Skip to main content

Abstract

Over the last two decades, a number of studies have examined the trade-off involved in concurrent engineering (CE), time reduction versus additional effort for downstream rework. This study presents an overview of the recent CE modeling literature that examined this trade-off. We find that most CE models are built on the assumption that development stages are dependent where the principal information exchange between consecutive design stages is unidirectional, from upstream stage to downstream stage. According to literature review and field study, we believe such assumption is reasonable, because in many situations, current execution of design stages actually occurs within two sub-stages (Testing 1 and Development 2) which are sequentially dependent. In the future, we may also build analytical models based on interdependent stages so as to better understand the impact of project properties on best CE policies and product development performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Terwiesch, C., Loch, C.H., De Meyer, A., 2002. Exchanging preliminary information in concurrent engineering: Alternative coordination strategies. Organization Science, 13 (4), 402-419.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lin, J., Qian Y., Cui, W., 2012. Managing the concurrent execution of dependent product development stages. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 59(1), 104-114.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Terwiesch, C., Loch, C.H., 1999. Measuring the effectiveness of overlapping development activities. Management Science 45 (4), 455-465.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Mitchell, V.L., Nault, B.R., 2007. Cooperative planning, uncertainty, and managerial control in concurrent design. Management Science 53 (3), 375-389.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Clark, K.B., Fujimoto, T., 1991. Product development performance: Strategy, organization and management in the world auto industry. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lin, J., Chai, K.H., Wong, Y.S., Brombacher, A.C., 2008. A dynamic model for managing overlapped iterative product development. European Journal of Operational Research, 185 (1), 378-392.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Love, P.E.D., Edwards, D.J., Irani, Z., Walker, D.H.T., 2009. Project pathogens: the anatomy of omission errors in construction and resource engineering project. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 56 (3), 425-435.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Eppinger, S.D., Whitney, D.E., Smith, R.P., Gebala, D.A., 1994. A model-based method for organizing tasks in product development. Research in Engineering Design 6 (1), 1-13.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Yassine, A.A., Chelst, K.R., Falkenburg, D.R., 1999. A decision analytic framework for evaluating concurrent engineering. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 46 (2), 144–157.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bhuiyan, N., Gerwin, D., Thomson, V., 2004. Simulation of the new product development process for performance improvement. Management Science 50 (12), 1690-1703.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Krishnan, V., Eppinger, S.D., Whitney, D.E., 1997. A model-based framework to overlap product development activities. Management Science, 43 (4), 437-451.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Loch, C.H., Terwiesch, C., 1998. Communication and uncertainty in concurrent engineering. Management Science, 44 (8), 1032-1048.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Roemer, T.A., Ahmadi, R., Wang, R.H., 2000. Time-cost trade-offs in overlapped product development. Operations Research, 48 (6), 858-865.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chakravarty, A.K., 2001. Overlapping design and build cycles in product development. European Journal of Operational Research, 134 (2), 392-424.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Roemer, T.A., Ahmadi, R., 2004. Concurrent crashing and overlapping in product development. Operations Research, 52 (4), 606-622.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wang, Z., Yan, H.S., 2005. Optimizing the concurrency for a group of design activities. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 52 (1), 102-118.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gerk, J.E.V., Qassim, R.Y., 2008, Project acceleration via activity crashing, overlapping, and substitution. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 55(4), 590-601.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lin, J., Chai, K.H., Brombacher, A.C., Wong, Y.S., 2009. Optimal overlapping and functional interaction in product development. European Journal of Operational Research, 196 (3), 1158-1169.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lin, J., Qian, Y.J., Cui, W.T., Miao, Z.L., 2010. Overlapping and communication policies in product development. European Journal of Operational Research, 201 (3), 737-750.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Qian, Y., Xie, M., Goh, T.N., Lin, J., 2010. Optimal Testing Strategies in Overlapped Design Process. European Journal of Operational Research 206 (1), 131-143.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Wheelwright, S.C., Clark, K.B., 1992. Revolutionizing Product Development. The Free Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Swink, M.L., Sandvig, C., Mabert, V.A., 1996. Customizing concurrent engineering processes: five case studies. Journal of Production Innovation Management 13 (3), 229-244.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cooper, R.G., 1994. Third generation of new product processes. Journal of Production Innovation Management 11 (1), 3-14.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cooper, R.G., Kleinschmidt, E.J., 2007. Winning businesses in product development: The critical success factors. Research-Technology Management 50 (3), 52-66.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Joglekar, N.R., Yassine, A.A., Eppinger, S.D., Whitney, D. E., 2001. Performance of coupled product development activities with a deadline. Management Science 47 (12), 1605-1620.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The work of Qian Y. was supported in part by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant 71101115), and by “the Humanities, Social Science and Management Research Funds of Northwestern Polytechnical University” (Grant 3102014RW0003). The work of Lin J. was supported in part by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants 71001084 and 71371149), and by “the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities” (Grant sk2014043).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yan-jun Qian .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Atlantis Press and the authors

About this paper

Cite this paper

Qian, Yj., Goh, T.N., Lin, J. (2015). Recent Advances in Concurrent Engineering Modeling. In: Qi, E., Su, Q., Shen, J., Wu, F., Dou, R. (eds) Proceedings of the 5th International Asia Conference on Industrial Engineering and Management Innovation (IEMI2014). Proceedings of the International Asia Conference on Industrial Engineering and Management Innovation, vol 1. Atlantis Press, Paris. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6239-100-0_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics