Introduction to Lean Product

and Process Development

LeanPPD Consortium

www.leanppd.eu
l d

1
 LeanPPD Project &
Consortium

• EU funded project
• 4 year (Feb 09 – Feb
13)
• 7,8 ML€ budget
• 12 European partners
• www.leanppd.eu

2
 How to live (or survive)?

• Next Ricardo’s competitive advantages…

• Keynesian policies…

• Schumpeterian strategies…

• Lean approaches…

3
 Lean? Where? When?

• Japan
– 1945, economic post-
war crisis
– 1965, market
liberalization
– 1970ies, petroleum
crisis & gas emission
regulation
– 1990ies, local financial
crisis
– 2008, global financial
crisis

4
 A proud history of
improvements

Henry Ford (1863 – 1943) Shigeo Shingo (1909 – 1990)

Kiichiro Toyoda (1894 – 1952) Jeffrey K. Liker

Taichi Ohno (1912 – 1990)

James P. Womack & Daniel Jones

Source: www.takt.com &

www.lean.org

5
 Lean is…

• A mindset,
i d or way off thinking,
hi ki with
iha
commitment to achieve a totally
waste-free operation that’s focused
on your customer’s success
• It is achieved by simplifying and
continuously improving all
processes and relationships in an
environment of trust, respect and full
employee involvement
• It is about people, simplicity, flow,
visibility, partnerships and true value as
perceived by the customer
Lean means economical,
Source: David Hogg, High Performance Solutions, 2008
thin, more value with less
work

6
 But isn’t it about production?

• Lean
L Production
P d i cuts costs and
d inventories
i i rapidly
idl to free
f cash,
h
which is critical in a slow economy
• It also supports
growth by
improving
productivity
d i i and d
quality, reducing
lead times and
freeing huge
amounts of
resources
esou ces
Source: Principles of Lean Thinking,
2004

7
Lean Enterprise

Source: 
xrtraining.com, 
2009

8
 While the world is
changing…

MASS CUSTOMIZATION

REDUCED TIME TO MARKET

GLOBALIZATION

9
 ...maybe we are missing
something?
• Product
P d t iis changed
h d
– Customer and market demands for value creation incorporating
sustainability, cultural aspects and customisation
– Production of affordable & sustainable (social, economic, environment)
products requires effective lean design and engineering
• Product Designg and Development p ((PD)) is more and more complex
p
– Design stage impacts whole product lifecycle
– 80% of manufacturing cost determined in design stage
– Time available for PD is decreasing
– Complex-design products not easy to make lean in production stage
(causing waste & non-value added activities)
• There is much more opportunities for competitive
advantage in PD than anywhere else!

10
 The “time” variable

Reduced TTM

Design and Development

Today 40% 60% Production

30 - 40%

Yesterday 15% 85%

11
 The “time-space” variable

Suppliers

Product Manager

Co-designers

12
 Then: Lean Thinking itself
might be improved

Lean Thinking

√ √
Lean Manufacturing Lean Enterprise Lean Product (and

X
(Shopfloor) (management) Process) Development

Definition exists Definition exists New idea

Value Stream Mapping Value Stream Mapping Dedicated tools not exist
(VSM) (VSM) No VSM
Eliminates Waste Eliminates Waste No full models available
Tools exist (e.g. JIT, Kaizen, Creates Value Engineering based
Jidoka) Tools exist (e.g. 5’M)
Models available Models available
Technical & Engineering Management based
based

13
 Lean Thinking in Product
Design & Development

• Lean principles in Product Development

– Lean objective is to identify Value and Non-Value
Add d A
Added Activities
ti iti (VAA),
(VAA) ini order
d tot eliminate
li i t Non-
N
Value Added (NVA)
– VAA in Product Development is any activity that
would result in customer requirements being
met (or exceeded)
– Engineering decisions in product development must
be based on p proven knowledge g and experience
p
– Failure to apply proven knowledge and
experience could result in product and process
redesign (NVA)
14
 Taking care of the fact that...

• Whil
While manufacturing
f i isi a repetitive
i i transactional-based
i l b d activity,
i i
which might concretize the decision taken by others
• Product
oduct Design
es g aandd Development
e e op e t iss a recursive
ecu s e and
a d reiterative
e te at e
intellectual activity, where designers and engineers might find
solutions for given problems
– Design and Development mean defining,
defining analyzing
analyzing, testing
testing,
comparing, choosing, specifying, documenting, etc.

Requirements

Concept

System Design

Detail Design

Specs

15
Lean PD literature

16
Toyota Lean PD System

17
 Toyota Lean PD System

5. Develop a Chief Engineer System to 11. Adapt Technology to Fit your People
Integrate
g Development from Start and Process
to Finish 12. Align your Organization through
6. Organize to Balance Functional Simple, Visual Communication
Expertise and Cross-functional 13. Use Powerful Tools for Standardization
Integration and Organizational Learning
7. Develop Towering Technical
Competence in all Engineers
8. Fully Integrate Suppliers into the
Product Development System
9. Build in Learning and Continuous
Improvement
10. Build a Culture to Support
Excellence and Relentless
Improvement
Source: Morgan & Liker, 2006

1. Establish Customer
Customer-Defined
Defined Value to Separate Value-Added
Value Added from
Waste
2. Front-Load the PD Process to Explore Thoroughly Alternative
Solutions while there is Maximum Design Space
3. Create a Leveled Product Development Process Flow
4. Utilize Rigorous Standardization to Reduce Variation, and Create
Flexibility and Predictable Outcomes

18
 P1: Establish customer-
defined value to separate
value-added from waste
• Main objectives of Lean
– R
Remove Waste
W t (cost
( t reduction)
d ti )
– Maximise Value (meet/exceed customer requirements)
• Waste
– Any activity that takes time and money but does not add value from the
customer’s perspective
• Value Added Activity
– Any activity that transforms or shapes raw material or information to
meet customer requirements
• Non-Value
l Added
dd d Activity
– Any activity that takes time, resources, or space but does not add value
to the product itself

19
 Value in Product
Development

Value Added
Design and testing

10%

Wasted time
Search for data
Waitinf for data
Data translation 30%
Wrong data
Data coding 60%

Non Value Added, but

needed
Specification
Source: PLM Alliance, 2007 Coordination

20
 Waste in manufacturing

• Seven types of waste

– Over Production (without demand)
– Waiting (for next step of production)
– Transportation (un-required movement of products)
– Inventory (components, WIP, finished product not
being processed)
– Motion (un-required movement of people/equipment)
– Over Processing (creates extra activity as result of
poor design)
d i )
– Rework / Defects (inspecting, repairing, redesigning)

21
 Waste in Product
Development

• Two major types

– Waste associated with the process of Product
D
Development
l t itself
it lf (e.g.
( knowledge,
k l d
communication, and resource)

– Waste created by poor engineering that results in

low levels of product or process performance,
performance then
embodied in the same product design (e.g. complex
design,
g , poor
p manufacturingg processes
p compatibility,
p y,
and custom parts)

22
 Waste in Product
Development

Strategy Wastes
Too many products
Over Production
Too many projects
Inappropriate processing
W
Wrong projects
j t
Failure to identify and manage design risk
Over /
Technology acquired but not used
I
Inappropriate
i t
Processing Poor make versus buy decisions resulting in
inability to deliver
P
Poor llong-term
t understanding
d t di off customer
t needs
d
Lack of focus

23
 Waste in Product
Development

Organizational Wastes
Wrong Poor process focus and visibility
organization Roles not clear
structure Poor team arrangements (including geography)
Inappropriate
pp p Poor training and skills development
individuals Inappropriate behavior
Lack of appropriate number of correct human resources
Lack of resources
Poor technology take up
Poor utilization of people
Untapped
pp human Poor representation
p of different function on Integrated
g
potential Project Teams
Lack of continuity (of people)
Inappropriate Poor process management
processes Lack of process knowledge capability
24
 Waste in Product
Development
Operational Wastes
Over specification - over designed
Over Failing to optimise design
Engineering / Too much and wrong timing for detail
Production Too much detail and unnecessary info
Redundant development (re (re-use
use not practised)
Information created too early
Late in delivery
Waiting to process information
Waiting
Waiting for information (e.g. inability to deliver
prototypes quickly and correctly)
Unavailable or of suspect quality

25
 Waste in Product
Development
Operational Wastes
Multiple sources and transport needs
Communications failure and non-conformance
Lack of standardisation of processes
Lack of use of standard parts and / or lack of
commonality
Lack of common prioritisation
Transportation
Information formats - Lack of common/compatible
standards
Information systems – Incompatibility, leading to
manual transfer waste,
waste and conversion waste
Poor interface control or management of design
data among departments

26
 Waste in Product
Development
Operational Wastes
Unnecessary details and too much information
Incomplete content
Inventory
Poor configuration management
Poor parts codification
Information pushed to wrong people
Unnecessary manual intervention due to poor
Motion
system connectivity
Too many data interfaces

27
 Waste in Product
Development
Operational Wastes
Unnecessary development activities
Unnecessary serial processing
Out of sequence working (due to poor integration)
Inappropriate changes (changes not customer driven or not of benefit to
business)
Re-work due to changing priorities or requirements
Excessive verification
Over authorisation
Over / Poor/ bad decisions affecting future
Inappropriate Excess /custom processing
Too many or too little iterations / cycles
Processing
Working with wrong/incomplete information
Processing of defective information
Information created / passed too early/late
Data acquired then not used
Unnecessary data conversions
Poor parts re-use
Over or inappropriate tolerancing
Use of inappropriate technology 28
 Waste in Product
Development
Operational Wastes
Quality lacking or suspect
Conversion error
Wrong level
Incomplete, ambiguous, inaccurate design
Tolerance exceeded
Failure to understand and capture requirements
Poor design for X - manufacture, assembly, cost, reliability,
Reworks / and supply
Defective
f Poor process outputs (poor specification , unclear
requirements)
Poor configuration management
P
Poor planning
l i
Poor supplier identification
Use of immature technology
Inappropriate use of tools
Lack of knowledge capture and reuse
29
P2: Front-load the PD process to
explore alternatives thoroughly

30
 Something that might be
considered from the early
stages…

Cumulated
costs Incurred
costs

Acrued
costs

Design Production Distribution & Use

31
 Something that might be
considered from the early
stages…
Doing it better
Opportunities incost Change costs
reductions first is
convenient!

Concezione Product
odu Design
g Process
o Production
odu o Use
U
and Development
Development

32
 Concurrent Engineering

• Integrated product development approach

– Emphasis on the response to customer expectations by
producing better
better, cheaper and faster products
– Multi-disciplinary teams
• Sharingg and exchanging
g g required
q knowledge
g and information
in such manner that decision-making proceeds with emphasis
on simultaneous consideration during the design stage
of all other product life cycle aspects
– As well as performing parallel activities
– The individual team member is responsible throughout all
the project for the product development

33
 Concurrent Engineering

Product
Engineer
Logistic

Manufacturing
g
Engineer
Purchase

Marketing Concurrent
Product Finance
Development
l
Production

Customer

Services Engineer
Supplier

34
 Set Based Concurrent
Engineering

• SBCE is the core of Toyota Product Development System

(TPDS)
• Design
D i participants
ti i t practice
ti SBCE bby reasoning,
i
developing, and communicating about sets of
solutions in parallel and relatively independently
– As the design progresses, they gradually narrow the sets of
solutions based on additional information from
d
development,
l testing,
i simulation,
i l i trade-off,
d ff customer and
d other
h
participant sets until they agree on one solution
– Itt iss p
product
oduct de
development
e op e t in a knowledge
o edge based
environment
• Defined by Allen C. Ward (1960-2004)

35
 Set Based Concurrent
Engineering
(A) “Point-Based”
Point Based Concurrent Engineering (B) “Set-Based”
Set-Based Concurrent Engineering

Re-Selection Set of Design

Feed back
Set of
Design

Final
Design

Evaluate against trade-off curves

Eliminate infeasible solutions
Detail the design
Combine in different ways

36
 Main elements of SBCE

• Consider
C id broad
b d alternatives
lt ti and
d gradually
d ll
narrowing them, till the optimal choice and
selection
• Chief Engineers
• Cross-functional team
• Team communication
• Working culture
• Knowledge generation and re-use
– Selection of set of solutions and
encouragement to perform several simulations,
develop several prototypes and test them –
leading to generation of valuable knowledge
– This knowledge is captured formally for its re-
use in future projects

37
SBCE Concept design level
Chief Engineer Vision : (vehicle
concept design in a written document)

ef engineer
Body Eng Chassis Eng etc

Chie
Stylists Develop Around 12 Artistic Concepts in 2-D

Chief Engineer: Approve the New Vehicle Concept

(sketch and specification) After considering requirements
(e.g. passengers ergonomics, marketing, etc).

38
 SBCE System design level

engineer
Stylist:6-10 Concepts and 1/5 Scale-Clay
Prototypes

Chief e
Planning Studies of:-
•Typical cross sections
Manufacturing •Joint definition
Evaluations Body Eng: Kentouzeu •Preliminary parts layout
Input drawings •Wire harness
•Crash analysis
•Etc

Design Eng
Narrow Set of Design to 2-3 Concepts for
1:1 Scale-Clay Prototypes
Evaluations

T t public
Toyota bli eventt

One final CAD

Drawing Body Eng: Kentouzeu
design Concept drawings

V hi l
Vehicle
Body Structures Design Plan:
Development Feedback & Approval
Units kozokeikaku (K4)

39
 SBCE Detail design level
Body structures
design plan: (K4)

Chief engineer
Detail design
(body panels &structural components)
Drawings sent
to die Eng

Stamping Soft-Tool dies

produced

Fit & function are

adjusted

Hard-Tool dies
Produced into
a screw
Body
ody
Full vehicle: Build&
Final design Test

40
 ICT for SBCE

Collaborative Product Development and Management - CPDM

EDM PDM PLM Collaborative desktop

Authoring tools - CAx

CAPP
RP/RM - CAM

CAD 2D

CAD 3D

DMU VR
CAE

41
 ICT for SBCE

‘70 ‘85 ‘95 ‘00

Drawing based Feature based Process based Knowledge based

Parametric
P t i andd
solid modelling CAD/CAM/CAPP Knowledge
CAD 3D Integration based
Desk CAD 2D Virtual Prototypes engineering

Source: Adapted from an of IBM, 2002

42
 ICT for SBCE

CAM
RP
CAE
Process Design, RM
CAPP
CAD Engineering and Physical Model
Planning RT
Model RC
Generation

DMU
Digital CAS VR
model Visualization Virtual Model
VP

RE
Drawing
CAD
Digitalization

Source: Adpated from an idea of the Kaemart Group

43
 P3: Create a leveled product
development process flow
• A Lean
L PD system is
i a Knowledge
K l d W
Work
k Job
J b Sh
Shop, which
hi h a
company can continuously improve by using adapted tools used in
repetitive manufacturing processes to eliminate waste and
synchronize cross-functional activities

44
Value stream mapping

Source: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/visio/HA101130241033.aspx
45
 Value stream mapping in PD
=information flow Lead time=30.1 days
Processing time=11.6 hours
=product
product flow

Product development Customer

Project
oject manager
a age
T
Team

Product
oduct
shipments

Parts supplier Parts shipments

Hardware
Requirements Product definition BOM Testing &
Assembly
Definition and layout definition validation
Build
3.5 days 16.3 days 9.7 days 0.6 days
1.1 hours 2.4 days 6 9 hours
6.9 0 8 hours
0.8 0 4 hours
0.4

Source: Fiore, 2005

46
 Value network analysis

• Value
V l Network
N t k Di
Diagram and
d
Social Network Analysis
– Ellipses represents roles
– Colours of links indicate
frequency of communication
– Links are labelled and given a
single arrow head to show
nature and direction of the
value transfer
– Questions
• Who do you communicate
with? How often?
• What do yyou send/share
/
and to whom? What do
you need and from whom?

47
 Value network analysis

• Roles
R l as agents off value
l creation
i / consumption
i
– Flow Objects can be tangible or intangible and can include wisdom,
knowledge, information and physical objects
– Flow Objects may be customer deliverable either to next in value chain
or ultimate end customer
– Value can be created from intangibles and it may be negotiable through
an exchange mechanism
• Assess health of network by subjective measure or by comparison
with industry benchmarks
– Coherent logic and reciprocity
– Asset utilisation
– Healthy balance of tangibles and intangibles
– Are there dead-links, missing links?
– Are exchanges fair?
Source: Allee, 2008

48
 P4: Utilize rigorous
standardization to reduce
variation & create flexibility
• A Lean PD system creates higher-level system
flexibilityy byy standardizing
g lower-level tasks
– Design standardization: common architecture,
modularity,
y and reusable or shared components
p
– Process standardization: standardize tasks and
work instructions, from design till manufacturing
processes
– Engineering skill set standardization: the right
staffing
t ffi and d program planning
l i guarantee t flexible
fl ibl and
d
skilled engineers
• Adoption
Ad ti off rules
l and
d methodologies
th d l i
49
 Design methologies and rules

• TRIZ e Problem solving tecniques

• Quality Function Deployment
• Value Analysis and Engineering
• Design to Cost and Target Cost Management
• Design for X and Design to Cost
• Modular design e Platform design
• Design of Experiment, Robust Design, Process Capability
• Clustering and Group Technology
• Variery Reduction Program
• Risk analysis, FMEA e FMECA
• Lifecycle Analysis, Engineeering and Assessment
50
 Design for X

Source: Ulrich and Eppinger, 2006

51
 P5: Develop a Chief Engineer
system to integrate
development

• Chief Engineer is responsible

f and
for d can ttellll you the
th
exact status of any given
project
– The Chief Engineer is not just a
project manager but a leader
andd technical
h i l systems
integrators, he/she is the glue
of the PD process
– It is to this individual that
difficult decisions are brought
for resolution

52
 P6: Organize to balance
functional expertise and
cross-functional integration

• Integrated traditional silos

th
throughh the
th Chi
Chieff Engineer
E i
• Module development
Teams
• Using obeya (“big room”)
system to enhance cross-
cross
functional integration

53
 P7: Develop towering
technical competence in all
engineers

• Technical excellence
– Rigorous hiring process
– Career path for technical
skills
• Principle of genshi
genbutsu (actual part
part,
actual place): get your
hands dirty and go directly
to see for yourself how the
work is getting done and
what the problems are

54
 P8: Fully integrate suppliers
into the PD System

• Involve suppliers from

the earliest stages in
concept development of
a product
– Presourcing
g
arrangements
– Guest engineers
• Suppliers are valued for
their technical expertise
in addition to their
parts-making capability

55
P9: Build in learning and
continuous improvement

56
 P10: Build a culture to
support excellence and
relentless improvement

57
P11: Adapt technology to fit
your people and process

58
P12: Align your organization
through simple, visual
communication

59
A3 sheets

Source: Morgan & Liker, 2006

60
P13: Use powerful tools for
standardization and
organizational learning

61
 LeanPPD Contributions

• Identify the added value activities in PD through

surveying and analyzing industrial best practices
• Develop
D l tools
t l for
f PD Value
V l Mapping
M i and
d Lean
L
Assessment
• Develop an approach for knowledge acquisition,
acquisition re-use
re use
and creation to enable a Knowledge Based
Engineering (KBE) system to enable a lean
development process and lean product designs
• Propose
p a route map p for the incorporation
p of the Lean
PD into organizations

62
63
64
LeanPPD Value Mapping
(
(Tool
l Under
d Construction)
C )

65
LeanPPD Assessment
(O
(Open Questionnaire)
Q )

66
LeanPPD Assessment
(
(Tool
l Under
d Construction)
C )

Qualitative (measured
Select Key Performance Indicators through a survey)
Quantitative (fact based)

1. Focus on Customer Value and Value Stream Mapping (VSM)

Level of customer participation in the development of products

Is value stream mapping technique used accurately in PD
Percentage of products that used inputs from the customer
Percent of Lead time reduction after using the VSM technique

Fill Qualitative Key Performance Indicators

1. Level of customer participation in the development of products

1 2 3 4 5

1 – No
N customer participation
i i i dduring
i the
h product
d ddevelopment
l phase
h
2 – Customers are only consulted at Alpha and Beta Testing
3 – Customers are consulted before starting the and at testing phase
4 – Customers provide feedback in an informal way
5 - Customers are involved in every step of the product development

67
 LeanPPD KBE
(
(Tool
l To Be Developed)
l d)

Engineering Design session

applications
Feedback area
Geometric
representation area
Input area

F t
Features

Information management
applications
68
Thanks for your attention!

The LeanPPD consortium

Any
y questions?
q
LeanPPD Consortium

www.leanppd.eu

70