res 47:235–246zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Alcaraz J, Maroto C, Ruiz R (2003) Solving the multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling problem with genetic algorithms. J Oper Res Soc 54(6):614–626zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Baldwin C, Clark K (2000) Design rules: the power of modularity. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Barabási AL, Albert R (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286(5439):509–512MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Boctor FF (1996) A new and efficient heuristic for scheduling projects with resource restrictions and multiple execution modes. Eur J Oper Res 90(2):349–361MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Borjesson F, Hölttä-Otto K (2014) A module generation algorithm for product architecture based on component interactions and strategic drivers. Res Eng Des 25(1):31–51Google Scholar
  8. Boyd S, Vandenberghe L (2004) Convex optimization. Cambridge University Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Boyd S, Kim SJ, Vandenberghe L, Hassibi A (2007) A tutorial on geometric programming. Optim Eng 8(1):67–127MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Braha D, Bar-Yam Y (2004a) Information flow structure in large-scale product development organizational networks. J Inf Technol 19(4):244–253Google Scholar
  11. Braha D, Bar-Yam Y (2004b) Topology of large-scale engineering problem-solving networks. Phys Rev E 69(1):016113Google Scholar
  12. Braha D, Bar-Yam Y (2006) From centrality to temporary fame: dynamic centrality in complex networks. Complexity 12(2):59–63Google Scholar
  13. Braha D, Bar-Yam Y (2007) The statistical mechanics of complex product development: empirical and analytical results. Manag Sci 53(7):1127–1145zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Braha D, Bar-Yam Y (2009) Time-dependent complex networks: dynamic centrality, dynamic motifs, and cycles of social interactions. In: Gross T, Sayama H (eds) Adaptive networks: theory, models and applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 39–50Google Scholar
  15. Browning TR (2016) Design structure matrix extensions and innovations: a survey and new opportunities. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 63(1):27–52MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. Browning TR, Ramasesh RV (2007) A survey of activity network-based process models for managing product development projects. Prod Oper Manag 16(2):217–240Google Scholar
  17. Cai J, Liu X, Xiao Z, Liu J (2009) Improving supply chain performance management: a systematic approach to analyzing iterative KPI accomplishment. Decis Support Syst 46(2):512–521Google Scholar
  18. Chen J, Reilly RR, Lynn GS (2012) New product development speed: Too much of a good thing? J Product Innov Manag 29(2):288–303Google Scholar
  19. Cheng H, Chu X (2012) Task assignment with multiskilled employees and multiple modes for product development projects. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 61(1–4):391–403Google Scholar
  20. Cicmil S, Williams T, Thomas J, Hodgson D (2006) Rethinking project management: researching the actuality of projects. Int J Project Manag 24(8):675–686Google Scholar
  21. Collyer S, Warren CM (2009) Project management approaches for dynamic environments. Int J Project Manag 27(4):355–364Google Scholar
  22. Cooke-Davies T (2002) The “real” success factors on projects. Int J Project Manag 20(3):185–190Google Scholar
  23. Cui Q, Hastak M, Halpin D (2010) Systems analysis of project cash flow management strategies. Constr Manag Econ 28(4):361–376Google Scholar
  24. Erdős L, Rényi A (1959) On random graphs. I. Publ Math 6:290–297MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Fefferman N, Ng K (2007) How disease models in static networks can fail to approximate disease in dynamic networks. Phys Rev E 76(3):031919MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. Frenken K (2006) A fitness landscape approach to technological complexity, modularity, and vertical disintegration. Struct Change Econ Dyn 17(3):288–305Google Scholar
  27. Hahn GJ, Kuhn H (2012) Designing decision support systems for value-based management: a survey and an architecture. Decis Support Syst 53(3):591–598Google Scholar
  28. Hartmann S, Briskorn D (2010) A survey of variants and extensions of the resource-constrained project scheduling problem. Eur J Oper Res 207(1):1–14MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Hill SA, Braha D (2010) Dynamic model of time-dependent complex networks. Phys Rev E 82(4):046105Google Scholar
  30. Holme P (2015) Modern temporal network theory: a colloquium. Eur Phys J B 88(9):234Google Scholar
  31. Hölttä-Otto K, de Weck O (2007) Degree of modularity in engineering systems and products with technical and business constraints. Concurr Eng Res Appl 15(2):113–125Google Scholar
  32. Huberman BA, Glance NS (1993) Evolutionary games and computer simulations. Proc Natl Acad Sci 90(16):7716–7718zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. Huberman BA, Wilkinson DM (2005) Performance variability and project dynamics. Comput Math Org Theory 11(4):307–332zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. Joglekar NR, Ford DN (2005) Product development resource allocation with foresight. Eur J Oper Res 160(1):72–87zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. Joglekar NR, Yassine AA, Eppinger SD, Whitney DE (2001) Performance of coupled product development activities with a deadline. Manag Sci 47(12):1605–1620Google Scholar
  36. Kim D (2007) On representations and dynamic analysis of concurrent engineering design. J Eng Des 18(3):265–277Google Scholar
  37. Kingman JFC (1961) A convexity property of positive matrices. Q J Math 12(1):283–284MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. Krishnan V, Ulrich KT (2001) Product development decisions: a review of the literature. Manag Sci 47(1):1–21Google Scholar
  39. Lee H, Padmanabhan V, Whang S (1997) Information distortion in a supply chain: the bullwhip effect. Manag Sci 43:546–558zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. Lee SG, Ong KL, Khoo LP (2004) Control and monitoring of concurrent design tasks in a dynamic environment. Concurr Eng Res Appl 12(1):59–66Google Scholar
  41. Lin H, Antsaklis PJ (2007) Switching stabilizability for continuous-time uncertain switched linear systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 52(4):633–646MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. Lin H, Antsaklis P (2009) Stability and stabilizability of switched linear systems: a survey of recent results. IEEE Trans Autom Control 54(2):308–322MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. Loch CH, Terwiesch C (1998) Communication and uncertainty in concurrent engineering. Manag Sci 44(8):1032–1048zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. Loch C, Terwiesch C (1999) Accelerating the process of engineering change orders: capacity and congestion effects. J Product Innov Manag 16:145–159Google Scholar
  45. Martin MV, Ishii K (2002) Design for variety: developing standardized and modularized product platform architectures. Res Eng Des 13(4):213–235Google Scholar
  46. Masuda N, Lambiotte R (2016) A guide to temporal networks. World Scientific Publishing, SingaporezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. McDaniel CD (1996) A linear system framework for analyzing the automotive appearance design process. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  48. Mihm J, Loch C, Huchzermeier A (2003) Problem-solving oscillations in complex engineering projects. Manag Sci 49(6):733–750Google Scholar
  49. Muller R, Geraldi J, Turner JR, Müller R, Geraldi J, Turner JR (2012) Relationships between leadership and success in different types of project complexities. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 59(1):77–90Google Scholar
  50. Newman MEJ (2010) Networks: an introduction. Oxford University Press, OxfordzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. Ogura M, Martin CF (2015) Stability analysis of linear systems subject to regenerative switchings. Syst Control Lett 75:94–100MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. Ogura M, Preciado VM (2016) Stability of Markov regenerative switched linear systems. Automatica 69:169–175MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. Ogura M, Preciado VM (2017) Optimal design of switched networks of positive linear systems via geometric programming. IEEE Trans Control Netw Syst 4(2):213–222MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. Ong KL, Lee SG, Khoo LP (2003) Homogeneous state-space representation of concurrent design. J Eng Des 14(2):221–245Google Scholar
  55. Patterson JH, Brian Talbot F, Slowinski R, Wegłarz J (1990) Computational experience with a backtracking algorithm for solving a general class of precedence and resource-constrained scheduling problems. Eur J Oper Res 49(1):68–79zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. Peteghem VV, Vanhoucke M (2010) A genetic algorithm for the preemptive and non-preemptive multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling problem. Eur J Oper Res 201(2):409–418MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  57. PMI (2013) A guide to the project management body of knowledge. Project Management Institute, Newtown SquareGoogle Scholar
  58. Richards J (1983) Analysis of periodically time varying systems. Springer, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  59. Serrador P, Turner R (2015) The relationship between project success and project efficiency. Project Manag J 46(1):30–39Google Scholar
  60. Smith WL (1955) Regenerative stochastic processes. Proc R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 232(1188):6–31MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  61. Smith RP, Eppinger SD (1997) Identifying controlling features of engineering design iteration. Manag Sci 43(3):276–293zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  62. Vazquez A, Rácz B, Lukács A, Barabasi AL (2007) Impact of non-Poissonian activity patterns on spreading processes. Phys Rev Lett 98(15):158702Google Scholar
  63. Watts DJ, Strogatz SH (1998) Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393(6684):440–442zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. Xiao R, Chen T, Ju C (2011) Research on product development iterations based on feedback control theory in a dynamic environment. Int J Innov Comput Inf Control 7(5):2669–2688Google Scholar
  65. Yassine AA, Naoum-Sawaya J (2016) Architecture, performance, and investment in product development networks. J Mech Des 139(1):011101Google Scholar
  66. 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):145–161Google Scholar
  67. Yu TL, Yassine AA, Goldberg DE (2007) An information theoretic method for developing modular architectures using genetic algorithms. Res Eng Des 18(2):91–109Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Information ScienceNara Institute of Science and TechnologyIkomaJapan
  2. 2.Principles of Informatics Research DivisionNational Institute of InformaticsTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Department of Industrial Engineering and ManagementAmerican University of BeirutBeirutLebanon

Personalised recommendations