Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T12:19:23.849Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of the Impact of Collaborative Research on Robust Design Methodologies: A Large Scale Empirical Case Study with an Automotive OEM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2022

F. Campean ,
A. Uddin ,
J. Bridges ,
S. Fannon  and
U. Yildirim
F. Campean*
Affiliation:
University of Bradford, United Kingdom
A. Uddin
Affiliation:
University of Bradford, United Kingdom Jaguar Land Rover, United Kingdom
J. Bridges
Affiliation:
University of Bradford, United Kingdom
S. Fannon
Affiliation:
University of Bradford, United Kingdom
U. Yildirim
Affiliation:
University of Bradford, United Kingdom Hubei University of Automotive Technology, China
*
F.Campean@Bradford.ac.uk

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The evaluation of impact of collaborative research on robust design methodologies and methods is important to both academic and industry stakeholders. This paper introduces a framework for impact evaluation which combines the broader framework adopted for the academic research impact assessment with the organisation viewpoint centred on business results, process improvement and product development teams capability improvement. A large scale empirical study conducted with evidence from technical reports on workplace projects from an automotive OEM proved the validity of the proposed framework.

Keywords

robust designdesign methodsdesign evaluation
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 2: DESIGN2022 , May 2022 , pp. 1 - 10
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2022.

References

Araujo, C.S., Benedetto-Neto, H., Campello, A. C., Segre, F.M. and Wright, I. C. (1996) The Utilization of Product Development Methods: A Survey of UK Industry, Journal of Engineering Design, 7:3, pp. 265–277, https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09544829608907940Google Scholar
Bacciotti, D., Borgianni, Y., Cascini, G. et al. . Product Planning techniques: investigating the differences between research trajectories and industry expectations. Res Eng Design 27, 367–389 (2016). 10.1007/s00163-016-0223-6Google Scholar
Badke-Schaub, P., Daalhuizen, J., Roozenburg, N. (2011) Towards a Designer-Centred Methodology: Descriptive Considerations and Prescriptive Reflections. In: Birkhofer, H. (eds) The Future of Design Methodology. Springer, London. 10.1007/978-0-85729-615-3_16Google Scholar
Beckmann, G., Gebhardt, N. and Krause, D. (2014) Transfer of methods for developing modular product families into practice - an interview study. Proceedings of DESIGN conference, pp.121–130.Google Scholar
Bender, B., Reinicke, T., Wünch, T. and Blessing, L., 2002, “Application of Methods from social science in design research”, Proc 7th Intl Design 2002 Conf, Dubrovnik, Croatia, May 14-17 .Google Scholar
Blessing, L. T. and Chakrabarti, A. (2009) DRM, a Design Research Methodology. Springer, London. 10.1007/978-1-84882-587-1Google Scholar
Blessing, L., Seering, W. (2016) Preparing for the Transfer of Research Results to Practice: Best Practice Heuristics. In: Chakrabarti & Lindemann Impact of Des Research on Ind Practice. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19449-3_1Google Scholar
Birkhofer, H., Lindemann, U., Albers, A., Meier, M. (2001) Product development as a structured and interactive network of knowledge—a revolutionary approach. In: Culley, SJ, Duffy, A, McMahon, C, Wallace, K (eds) Proceedings of ICED01, Glasgow, August 21–23, Professional Engineering Publishing, UK, pp 457–464.Google Scholar
Birkhofer, H, Jänsch, J and Kloberdanz, H (2005) An extensive and detailed view of the application of design methods and methodology in industry. Proc Int Conf on Eng Design, ICED’05, Melbourne.Google Scholar
Booker, J. (2012) A survey-based methodology for prioritising the industrial implementation qualities of design tools. Journal of Engineering Design, 23(7), pp. 507–525. 10.1080/09544828.2011.624986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campean, I., Henshall, E., and Rutter, B., “Systems Engineering Excellence Through Design: An Integrated Approach Based on Failure Mode Avoidance,” SAE Int. J. Mater. Manf. 6(3):389–401, 2013, 10.4271/2013-01-0595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campean, F, Williams, H, Uddin, A, Yildirim, U., Robust engineering systems analysis through failure mode avoidance, Short Course Lecture Notes, University of Bradford, 2017.Google Scholar
Daalhuizen, J.J., (2014) Methods Usage in Design, PhD Thesis, TU Delft.Google Scholar
Eckert, C.M. and Clarkson, J. (2005) Design Process Improvement: A review of current practice. In: Clarkson, J. and Eckert, C.M. (Eds.), Design process improvement: A review of current practice, Springer, London, pp. 1–29. 10.1007/978-1-84628-061-0Google Scholar
Fujita, K. and Matsuo, T. (2005) Utilization of Product Development Tools and Methods: Japanese Survey and International Comparison. International Conference on Engineering Design, Melbourne, 15-18 August.Google Scholar
Geis, C., Bierhals, R., Schuster, I., Badke-Schaub, P. and Birkhofer, H. (2008) Methods in Practice - A Study on Requirements for Development and Transfer of Design Methods. Proc DESIGN conference, pp.369–376.Google Scholar
Gericke, K., Eckert, C.M. and Stacey, M. (2017) What do we need to say about a design method? Proc 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 17), Vancouver, Canada, August 21-25.Google Scholar
Gericke, K., Eckert, C., Campean, F., Clarkson, P. J., Flening, E., Isaksson, O., Kipouros, T., Kokkolaras, M., Köhler, C., Panarotto, M. and Wilmsen, M. (2020) Supporting designers: Moving from method menagerie to method eco system. Design ScienceGoogle Scholar
Henshall, E.J. (1995) Ford engineering and quality improvement programme. In: Kanji, G.K. (eds) Total Quality Management. Springer, Dordrecht. 10.1007/978-94-011-0539-2_94Google Scholar
Hiort, V., Warell, A., Larsson, A., Motte, D. and Jagtap, S. (2014) The spread of product development methodology: Exploring drivers and barriers in Swedish Industry. Proc NordDesign, 540–549.Google Scholar
Jagtap, S., Warell, A., Hiort, V., Motte, D. and Larsson, A. (2014) Design Methods and Factors Infuencing Their Uptake in Product Development Companies: A Review. Proceedings of DESIGN conference, pp.231–240.Google Scholar
Laing, C., David, P., Blanco, E. and Dorel, X. (2020) Questioning integration of verification in model-based systems engineering: an industrial perspective. Computers in Industry, Volume 114, 10.1016/j.compind.2019.103163.Google Scholar
Lopes, Jo, (2012) Jaguar Land Rover Technical Accreditation Scheme: Innovation in Industry-University Partnership CPD, UKCES-OECD Workshop UK Skills Show, Birmingham, 16 Nov 2012.Google Scholar
López-Mesa, B. and Bylund, N., (2011) A study of the use of concept selection methods from inside a company. Res Eng Design, 22, pp. 7–27. 10.1007/s00163-010-0093-2Google Scholar
Müller, Th., Manga, K., Walther, M. and Wallaschek, J. (2007) Results of an Industry Survey on the Application of Dependability Oriented Design Methods. In: Krause, Frank-Lothar: The Future of Product Development, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 175–184. 10.1007/978-3-540-69820-3_19Google Scholar
Nijssen, E. J., Frambach, R. T. (2000) Determinants of the adoption of new product development tools by industrial firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 29(2), pp. 121–131. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0019-8501(98)00043-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ponn, J. (2016) Understanding the Gaps and Building Bridges for Synergy—How to Promote the Dialogue Between Design Research and Design Practice. In: Chakrabarti & Lindemann (eds) Impact of Design Research on Industrial Practice. Springer. 10.1007/978-3-319-19449-3_27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
REF21 Research Excellence Framework (2019) Panel Criteria and Working Methods, https://www.ref.ac.uk/publications/panel-criteria-and-working-methods-201902/Google Scholar
Repenning, N, Sternamn, J, (2001) Nobody Ever Gets Credit for Fixing Problems that Never Happaned: Creating and Sustaining Process Improvement, California Management Review, 43:4, https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/41166101.Google Scholar
Sandberg, A., Pareto, P. and Arts, T. (2011) Agile Collaborative Research: Action Principles for Industry-Academia Collaboration. IEEE Software, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 74–83, https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MS.2011.49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheldon, D.F. and Foxley, D. (2003) UK Design Research and Its Impact on Industrial Practice for Product Development. International Conference on Engineering Design, 19-21 August, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Stetter, R. and Lindemann, U. (2005) The transfer of methods into industry. Design process improvement: A review of current practice, Clarkson, J. and Eckert, C. (Eds.), Springer, London. 10.1007/978-1-84628-061-0Google Scholar
Stetter, R. (2016) Adoption and Refusal of Design Strategies, Methods, and Tools in Automotive Industry. In: Chakrabarti, A., Lindemann, U. (eds) Impact of Design Research on Industrial Practice. Springer. 10.1007/978-3-319-19449-3_29Google Scholar
Tomiyama, T., Gu, P., Jin, Y., Lutters, D., Kind, C. and Kimura, F. (2009) Design methodologies. Industrial and educational applications. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 58 No. 2, pp. 543–565. 10.1016/j.cirp.2009.09.003Google Scholar
Wallace, K. (2011) Transferring Design Methods into Practice. The Future of Design Methodology, Birkhofer, H. (Ed.), Springer, London, pp. 239–248. 10.1007/978-0-85729-615-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wohlin, C. et al. . (2012) The Success Factors Powering Industry-Academia Collaboration. IEEE Software, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 67–73, https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MS.2011.92.Google Scholar
Yeh, T.-M., Pai, F.-Y., Tang, C.-C. (2010) Performance improvement in new product development with effective tools and techniques adoption for high-tech industries. Quality and Quantity, 44 (1), pp. 131–152. 10.1007/s11135-008-9186-7Google Scholar
Yutaka, N., Masahi, T, Sakaguchi, A, Fujita, K., (2017) A decade trend of utilisation of design tools and methods in Japanese product industries, in Proc ICED 2017, Vol 1, p 379–388Google Scholar