IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v12y2009i1p55-68.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating product development systems using network analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Shawn T. Collins
  • Ali A. Yassine
  • Stephen P. Borgatti

Abstract

This paper proposes the integration of two systems engineering analysis tools, the Design Structure Matrix (DSM) and Network Analysis (NA), to study task interactions in a Product Development Process (PDP). The DSM is a matrix‐based systems engineering tool that analyzes task sequences to improve PDP execution. Using NA metrics to measure properties of information flow helps to identify important product development tasks and interactions that constrain PDP execution. Project managers can use these data to structure team integration mechanisms or to identify coordinating mechanisms for groups of concurrently scheduled PDP tasks. Functional managers and process architects can use these data to identify important or overloaded tasks. They can also evaluate whether tasks like stage gates and design reviews are acting as effective information flow regulators in the PDP. This new Systems Engineering approach provides a rigorous decision support tool for managers who must alter ideal task sequences due to specific schedule, budget, and expertise constraints encountered on their projects. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng

Suggested Citation

  • Shawn T. Collins & Ali A. Yassine & Stephen P. Borgatti, 2009. "Evaluating product development systems using network analysis," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 55-68, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:12:y:2009:i:1:p:55-68
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.20108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20108
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.20108?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tyson R. Browning & Ernst Fricke & Herbert Negele, 2006. "Key concepts in modeling product development processes," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(2), pages 104-128, June.
    2. Tyson R. Browning, 1998. "Integrative mechanisms for multiteam integration: Findings from five case studies," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(2), pages 95-112.
    3. David M. Sharman & Ali A. Yassine, 2004. "Characterizing complex product architectures," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(1), pages 35-60.
    4. John D. Sterman, 1989. "Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 321-339, March.
    5. Manuel E. Sosa & Steven D. Eppinger & Craig M. Rowles, 2004. "The Misalignment of Product Architecture and Organizational Structure in Complex Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(12), pages 1674-1689, December.
    6. Tyson R. Browning, 1999. "Designing system development projects for organizational integration," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(4), pages 217-225.
    7. Taylor, Frederick Winslow, 1911. "The Principles of Scientific Management," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number taylor1911.
    8. Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2002. "Misperceiving Interactions Among Complements and Substitutes: Organizational Consequences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(7), pages 900-916, July.
    9. Dan Braha & Yaneer Bar-Yam, 2007. "The Statistical Mechanics of Complex Product Development: Empirical and Analytical Results," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(7), pages 1127-1145, July.
    10. Sterman, John D., 1989. "Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 301-335, June.
    11. Stephen P. Borgatti, 2006. "Identifying sets of key players in a social network," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 21-34, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. John Wood & Shahram Sarkani & Thomas Mazzuchi & Timothy Eveleigh, 2013. "A framework for capturing the hidden stakeholder system," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 251-266, September.
    2. Pedro Parraguez & Steven Eppinger & Anja Maier, 2016. "Characterizing Design Process Interfaces as Organization Networks: Insights for Engineering Systems Management," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 158-173, March.
    3. Marcus A. Bellamy & Rahul C. Basole, 2013. "Network analysis of supply chain systems: A systematic review and future research," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 235-249, June.
    4. Natalie Burford & Andrew V. Shipilov & Nathan R. Furr, 2022. "How ecosystem structure affects firm performance in response to a negative shock to interdependencies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(1), pages 30-57, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ali A. Yassine & Luke A. Wissmann, 2007. "The Implications of Product Architecture on the Firm," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(2), pages 118-137, June.
    2. Pedro Parraguez & Steven Eppinger & Anja Maier, 2016. "Characterizing Design Process Interfaces as Organization Networks: Insights for Engineering Systems Management," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 158-173, March.
    3. Pastore, Erica & Alfieri, Arianna & Zotteri, Giulio, 2019. "An empirical investigation on the antecedents of the bullwhip effect: Evidence from the spare parts industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 121-133.
    4. Berry, D. & Naim, M. M., 1996. "Quantifying the relative improvements of redesign strategies in a P.C. supply chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 181-196, December.
    5. Towill, Denis R. & Zhou, Li & Disney, Stephen M., 2007. "Reducing the bullwhip effect: Looking through the appropriate lens," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1-2), pages 444-453, July.
    6. Oliva, Rogelio, 2003. "Model calibration as a testing strategy for system dynamics models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(3), pages 552-568, December.
    7. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    8. Ma, Yungao & Wang, Nengmin & He, Zhengwen & Lu, Jizhou & Liang, Huigang, 2015. "Analysis of the bullwhip effect in two parallel supply chains with interacting price-sensitive demands," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(3), pages 815-825.
    9. Rich, Karl M. & Ross, R. Brent & Baker, A. Derek & Negassa, Asfaw, 2011. "Quantifying value chain analysis in the context of livestock systems in developing countries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 214-222, April.
    10. Li Chen & Hau L. Lee, 2012. "Bullwhip Effect Measurement and Its Implications," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 771-784, August.
    11. Hazhir Rahmandad, 2012. "Impact of Growth Opportunities and Competition on Firm-Level Capability Development Trade-offs," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 138-154, February.
    12. Gérard P. Cachon & Paul H. Zipkin, 1999. "Competitive and Cooperative Inventory Policies in a Two-Stage Supply Chain," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(7), pages 936-953, July.
    13. Zhang, Xiaolong & Burke, Gerard J., 2011. "Analysis of compound bullwhip effect causes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 210(3), pages 514-526, May.
    14. Lin, Jinchai & Fan, Ruguo & Tan, Xianchun & Zhu, Kaiwei, 2021. "Dynamic decision and coordination in a low-carbon supply chain considering the retailer's social preference," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    15. Arunachalam Narayanan & Brent B. Moritz, 2015. "Decision Making and Cognition in Multi-Echelon Supply Chains: An Experimental Study," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 24(8), pages 1216-1234, August.
    16. Charles L. Munson & Jianli Hu & Meir J. Rosenblatt, 2003. "Teaching the Costs of Uncoordinated Supply Chains," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 24-39, June.
    17. Rosanna Cole & Brent Snider, 2020. "Rolling the Dice on Global Supply Chain Sustainability: A Total Cost of Ownership Simulation," INFORMS Transactions on Education, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 165-176, May.
    18. F Ackermann & C Eden & T Williams & S Howick, 2007. "Systemic risk assessment: a case study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(1), pages 39-51, January.
    19. Xuanming Su, 2008. "Bounded Rationality in Newsvendor Models," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 566-589, May.
    20. Florian Kapmeier, 2020. "Reflections on developing a simulation model on sustainable and healthy diets for decision makers: Comment on the paper by Kopainsky," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 928-935, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:12:y:2009:i:1:p:55-68. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.