Search results

Reports on three papers concentrating on simultaneous engineering, presented at the Autotech 89 congress. Argues that CAE and CNC machines and new manufacturing systems cannot solve all the problems of new product introduction because of the traditional step‐by‐step approach to the production cycle rather than simultaneous phasing. Concludes that there is a need to get back to the basics of man‐management, communication, and common sense to allow simultaneous engineering and other manufacturing systems to occur naturally.

Simultaneous engineering is the only way to survive, according to today's automotive industry leaders. Anna Kochan reports from an international gathering in Wiesbaden.

Investigates the use of computer analysis tools in design; including information on speed or torque probes, and the use of fine element analysis and the Cosmos/M analysis system for design and verification of probes—stressing speed and simplicity of operation. Outlines the nature and time‐saving advantages of simultaneous engineering; reporting on a visit to see simultaneous engineering at work on a current project relating to aircraft passenger door assembly.

This paper presents the concepts and principles of quality function deployment (QFD) as they have been implemented by Ford company. The paper illustrates the essential linkages between external and internal customers to suppliers (i.e. “Voice‐Quality‐Satisfaction” Chains).

The paper considers some of the details of changes that are occurring to support the “Breakthrough in Quality”. One of the key elements of the Ford Motor Company engineering quality improvements program (EQIP) within Europe has been the linking of some seven‐quality tool techniques including QFD as the core link. For the purpose of improving QFD, it is both useful and rational to look at ways in which it can be linked to, or integrated with other quality tools. The Ford EQIP training process argues that QFD, within a customer focused engineering (CFE) process is a key tool in linking all other tools, through the QFD process itself.

The paper also looks at discussions on QFD linkages with other quality tools and processes. This sequence of QFD linkages to other single, or dual linked quality tools finishing with some engineering processes is particularly discussed. Among these are Pugh Concept Selection, Taguchi methods, experimentation, failure mode effects analysis (FMEA), value management, quality benchmark deployment (QBD) and benchmarking, process management, statistical process control (SPC), team oriented problem solving – eight disciplines (TOPS 8D), and systems engineering.

Although the manifestation of the Ford customer satisfaction process has been reviewed as the CFE QFD process within Ford of Europe, its adoption and awareness is still limited. As a result of this, it is critical to review the research topic of customer satisfaction with a focus on how Ford Motor Company as a whole approaches this key goal through the use of various marketing, sales and marketing research office (MRO) initiatives.

It discusses the various arguments and proposals that link together the end user customers voice to the internal customer‐supplier chains that act on the customer input and feedback to improve product quality and ultimately deliver higher end user satisfaction.

The paper concludes with a discussion of the use of QFD with other quality tools and processes, the role of QFD within total quality management (TQM) processes, and team working.

Quick response to customer needs is an important dimension on which a company may compete. However, quick response in and by itself does not achieve much of a competitive advantage unless timeliness is integrated with quality, flexibility and cost efficiency. Discusses the meaning and origins of the quality function deployment (QFD) technique, its reported benefits and problems, its relationship to continuous improvement programmes such as total quality management, statistical process control (SPC), concurrent engineering (CE), and benchmarking. Also examines several case studies of companies based in the UK, in their attempt to introduce QFD for new product development. Highlights reported benefits up to date and how QFD starts to challenge existing cultures of developing new products. Finally presents some guidelines on QFD implementation and lists all the critical factors reported to impinge most on its successful implementation.

This paper aims to improve understanding of how to manage global network operations from an engineering perspective.

This research adopted a theory building approach based on case studies. Grounded in the existing literature, the theoretical framework was refined and enriched through nine in‐depth case studies in the industry sectors of aerospace, automotives, defence and electrics and electronics.

This paper demonstrates the main value creation mechanisms of global network operations along the engineering value chain. Typical organisational features to support the value creation mechanisms are captured, and the key issues in engineering network design and operations are presented with an overall framework.

Evidenced by a series of pilot applications, outputs of this research can help companies to improve the performance of their current engineering networks and design new engineering networks to better support their global businesses and customers in a systematic way.

Issues about the design and operations of global engineering networks (GEN) are poorly understood in the existing literature in contrast to their apparent importance in value creation and realisation. To address this knowledge gap, this paper introduces the concept of engineering value chain to highlight the potential of a value chain approach to the exploration of engineering activities in a complex business context. At the same time, it develops an overall framework for managing GEN along the engineering value chain. This improves our understanding of engineering in industrial value chains and extends the theoretical understanding of GEN through integrating the engineering network theories and the value chain concepts.

Presents samples of ideas and examples of concurrent engineering discussed at Management Roundtable′s Seventh International Conference on Design for Manufacturability, held in Orlando, Florida, USA.

Summarizes the most important principles of concurrent engineering [CE] and computer integrated manufacturing [CIM]. Discusses system data flow and IDEFo diagrams used as graphical descriptions of the engineering process. Introduces a software package called CIMpgr. Concludes that CIM addresses the total information requirements and management of a company from the development of a business plan through to the shipment of a product and the follow‐up support.

This special “Anbar Abstracts” issue of Industrial Management & Data Systems is split into six sections covering abstracts under the following headings: Industrial Management; Industrial Engineering and Work Study; Industrial Design; Quality Management; Manufacturing Strategy and Production; Information Systems.

Taylorism is well known, for the organizational techniques that it implements. Post‐Taylorism innovates with news ways of working but its initiatives, in many ways, resemble its predecessor. One may argue that these organizational techniques are inconsistent with corporate objectives. Over and above the simple aim of maximizing profit, the Taylorian enterprise works to produce more goods at low cost. In the post‐Taylorism enterprise, the objective of efficiency is complemented by those of short delivery times, quality, diversity and flexibility. In order to attain these new objectives, and still remain coherent with previous ones, enterprises have developed new techniques: just‐in‐time production, business process re‐engineering, call centers, simultaneous engineering, and asynchronous teamwork across networks. According to the hypothesis put forward, post‐Taylorism adds new objectives to Taylorism. The strength of today’s reorganizations lies in attaining these objectives simultaneously. The consequences for people, however, in terms of their relationship with work, do not necessarily change.