Search results

This paper is the second of a three‐part series in which the authors identify best practice for implementing virtual teamworking to aid concurrent engineering. Part 1 examined how five key texts on virtual teamworking contribute to an understanding of how to introduce virtual working to enable concurrent engineering. It developed a structure for comparing and contrasting the texts for this purpose. In Part 2, four general areas of concern are identified from these texts. The authors suggest five other issues, derived from other texts and practical experience important to concurrent engineering involving the supply chain. Part 3 will then synthesise the key elements of a methodology for introducing virtual teaming in a design and manufacture supply chain utilising concurrent engineering.

This paper is the first of a three part series in which the authors identify best practice for implementing virtual teamworking to aid concurrent engineering. Part 1 examines how five key texts on virtual teamworking contribute to an understanding of how to introduce virtual working to enable concurrent engineering. It develops a structure for comparing and contrasting the texts for this purpose. In Part 2, four general areas of concern are identified from these texts. The authors suggest five other issues, derived from other texts and practical experience important to concurrent engineering involving the supply chain. Part 3 then synthesizes the key elements of a methodology for introducing virtual teaming in a design and manufacture supply chain utilising concurrent engineering.

An investigation was conducted in the design department of a medium‐sized automotive company to establish engineers’ preferred learning styles. This was achieved by using two proven questionnaires followed by statistical analysis methods. The evidence showed that the engineers investigated have a significant visual learning style preference. This means that their learning is more effective by using diagrams, sketches, photographs, schematics, flow charts, pictures, videos, computer graphics, and demonstrations in training programmes and in their everyday working environment. The present computer‐aided design (CAD) training in the company does incorporate some of these visual techniques and so does satisfy the engineers’ visual learning style preference. Evidence also suggested that there is not a need to have different training and learning methods for design engineers and for managerial engineers such as project engineers and team leaders.

For learning opportunities to exist in an organisation, adequate learning methods need to be available in the organisation. This paper looks at the various learning methods for engineers in the design environment adopted by two automotive organisations. With greater work demands placed on the engineer and less time to learn, a more self‐directed learning approach is emerging. Emphasis is on the engineering design environment because of the continuous need for design engineers to keep updated with current engineering information, knowledge and techniques. By having the right learning climate and methods available in the organisation, the individual can engage in self‐directed learning; the effects of which are beneficial to organisational learning and the design engineer’s self‐development.

There is a gap in the existing literature relating to the implementation of virtual teamworking for engineering collaboration, and concurrent engineering in particular. This paper discusses the development of a methodology focused on guiding companies implementing virtual teamworking for engineering collaboration. The key principle of the methodology is to consider the implementation of virtual teaming as a business project rather than as an IT project. The methodology is derived from an analysis of the key issues identified in the literature, and the empirical findings from an ESRC Innovation funded project on virtual teaming in the automotive supply chain. The methodology identifies 20 important activities around the three key areas of processes, people and technology. The methodology is currently being evaluated with first tier suppliers and SMEs in the automotive sector.

The design, manufacture and delivery of a product requires ever‐higher levels of knowledge and expertise within the supply chain. If concurrent engineering (CE) in tiered supply chains is to be fully implemented, a practical CE strategy needs to recognise that successful, concurrent designs are built on rich relationships amongst all parties. Virtual teaming is the most appropriate framework and mechanism in which to examine how such relationships can be created across a distributed supply chain, with members separated geographically. In principle, virtual teaming could allow joint commitment, feelings of mutuality, trust and creativity, and rapid decision making to operate within a supply chain. For this to be possible, a virtual team needs to be built by concentrating on process, teaming and technology factors. However, experience from other IT‐based initiatives is that technology will be concentrated on to the exclusion of other factors. Data from the two sources support this contention.

This paper describes the information flows in the supply chain, and identifies knowledge and expertise as richer more capable entities for its management than data or information. It briefly explores how the structure of the automotive supply chain is changing due to the pressures of increasing complexity and urgency. Then it highlights the inevitability of instability in the supply chain, through an evaluation of turbulence. Agility is identified as a response for coping with this uncertainty. The tool identified for introducing agility in the supply chain is Virtual Teaming. It achieves this by forming collaborative supply chain partnerships, unconstrained by geography that can quickly apply knowledge and expertise as corrective and preventive mechanisms. A survey of the suppliers to a major automotive manufacturer has highlighted the need for this form of working.

Before an organisation can develop its marketing strategy, it needs to carry out a thorough marketing analysis in order to understand the customers and trends, and evaluate external environmental forces. This paper seeks to identify and discuss the external environmental forces affecting: e‐learning providers, including market demand; political and legal forces; social and ethical influences; technology; and competition. The e‐learning provider has little, or no, control over the external environmental forces affecting the market in which it operates, and so it is necessary continually to forecast, monitor and assess this environment and to adapt its e‐learning product or services accordingly.

Technology‐based learning (TBL) provides a flexible learning approach to support the knowledge and skills base within an organisation. TBL also creates an interesting learning environment to motivate continuous learning. Emphasis is on the engineering design environment due to the continuous need for engineers to keep updated with current engineering information, knowledge and technologies. With the greater work demands placed on the engineer and less time to learn in, a more self‐directed learning approach is required. TBL tackles the increasing need for immediate learning and self‐directed learning. By establishing an effective learning environment, the engineers can use their own initiative and take responsibility for their own training and learning requirements. This is beneficial to organisational learning as well as the individual’s self‐development. The effects of TBL on the design engineer and the organisation are investigated.

Business process reengineering (BPR) and total quality management (TQM) both emphasise the benefits that a process orientated view of company operations can bring. Acquiring a clear definition of the “as‐is” business process and developing an understanding about how the process may be re‐engineered is a crucial stage in any BPR project. This early phase normally has three objectives: to achieve a full understanding of the process to be re‐engineered so as to clarify its objectives and characteristics; to create a shared vision and understanding among the re‐engineering team; to have a basis for starting the redesign. To support this phase, there is a range of tools: manual, computer supported and computer enabled which are traditionally used to help in the activities of process definition and analysis. This paper describes some of the newer approaches. The product introduction process (PIP) is examined in a general sense, and specific examples from the automotive industry are taken as a basis for evaluation of the available tools and applications. A sample from the process analysis tools identified was used to model the PIP, and from the difficulties and successes an understanding of the attributes required in such an analysis tool was derived.