Determining the Impact of Change within your Method- and Toolbox for System Development

摘要

To be successful in a highly dynamic environment, with increased global competition, shorter life cycles, more demanding customers/users, and more complex products, we have to strive for an effective and efficient product development system. In order to reach this goal, the right methods and tools are an important aspect, besides the right products, processes, strategies, requirements, people, etc. There are lots of different methods and tools well known, e.g., QFD, Taguchi, CAX, PDM, Robust Design, or DFX and most of them are applied (successfully?) in daily industrial practice. But what method or tool should we use, and when?rnFor the right product development method/tool box, a comprehensive framework is needed, which supports the selection, coordination, and assessment according to domain- and company-specific needs and constraints. Unfortunately, tools and methods often are used because it is popular to use them, but not because they ideally support the solution of specific problems. Therefore, in earlier papers a systematic approach was proposed on how methods and tools can be selected for a successful product development system, independent of the industrial sector of a company, but dependent on its problems, market constraints, and declared goals (Wenzel & Bauch 1996, Negele et al. 1998, Wenzel et al. 2000).rnThis paper is an extension and a more detailed workout of the derived structured model, the "House of IPD" (IPD: Integrated Product Development). It was initially derived from the analysis of different product development processes at commercial companies in Germany, England, and the US (Wenzel & Bauch 1996). Two papers have already been presented at INCOSE symposia describing the structure, goals, benefits, and usage of the House of IPD (Negele et al. 2000, Wenzel etal. 2000).rnIn the House of IPD, the interdependencies and relations between goals and problems, essentials/ processes, and practices can be structured. It is possible to visualize in a matrix, how and tornwhat extent (qualitative) the practices (HOWs) contribute to the realization of certain essentials (WHATs), and which essentials support which goals or solve which problems (WHYs).rnIn this paper, after shortly refreshing the basic concepts of the House of IPD, we will explain a method to determine the impact of changes in an existing method- and toolbox for complex system development. Therefore, the qualitative relationships represented in the House of IPD will be transformed into quantitative relationships. These can then be used to study the impact of methods & tools (HOWs) on essentials/ key success (WHATs) factors.