A Metric for Evaluating Design Commonality in Product Families

1998 ◽  
Vol 122 (4) ◽  
pp. 403-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sridhar Kota ◽  
Kannan Sethuraman ◽  
Raymond Miller
Keyword(s):  
Product Family ◽  
Objective Measure ◽  
Value Added ◽  
New Product ◽  
Product Line ◽  
Product Complexity ◽  
Product Families ◽  
Market Strategy ◽  
Customer Base ◽  
Market Needs

Many companies develop a market strategy built around a family of products. These companies regularly add new product variations to the family in order to meet changing market needs or to attract a broader customer base. Although the core functionality remains essentially unchanged across the products within a family, new functions, feature combinations and technologies are incorporated into each new product. If allowed to grow unchecked, these component variations, commonly referred to as “complexity”, can result in a loss of productivity or quality. The challenge lies in an effective management of product variations in the design studio and on the manufacturing floor. The key is to minimize non-value added variations across models within a product family without limiting customer choices. In this paper we discuss the factors that contribute to product complexity in general, and present an objective measure, called the Product Line Commonality Index, to capture the level of component commonality in a product family. Through our Walkman case study, we present a simple yet powerful method of benchmarking product families1. This method gauges the family’s ability to share parts effectively (modularity) and to reduce the total number of parts (multi-functionality). [S1050-0472(00)02704-5]

Managing Variety in Product Families Through Design for Commonality

1998 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sridhar Kota ◽  
Kannan Sethuraman
Keyword(s):  
New Technologies ◽  
Product Family ◽  
Objective Measure ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Product Variety ◽  
New Product ◽  
Product Line ◽  
Product Portfolio ◽  
Product Complexity ◽  
Product Families

Abstract Majority of companies develop a family of products and many new product variations are added to the product portfolio regularly to meet changing market needs and/or to attract new customer base. Although, the core functionality remains essentially unchanged across all products within a family, new functions, new feature combinations and new technologies are incorporated into each new product. The component variations, commonly referred to as “complexity”, grow exponentially resulting in loss of productivity and/or quality. The challenge lies in effective management of product variations in the design studies and on the manufacturing floor. The key is to minimize non-value added variations across models within a product family without limiting customer choices. Although the benefits of standardization are widely known and most companies do standardize stock components such as fasteners, they are far from standardizing their product -specific core components and thus fail to reap significant benefits in quality and cost. Through this research, we are developing new methodologies for improved management of product variety to achieve higher productivity. In this paper, we discuss the factors that contribute to product complexity in general, and present an objective measure, called the Product Line Commonality Index, to capture the level of part commonality in a product family. Through our Walkman case study, we illustrate robust design/manufacturing strategies, including modularity and postponement of product differentiation, that help minimize non-value added variation across models within a product family1 without limiting customer choices. Finally, we present a simple and yet a powerful method of benchmarking product families or companies in their ability to share parts effectively (modularity) and reduce the total number of parts (multi-functionality) used in product families.

Application of Product Line Commonality Index (PCI) in a Family of Products

2014 ◽  
Vol 564 ◽  
pp. 650-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Oliver Rubio ◽  
O. Julian Mora ◽  
G. Alvaro Guarin ◽  
I. Pablo Carrizosa
Keyword(s):  
Product Family ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Product Line ◽  
Effective Management ◽  
Aesthetic Appearance ◽  
Design And Manufacturing ◽  
Bicycle Frame ◽  
Market Needs ◽  
Commonality Index

Currently many companies base their marketing strategy around a family of products. Thus, they regularly add new variations to products in order to meet changing market needs, or to attract new customers. Although the basic functionality remains unchanged across products, new features, aesthetic appearance and technologies are incorporated in each new product. This if it is not checked, can generate the “complexity of the product,” which leads to a loss of productivity or quality. Thus, the effective management of product variations in design and manufacturing is challenging. The key is minimizing the non-value added variations through models within a range of options without limiting customers. This article discusses the factors that contribute to the "complexity of the product” and this is done through the product line commonality index (PCI) , which measures the level of common parts in a product family. A case study of bicycle frame displays its implementation and functionality. The index shows the possibility that the products in a family share parts effectively (modularity) and reduces the total number of parts (multifunctionality).

A Methodology to Support Product Family Redesign Using Genetic Algorithm and Commonality Indices

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henri J. Thevenot ◽  
Jyotirmaya Nanda ◽  
Timothy W. Simpson
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Algorithm ◽  
Product Family ◽  
Product Line ◽  
Manufacturing Companies ◽  
Component Level ◽  
Product Families ◽  
Overall Design ◽  
Family Level ◽  
Systematic Methodology ◽  
Commonality Index

Many of today’s manufacturing companies are using platform-based product development to realize families of products with sufficient variety to meet customers’ demands while keeping costs relatively low. The challenge when designing or redesigning a product family is in resolving the tradeoff between product commonality and distinctiveness. Several methodologies have been proposed to redesign existing product families; however, a problem with most of these methods is that they require a considerable amount of information that is not often readily available, and hence their use has been limited. In this research, we propose a methodology to help designers during product family redesign. This methodology is based on the use of a genetic algorithm and commonality indices - metrics to assess the level of commonality within a product family. Unlike most other research in which the redesign of a product family is the result of many human computations, the proposed methodology reduces human intervention and improves accuracy, repeatability, and robustness of the results. Moreover, it is based on data that is relatively easy to acquire. As an example, a family of computer mice is analyzed using the Product Line Commonality Index. Recommendations are given at the product family level (assessment of the overall design of the product family), and at the component level (which components to redesign and how to redesign them). The methodology provides a systematic methodology for product family redesign.

scholarly journals Pequeña Empresa: Papel de Nuevo Gerente de Marketing ESCOBITA NUEVA

1992 ◽  
pp. 103-109
Author(s):  
Konrad Fischer ◽  
◽  
Alfonso Gastañaduy ◽  
Keyword(s):  
New Product ◽  
Product Line ◽  
Sales Promotion ◽  
Product Price ◽  
Pricing Policy ◽  
Market Strategy ◽  
Financial Situation ◽  
Market Signals ◽  
Price Distribution ◽  
Organization Of Production

It presents the case of a family-owned garment company whose development has responded more to the founder's desire to provide his family with a sufficiently comfortable living than to the entrepreneurial vision that would have allowed it to respond to market signals, which has led the company to lose ground to the competition. The organization of production is described; the market strategy: product, price, distribution and sales, promotion and advertising; the characteristics of the market and the competition; and the financial situation. When the founder's son takes over the business, he evaluates this situation and considers different alternatives for action: specializing in a new product line; maintaining the same product line, but with new designs; entering other markets; changing its pricing policy; its distribution and sales system, as well as promotion and advertising. The discussion of the case can be oriented towards the analysis of these options.

Products' Shared Visual Features Do Not Cancel in Consumer Decisions

2015 ◽  
Vol 137 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ping Du ◽  
Erin F. MacDonald
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Preferences ◽  
Product Family ◽  
Image Features ◽  
Visual Features ◽  
Cognitive Responses ◽  
Product Family Design ◽  
Product Complexity ◽  
Product Families ◽  
Mass Customisation ◽  
Model C

Consumers' product purchase decisions typically involve comparing competing products' visual features and functional attributes. Companies strive for “product differentiation” (Liu et al., 2013, “Product Family Design Through Ontology-Based Faceted Component Analysis, Selection, and Optimization,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 135(8), p. 081007; Thevenot and Simpson, 2009, “A Product Dissection-Based Methodology to Benchmark Product Family Design Alternatives,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 131(4), p. 041002; Kota et al., 2000, “A Metric for Evaluating Design Commonality in Product Families,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 122(4), pp. 403–410; Orfi et al. 2011, “Harnessing Product Complexity: Step 1—Establishing Product Complexity Dimensions and Indicators,” Eng. Econ., 56(1), pp. 59–79; and Shooter et al. 2005, “Toward a Multi-Agent Information Management Infrastructure for Product Family Planning and Mass Customisation,” Int. J. Mass Customisation, 1(1), pp. 134–155), which makes consumers' product comparisons fruitful but also sometimes challenging. Psychologists who study decision-making have created models of choice such as the cancellation-and-focus (C&F) model. C&F explains and predicts how people decide between choice alternatives with both shared and unique attributes: The shared attributes are “canceled” (ignored) while the unique ones have greater weight in decisions. However, this behavior has only been tested with text descriptions of choice alternatives. To be useful to designers, C&F must be tested with product visuals. This study tests C&F under six conditions defined by: The representation mode (text-only, image-only, and image-with-text) and presentation (sequentially or side-by-side) of choice alternatives. For the products tested, C&F holds for only limited situations. Survey and eye-tracking data suggest different cognitive responses to shared text attributes versus shared image features: In text-only, an attribute's repetition cancels its importance in decisions, while in images, repetition of a feature reinforces its importance. Generally, product differences prove to attract more attention than commonalities, demonstrating product differentiation's importance in forming consumer preferences.

Focused Product Family Improvement

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoli Ye ◽  
John K. Gershenson
Keyword(s):  
Diversity Index ◽  
Product Family ◽  
Evaluation Tool ◽  
Product Families ◽  
Customer Needs ◽  
Cost Structures ◽  
Improvement Method ◽  
Single Use ◽  
Market Needs ◽  
Family Evaluation

Manufacturers in various industries are seeking to redesign their existing product families to better satisfy their diverse customer needs while maintaining competitive cost structures. Failure to carefully balance the commonality/variety tradeoff during product family redesign will catastrophically hamper the widely sought benefits of both appropriate commonality and variety. Existing product family redesign approaches often focus on increasing the degree of commonality or variety unilaterally and to their utmost, without considering the appropriate commonality/variety tradeoff based on both marketing and engineering resource concerns. The result is redesigned product families that are unachievable or much delayed. In this paper, the Focused Product Family Improvement Method (FPFIM) is proposed to help manufacturers utilize their limited engineering efforts to efficiently respond to market needs using their own competitive focus and commonality/variety tradeoff analysis. This method uses a graphical evaluation tool, the Product Family Evaluation Graph, to determine the necessary direction of improvement for product family redesign — either increasing appropriate commonality or increasing appropriate variety. A set of indices, the Commonality Diversity Index for commonality and variety, support the FPFIM in identifying components with undesirable commonality or undesirable variety, prime targets of redesign to satisfy the redesign intent. To illustrate the proposed method, an example application with four single-use camera families is presented.

scholarly journals Wireless controller and smartphone based interaction system for electric bicycles.

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 59-68
Author(s):  
Jorge Revuelta Herrero ◽  
Gabriel Villarrubia ◽  
Alberto L. Barriuso ◽  
Daniel Hernández ◽  
Álvaro Lozano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Automotive Industry ◽  
Product Family ◽  
Value Added ◽  
New Product ◽  
Social Environments ◽  
End User ◽  
Driving Experience ◽  
Electric Bicycle ◽  
Adaptive Environment ◽  
Made In

Throughout the last years, great improvements have been made in the automotive industry, a sector with a high impact in both economics and social environments. Many development efforts have targeted on satisfying the need of providing smart environments to the end user in vehicles, such as cars. This paper proposes a brand-new solution in the automotive field, consisting of a new product family which aims to transform the traditional bicycle to an electric bicycle using an architecture that provides an adaptive environment to the user, improving the driving experience enabling value-added services.

Recommending a Platform Leveraging Strategy Based on the Homogeneous or Heterogeneous Nature of a Product Line

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabrice Alizon ◽  
Steven B. Shooter ◽  
Timothy W. Simpson
Keyword(s):  
Product Development ◽  
Product Family ◽  
Product Line ◽  
Levels Of Abstraction ◽  
Product Families ◽  
The Family ◽  
Heterogeneous Nature ◽  
Single Use ◽  
And Function ◽  
Blue Jeans

Platform-based product development depends on many factors, including technology, cost, competition, and life cycle considerations, and many companies would benefit from knowing more about the nature of their product families and how they impact platform-based product development. We assert that the development of a product platform and its derivative family of products is also impacted by the homogenous/heterogeneous nature of the products being developed, which has received little attention in the engineering literature. The current study introduces an original metric for assessing the homogeneity/heterogeneity in a given family: the Homogeneity versus Heterogeneity Ratio (HHR), which works at two levels of abstraction, namely, family and function. This study focuses on the platform leveraging strategy and takes an interest in two other aspects of platform development: the specification of the family and the necessary differentiation. To support platform design, the HHRfamily and HHRfunction metrics quantify the ratio of homogeneity/heterogeneity in the family to recommend a platform leveraging strategy by highlighting homogeneous functions that support platform leveraging. Reverse engineering helps us to retroactively study three types of families (power tools, single-use cameras, and blue jeans) using HHRfamily and HHRfunction. In particular, we demonstrate: (1) quantification of the homogeneity/heterogeneity of a family of products based on their functions; (2) recommendation of a leveraging strategy based on HHR; (3) a new leveraging strategy, the combined leveraging strategy via cross leveraging; (4) how HHR can help designers to validate the product family specification; and (5) how HHR can highlight needs to differentiate a family of products other than through functions.

A Review of Software Solutions for the Management of New Product Development and Product Family Planning

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bethany M. Byron ◽  
Steven B. Shooter
Keyword(s):  
Product Development ◽  
New Product Development ◽  
Product Family ◽  
New Product ◽  
Product Lifecycle Management ◽  
Document Management ◽  
Software Systems ◽  
Product Families ◽  
Geographically Dispersed ◽  
Management Project

The field of new product development has a number of difficult challenges with which it must contend: shortened production time, greater market share demand, and geographically dispersed teams. Several software systems have been developed to ease these challenges. A representative cross-section of work in the fields of document management, project management, product lifecycle management, and conceptual and family design is examined, including past and current academic work and commercially available software. The scope and features of these projects are examined and compared on a software taxonomy. The potential application of these systems to product families is discussed throughout.

scholarly journals INTRODUCING A FRAMEWORK TO GENERATE AND EVALUATE THE COST EFFECTS OF PRODUCT (FAMILY) CONCEPTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 1907-1916
Author(s):  
Kai G. Mertens ◽  
Mark Schmidt ◽  
Tugba Yildiz ◽  
Matthias Meyer
Keyword(s):  
Selection Criteria ◽  
Product Family ◽  
New Product ◽  
Economic Consequences ◽  
Concept Generation ◽  
Product Families ◽  
Product Concept ◽  
Virtual Testbed ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Product Concepts

AbstractProduct concept generation and evaluation are critical for the success of new product developments (NPD) because managers need to select the most profitable product concepts. However, current approaches can be restricted to single products and do not cover product families' effects. Similarly, they do not necessarily capture all requirements and usually lack extensive cost analyses. Thus, this paper proposes a framework supporting product concept generation and evaluation by providing an accessible conceptualization to overcome the limitations. Using the so-called Extended Axiomatic Design (EAD) supports designers and managers to configure the requirements across product concepts' various domains while concurrently evaluating their economic consequences. The study applies the framework on a simplified case of a bottle manufacturer to conceptualize four product concepts. The case illustrates how the EAD can be used as a virtual testbed to generate and evaluate new product concepts. Finally, designers and managers can make more informed decisions about product concepts by considering their economic and engineering selection criteria to select the most profitable NPD project configuration.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document