4 5 11 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 31 30 29 26 21 15 14 13 12 0 3


36 35 32 41 40

Technovation XX (2002) XXX–XXX www.elsevier.com/locate/technovation



Dynamic product development — DPD
S. Ottosson ∗
Linko ¨ ping University, S-60174 Norrko ¨ ping, Sweden


45 46 47


Abstract To be competitive on an increasingly competitive global market, companies must be better at quickly developing innovations and new product platforms. Particularly for companies with short product life cycles, it is important to quickly and safely develop new products and new product platforms that fulfill reasonable demands on quality, performance, and cost. Unfortunately, classical methods such as Integrated Product Development (IPD), Concurrent Engineering (CE), and Simultaneous Engineering (SE) were developed for re-engineering of existing products, and have written reports and project reviews at discrete points (at the gates) as feedback principles, which for all types of development means fragmented information, delayed information, and reactive management. Dynamic Product Development (DPD) has a different mindset and is the product concept developed as long as a project runs and not just before engineering starts. Feedback is in DPD based on management participation for immediate and qualitative information, which facilitates control and guidance in real time, reducing unwanted surprises to low levels. Frequent solution iteration (making almost right and quickly testing the solutions) is in DPD important, which is opposite to classical methods. High demands on creativity, development time, usability, cost, and quality have in practical tests shown to be satisfied using DPD. © 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Creativity; Invention; Innovation; Product development; Product variant; Project

49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

61 62

63 64 65

1. Introduction For companies (small and large) that wish to maintain or establish market-leading positions, it is not enough in the long run to perform re-engineering of existing solutions. These companies must also seek, create, develop, and market new solutions, i.e., innovations and new product variants. However, the creation and early development of innovative solutions is not widely described in scientific papers (Freisleben, 2001). One reason for this is that classical research is difficult to perform when stability and predictability are no longer obvious, which, unfortunately, is the situation in the early phases of new product development. Another is that it is difficult to objectively measure efficiency between different ways of performing product development. A third reason is that it is not possible to forecast and plan creativity as creative solutions will often arise in relaxed situations, which we will deal with to some extent in this paper. In accordance with the classical paradigm, principles/methods for product and production development have been developed since the 1970s, mainly in

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85

1 27 28 1 2 3 4

E-mail address: stiot@telia.com (S. Ottosson).

the automotive industry. These principles are called Concurrent Engineering (CE) and Simultaneous Engineering (SE). The clear ambitions with CE and SE were (are) to shorten development time, improve quality, and cut cost or, in short, to improve QCT (Quality, Cost, and Time). Where to position developing products on the three axes in QCT diagrams is often a matter for discussion (see, for example, Schabacker, 2001). ‘Concurrent’ means that single tasks are divided into smaller tasks that are performed in parallel (Vajna, 2001) with the same starting point for different activities while ‘Simultaneous’ means that design and process planning is performed in parallel with separate starts of the different activities forming a “waterfall” pattern. CE has a more academic background while SE has been developed mainly within the automotive industry. Both methods build on the classical (Newtonian) paradigm and have a strong market-need perspective, meaning that the focus is not at bringing forward innovations. The principles and protocols of SE are well described in the manual of Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP) and Control Plan (APQP, 1994) that was sanctioned by the three automotive giants Chrysler, Ford, and General Motors in 1994. The principles of CE are not ‘standardized’ as they are for APQP. Often, however,

86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99












0166-4972/02/$ - see front matter. © 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 1 6 6 - 4 9 7 2 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 7 7 - 9


the terms IPD and DPD are used. Thus. a new product that does not live up to the demands of being called an innovation is generally a new product variant. we mean here a new product based on an existing product ‘platform’. By the term new product variant. If the invention leads to large steps in technical knowledge. the solution must be patentable even if a patent application is not filed. In more detail. If the new invention is further developed from existing solutions. it is often said to be a radical invention. the product should generally be regarded as new by the ‘market’. we mean in this paper not-commonly-known inventions. Definitions of used terms By new solutions. 148 2.e. this term will mean something that not even experts would expect when the solution is/was created. i. FEM (Finite Elements Method). CAE. Technically. Unpleasant surprises in excess time and/or cost are reported in business literature to be common in most development projects. The development of DPD can be said to have started in 1994. the time factor will not be limiting for the newness but the solution can be overrun by other solutions. the terms concurrent engineering (CE) or simultaneous engineering (SE) are often used.4 5 1 2 3 2 1 3 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 ARTICLE IN PRESS 2 S. it loses its newness and becomes a commonly known solution. The product development process from when a product concept exists is today often performed as a project with a project leader and team members representing different specialties. In this paper. Inventions can be both product inventions and process inventions and also combinations of product and process solutions. Furthermore. ‘Not commonly known’ is a diffuse expression that we need to use. new products (innovations) and radical new product variants have proved to be rare. when a project was started at Halmstad University to modify IPD with the aim of providing faster and more creative results. In order to be an invention. research finding. DFMA (Design for Manufacture and Assembly). When marketing people and other experts also take part in the project. and Analyzing methods are mentioned as being important for CE. or a new idea that has been developed into a new product and sold on the market and come into use. Computer-aided engineering (CAE) tools are used from project start onwards. When a multidisciplinary project team consists of only product development people and process development people. we will describe a new mindset for carrying out product development called Dynamic Product Development (DPD). IPD in 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 1 1 . different aspects.. 14). JIT (Just in Time). From a marketing point of view. ten people know about it and have promised not to tell anyone else. this means that the engineers from engineering design and production must work together in project teams due to project plans that have wellspecified gates/decision points. a technical height is required for a technical solution to become an invention. Research This paper is based mainly on Participation Action Research (Ottosson. 2002) and Action Research. By a new product. and revolutionary new ideas. with the aim of finding usable rules of thumb for product development and especially innovative development. on concept development and early product development as well as early verification of the solutions that have been found. comparisons will frequently be made with IPD. results have not always proved to be the desired ones when performing product development due to the principles of CE/SE/IPD. we mean a product that is new both from a technical point of view and from a market point of view. In practice. Focus in the presentation is on innovative work. By technical innovation. Engineers also use analyzing methods such as QFD (Quality Function Deployment). 1998). FMEA/FTA (Failure Mode Effect Analysis/Failure Tree Analyses). There are different definitions as regards the term innovation. tools/aids and guidelines of development have been tested since the early 1980s in industrial projects in Swedish companies as well as in university student projects. while DPD was developed mainly for innovative development where uncertainty and non-linearity are important factors to cope with. 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 3. 2001. it is often said to be an incremental invention. If the solution is kept secret and no more than. software projects seem to be very difficult to plan. Ottosson / Technovation XX (2002) XXX–XXX the three ‘tools/aids’ Project management. In particular. the product should have at least 60% new or redesigned parts and systems. and other optimization methods. Thus. DPD builds further on IPD but has the Quantum Paradigm as the main mental model while IPD has the Classical Paradigm as the main mental model. which is natural as these methods have not been developed for innovative product development (Freisleben. we mean here an invention. Here. p. research breakthroughs. TQM (Total Quality Management). say. When CE teams are extended with experts in marketing — and eventually also extended with other people — it is commonly called Integrated Product Development (IPD) (Vajna and Burchardt. For the reader to understand the thinking behind DPD. IPD/CE/SE were developed mainly for re-engineering situations. If the solution is not adopted for product development soon after it has been made public. There- fore. as a rule of thumb.

Tervix AB (business development). ț The projects shall preferably be organized in planetary organizations. Our industrial tests have been performed in small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) as well as in large companies. SKF AB (transport equipment. DPD in short It is not possible here to review DPD in any detail (three books by the author totaling about 800 S5 pages exist in the Swedish language). These development projects have resulted in many profitable innovations and new product variants. ț Dynamic and interactive follow-up aids shall be used. etc.4 5 1 2 3 2 1 3 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 ARTICLE IN PRESS S. which also change with time in a dynamical way.liu. ț A Concept Group. Frontec AB (mechanical products and machines). reach similar functionality stages after 3–4 months with DPD.hh. According to classical theories. Prosolvia AB (VR technology). five half-year projects were performed on the Innovation Management course at IUC West AB. In 1998–1999. Many patents have also been granted — not always. in 1997. ț A clear and living vision of the desired final result of the work must be communicated and understood by all involved in the development. dynamic handling is the only way to adjust to reality in a successful way. Swedelift AB (lifts & elevators). careful long-term planning should be done before any action is taken and especially before a product development project starts. we were clearly outside the IPD mindset and so. IUC West AB (regional development). ț The Concept Group is an “insider group” of the project. and Texsun AB (solar power). ț An open dialog must exist that is amplified by choosing proper project localities in the early project stages. In 2000 and 2001. In some cases. only FMEA/FTA is used initially. we have particularly experienced that student projects at Halmstad University that used to need 8–9 months to come to functional models when carried out according to IPD. ț Of analyzing aids. and fluent to and between the team members and the project leader(s) — IT shall be used as communication tool together with dialog. ț To meet changing situations and new possibilities. Daros AB (diesel engine piston rings). ț Frequent feedback must take place between the development team and the Concept Group. Some examples of these are Alert Invest AB (hospital equipment). [The Olsson model was the basis for the internationally more renowned IPD model described by Andreasen and Hein (1987). innovations have also become a reality. Chaos situations can also occur suddenly and with very little prior notice. leading to new innovations and new commercial product variants. An average of around 70 half or full academic year industrial projects with 2–5 students per project were performed every academic year in 1994– 1998. ț Project planning must be lucid with weekly followup reports. which is why this paper should be seen as an introduction to the mindset behind DPD. Edu-Euro AB (IT products). To start with. however. the concept must be developed continuously in parallel with product and production development. 5. our material and experience clearly show that this in general is wasted time and wasted money as the predictability is low for complex processes as product development. 5 + 5 student teams ran product development projects for three months on the Electronics ¨ ping Design programme at Linko University (www. ț The development is performed by project teams. A number of patents and invention prizes have been the result of these student projects. Most student projects have been carried out on the Innovation Engineering programme at Halmstad University (www. develops the first edition of the concept before project start.se). Ottosson / Technovation XX (2002) XXX–XXX 3 this case was the principles described by Freddy Olsson (1985). ț The Pareto principle (or 80/20 rule) is adopted iteratively in all activities. careful budgeting 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 262 331 263 264 265 266 267 268 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 269 270 339 1 1 .se).).] After some time of development. ț Both manual aids (BAD-PAD-MAD) and computerized aids shall be used. down to minutes in the early stages of product development when new ideas and findings can suddenly totally change the whole planning situation. 4. ț Benchmarking (investigating other solutions) shall not be done initially but after BAD-PAD-MAD and before CAD. The project leader is one of the members of the Concept Group. Careva Systems AB (handicap aids). Medical Robotics AB (medical equipment). Therefore. here are some statements regarding an overall view of state-of-the-art DPD: ț DPD is based on a holistic/quantum view. ț A user perspective is important during product development. Perhaps a shocking statement is that meaningful planning can only be done in very short periods of time. Management considerations According to classical theories. unlimited. ț Information must be fast. Handiquip AB (lifts). Flygt AB (pumps). which is also the steering group for the project. Although there are many factors that can influence the result of every project. we started to use the term Dynamic Product Development (DPD) for our method of product development. However.

For the same reason. changing the concept is not allowed while the project is in progress (concept development is discussed in more detailed in a later section). 2001. 164). society. The author’s opinion was (is) that such stops should be avoided as the average speed is reduced at each stop. we have collected many examples of the disappointment shown by customers and users when they have received the outcome of projects that were performed and delivered in accordance with the specifications the customers had given at the outset of the project. i. Making a budget is an exercise in minimization. 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 simply. The average speed is reduced considerably at traffic lights compared to when self-organizing systems are used. From this book a citation of Jack Welch. can serve as an example: The budget is the bane of corporate America. project leaders will know the real status of the projects long before written or oral reports reach them. the project leaders in DPD are moving back and forth between being in the middle of the project work to being on the market and technology frontiers. In our research. Fig. Budgeting starts with planning and as long-term planning is rather wasted time and wasted money. it is very important to make sure that the project concepts are always up to date. we also had different opinions on the necessity of having gate watchers. Ottosson / Technovation XX (2002) XXX–XXX should be done before any action is taken. so is also the budgeting efforts. being in frequent contact with the customers. 2. Support for this statement has recently been published (Read et al. p. the same amount of work is needed to push and pull but in reality we have seen that there is a big difference in efficiency in project manage- 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 963 964 965 967 966 968 969 970 Fig. They act more than react and are not afraid of losing control. Our findings show that the Volvo opinion is common in larger companies in Sweden. A survey of CFOs further underlines this standpoint (ibid. the project leaders must be very mobile. and DPD. Thus. It should never have existed.. Things happen all the time and concepts must simply be changed to be kept up to date. 1). p. a mutual view existed that stops are major thieves of time and money (cf. 2000).e. In classical mechanics. 1 1 . 164) as only 12% of the CFOs believed that budgets added much value to their organization. as well as the people working in the projects. showing how little you can do (ibid. As a consequence. Ericsson).4 5 1 2 3 2 1 3 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 ARTICLE IN PRESS 4 S. CEO of General Electric. in principle. However. researchers. Thus. Therefore. which Volvo has (Ottosson et al. at meetings at that time with corporate R&D management in the largest Swedish company (Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson or... One example of the belief in static planning is that in IPD/CE/SE: the concept is developed once to start with and. project leaders in particular must always be a few steps ahead of the work being done in the projects. Fig. A metaphor of how the entrepreneurial project leader in DPD acts and how the more bureaucratic or administrative project leaders in IPD/CE/SE act is seen in Fig. the concepts must not be static but dynamic documents. experts. In the form of metaphors of traffic lights and traffic islands. as their horizontal and vertical feedback systems will always provide them correction possibilities as fast as they are needed. In a personal meeting with the president of Volvo Traction and his vice president on the 11th September 2001 — the day when the world was suddenly changed by the terrorist attacks in the USA — they expressed with emphasis that new projects must be started and old ones terminated whenever the circumstances are changed so much that the concepts are no longer valid. 1. Ericsson’s most successful project in modern times (the ‘Japan project’) was performed — as is now evident — in a dynamic way that was in contradiction to Ericsson standards but is in good agreement with DPD. which Volvo follows.. 1 shows the principle differences between CE/IPD. for project leaders in DPD and for the Concept Groups. p.. of which traffic islands is an examples. By using ‘Management by Walking Around’. Thus. The motivation for the DPD standpoint that concepts must be changed continuously is that projects are not isolated from the world. 164).

Thus. is that the project leaders act as coaches and adopt to an entrepreneurial leadership. the Concept Group will meet. [Later on in a project. who are either experts and/or members of the Concept Group. that person should also act as an ‘early warning system’. corridors. the project leader is in the center of the activities. the bureaucratic/administrative project leader pushes the organization mostly in a reactive way. The “comets” help to ensure that vertical and horizontal communication is maintained. Line organizations and matrix organizations build on the basic principle that the leaders shall have the best knowledge to be able to make good decisions. the project leaders are only in discrete points (at the gates) presenting the work done in the projects together with plans for the next stage in development. A slower tempo in development and less creative edge can be the result when communication must be done over telephones and/or intranet and not spontaneously face-to-face. Fig. he/she needs the help of someone to take care of the administrative and financial work. Another inefficient factor we have noticed is that in many industrial projects. The comets ‘fly’ in and help to speed up the pace and eliminate problems that always occur in project work. In DPD. 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 982 983 984 986 985 Fig. the project leaders will have the time to keep ahead of the project work. By delegating and using self-adjusting principles. it is important not only to have an efficient administrative system and an early warning system but also to have a dynamic control system in which the team members can continuously update what they have done and what they plan to do in the future. 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 1 1 . not one. and avoid lack of information to colleagues. 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 ment. The Concept Group in DPD is an ‘insider group’ and not an ‘outsider group’ assessing the work at formal gates as in IPD/CE/SE. 1999). 2. it is important that he/she does not become shackled with administration. Particularly for complex situations. 3. In DPD. Most important. save time for the managers. To do so they must have enough self-confidence that they make it a principle to delegate work.4 5 1 2 3 2 1 972 3 973 ARTICLE IN PRESS S. As shown in Fig. it is impossible to disregard information needed for every subordinate to do his/her job. the entrepreneurial project leader pulls the organization project in an active way. When major changes are needed in the concept and when the project leader is uncertain of the actual or perceived situation. by using planetary organization principles. At the same time. such behavior forces the project leader to be available all the time. entrepreneurial leadership is fostered and tight control and guidance is accomplished by the project leader and the Concept Group. which means that the important spontaneous contact needed when creative work is to be done will be hampered. Preferably. To ensure that the distance between the project leader and his/her sub-project leaders and their teams does not grow too great. Note that in the Steering Groups in IPD/CE/SE. when the product is well defined and the tidy detail work is to be done. The lines show how information is given inwards and sideways simultaneously to speed up information. pointing out things that may go wrong. As the role of the project leader is to guide the project through ‘unknown terrain’ without getting the whole project team bogged down where it is not possible to proceed further. team members are often separated from each other by office walls and doors. early in every new development project. meaning less time spent in close contacts with the market and external sources. therefore. Therefore. 3. In order to maintain their authoritative position they generally keep tight control of information so that their subordinates will be dependent upon information from the leaders. However. The project leader is a member of the Concept Group. By using the principle of MBWA they can guide the work in an efficient way. the choice of project rooms is therefore a strategic factor. In IPD. 3 shows in principle how the planetary organization is set up (Ottosson. every time an information piece is missing for a subordinate. the choice of locality is important for the efficiency of the project and its sub-projects. The planetary organization used in DPD. Ottosson / Technovation XX (2002) XXX–XXX 5 974 976 975 977 978 979 980 Fig. that causes expensive stops when he/she must ask the leader for the missing or disregarded information. Note that the formal information is three-dimensional in the planetary organization. that work can often be done anywhere on the globe with the excellent IT possibilities we now have]. and stairways.or two-dimensional as for line and matrix organizations. A factor that slows down projects according to our findings is the organizational principles used. This is also an important mission for the ‘comets’.

Note that tests of the business idea/concept and the business/product plan start first when a Go decision at Gate 1 has been taken. that 10–20% of the total time spent in the conceptual design phase determines 80–90% of the total product cost.4 5 1 2 3 2 1 3 497 ARTICLE IN PRESS 6 S. a large portion of the product cost has in general already been committed when only a small portion of the development resources has been expended in this phase. 5 shows.. As conceptual development in general has the single largest influence on the product cost and as it sets the premises for the other development phases. data collection. Hundal. the concept is not to be changed in principle when ‘Gate 1’ has been passed. in IPD. At these gates. the concept in DPD is in continuous development while product development is taking place until the development process is completed. i. This way of working quickly accumulates knowledge so that the total business/product plan will really work when ‘Gate 1’ is reached. what to do) is accepted for further progress of the project.e. Technical concept development in IPD/CE/SE is generally only seen as the first phase in the product development process (e. In contrast. when?. 1998) tell. the term ‘Gates’ are not used in DPD as a few formal decisions in IPD are exchanged with many small decisions in DPD. ‘Gate 0’ is the same as for IPD/CE/SE.g.g. 1995). Ulrich and Eppinger. Koch. the business idea must also be supplemented with specifications/plans giving answers to the question why?. Therefore. Coming early into the market with a new product means that the company will gain a pricing advantage and advance on the competition on the learning curve.. although it has so far attracted marginal interest in research (Freisleben. Needed at least for the initiation of a new project is some information/insight of a wish (a need is a subset of a wish. and tests of the ideas are done in parallel instead of performing them in sequence.g. the product becomes increasingly more concrete. As Fig. Fig. which means improved profitability during the product life cycle. 2001). low costs. This concept work is done by the Concept Group. In classical concept development. a rough vision/idea of what the solution could look like. which is an ‘insider steering group’ of the project. Concept development It is an often-heard apprehension (e. 4 shows in principle the steps taken from start to decision of the business idea/concept to be developed. 1989) that many of the product features are already set during the initial creative development steps of new products and product variants. design. analyses. For economic as well as practical and mental reasons. and manufacturing phases. the relationship of time use will vary during the work. Ottosson / Technovation XX (2002) XXX–XXX 6. decisions are taken if the business idea (i. it is thus possible to achieve low development time. which acts as an ‘outsider group’ of the project. Classical business idea/technical concept development starting at ‘Gate 0’ with initiation ending with a business idea/concept at ‘Gate 1’. 1998). and good performance at the same time as creativity is maximized for the new product. It is also well known that the degree of control over the products decreases rapidly during the first steps of development. 100 100 100 100 100 100 1 1 . an interest/engagement to satisfy the wish. However. Through well-performed conceptual development. At 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 ‘Gate 1’ for IPD. the management and development teams are thus less able later to change the properties of the product and production set early in the process. and how? (For CE/SE. Nevins and Whitney. In DPD. If so.) and the technical concepts. The guiding principle of this work should be the ‘Pareto/80–20 Principle’ (e. to which we will return. The total development process is controlled by a steering group. where?. to which we will revert). from when the Steering Group — which normally is an ‘outsider group’ of the project — has taken its decision about the concept. As the development process moves through the planning..e.g. Controls are performed at well-defined decision points (so-called gates) where decisions are taken as to whether development should stop or continue in any form. 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 995 996 997 999 998 Fig. The Concept Group meets whenever there is a need for a meeting. The conceptual development performance is also extremely important if the product is to be able to reach the market early as a quality product or not. The vertical axis tells how relative time is used to develop the business idea and the technical concept. One important team member in the Concept Group is the project leader.. Thus. the project leader usually presents the situation and the action taken from the last gate. 1998). for example. idea generation. it is sometimes regarded as the most important design phase (e. ‘Gate 0’ is the initiation of data collection followed by analyses of the data and idea generation. decisions are only taken if the technical concept is accepted for further progress of the project. 4. The sales life of the product will also be extended. Estimations (Hundal. However. and a wish to be involved in developing a solution.

we have often seen. shows this principle. 2002b).. In DPD.. one should therefore start to find one’s own solutions first. manual ‘tools’ cannot compete with CAD. Pencil-aided Design (PAD) and Modelaided Design (MAD) or Virtual Reality (VR) for the design of larger objects (Ottosson. a problem. only leads to detail adjustments and few innovative ideas. 103 103 investigations in Germany (Pache et al. Recent 102 102 Fig. which is why we must often discard the solutions after some time and start to be creative. Ottosson / Technovation XX (2002) XXX–XXX 7 101 101 1010 1012 1011 1013 1014 1015 1016 Fig. 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 which normally means frequent meetings early in the product development process and fewer meetings later in the process. the activities in Fig. 2001) have revealed that development engineers stop using CAD when problems occur and/or when new ideas are needed. before the real creative process can start. from experts and from the market. 6. the Concept Group will often be expanded with some creative people to speed up and improve the initial creative work. This wish can be a need. BAD can be seen as finding solutions on an abstract level.g. When developing at detail level. 6. PAD — i. it is important to start out with different aids before benchmarking and CAD are used. sketching — is done to find more concrete solutions. and turn to at least BAD and PAD before they can go back to CAD. for example. 102 102 102 102 103 103 Fig.e. 5. 4 are done in parallel to speed up the process and to reach tested solutions more quickly. MAD/VR is used to find whole solutions. which is a simplification of Fig. DPD starts from a ‘wish’ while IPD starts from a market ‘need’. The concept development process starts in DPD with a wish and not only a need. forgetting the work we have done so far. 7. DPD and IPD. 619 620 621 622 623 624 1 1 .4 5 1 2 3 2 1 1008 3 1009 ARTICLE IN PRESS S. In DPD. it is a waste of time to “reinvent the wheel” so one should start with benchmarking an existing solution. According to classical theories. The Concept Group is normally a small group (not more than six individuals) that consults resource people when it is needed. This. Initially. or simply a dream to be fulfilled. 6. When new solutions are needed. 7. e. The Pareto Principle is used as a guiding principle. which is accomplished by using different aids such as Brain-aided Design (BAD). is shown in Fig. The wish has to be clarified and visualized and also complemented with other knowledge.. which is the starting point in IPD. The process from start to technical concept for the two methods. Fig. A wish is a wanted future situation or solution.

brainstorming when technical solutions are to be created. Much of the design intent therefore has to be documented separately. Language problems will not occur with models. it can be advisable to develop them all simultaneously and make a judgment later. When we find ourselves in a new situation. we have also found that visualizations in the form of simple sketches are extremely important for fast and creative results. The last step in initial concept development work is to document relevant data manually and electronically in EDM/PDM files (EDM = Engineering Data Management. In such cases. The engineering design is very much a question of 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 1039 1041 1040 1043 1042 714 Fig. two or more good solutions may be found and it can be difficult to judge which of them has the best possibilities for the future. Sometimes. Ottosson / Technovation XX (2002) XXX–XXX The creative process in Fig. 1991). space. preferably on a whiteboard. According to our findings. 6 takes place individually or in a group and should hopefully result in at least one unique (radical) solution. In complicated situations. Verification means to check that the solutions meet the wishes (verification is treated further below). If the process meets unsolvable problems at any time. the creative process must be restarted. Refreshment is needed when illumination does not appear. when more than four individuals cooperate simultaneously. During group work. it is recommended to start the engineering development by making one or more models as models ‘speak’ to many senses of those taking part in the development work. 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 7. 8) may be required to find a new solution from which to move on. If sufficiently good solutions do not emerge. 1965) 715 1 1 .4 5 1 2 3 2 1 3 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 1037 1038 ARTICLE IN PRESS 8 S. Much of this pattern recognition takes place on an unconscious level. Without sketches. the initial solution should be modified and combined with other solutions in order to obtain an even better solution to work further from. Early product development The chain of performing development from a product concept to a wanted or wished result can be performed as shown in Fig. Time. Incubation is related to the subconscious mind that works with a problem until useful solutions appear (the illumination). a new creative process (see Fig. Note that computer-aided tools up to this point are of limited use as CAD systems are based on geometric manipulation and reasoning and cannot deal with non-geometric information. 9. everybody will not have the same vision for the work. 8. it is often beneficial if the problem is divided into several parts and solved individually before being reassembled and further worked on to become a functional product concept. If a model has not been made in the concept work. 6 is principally shown in Fig. 1965. and structure are feasible grounds for such a division (Knellner. PDM = Product Data Management). Thus. the more solutions will we produce in general. In our work. It is also difficult to link the geometric solid models with the conceptual models as they are based on different representation schemes. we do not consciously understand a pattern other than through a feeling — which is why it is important to make models in the verification process. we have found it to be beneficial if at least one participant is able to make simple sketches. Of all the different creative methods that have been suggested in creativity literature. we have found that dialog is more useful than. the chain preparation ‫ ב‬incubation ‫ ב‬illumination ‫ ב‬verification (Knellner. when a unique solution has first appeared it should be compared with other solutions (so-called benchmarking). which is why the risk of misunderstandings will be minimized using models as communication tools. 1998). for example. It should be noted that in the creative process. The time for an illumination to appear will differ depending on personal factors and external factors as well as on the problem complexity. when someone has shown an interest and willingness to engage in a wish or need. 1965) is performed. Preparation means active thinking (BAD) combined with sketching (PAD) or modeling (MAD) (Ottosson. The more experience and the more solutions we have stored in our memory. Depending on the result of that activity. The creative process (after Knellner. if we have an interest and a willingness to do so (Hertzberger. Sometimes. 1995. our brains look for patterns that fit the situation and we get guidance on how we should think and act. This method of working has developed simply because it is practical and effective. which leads to misunderstandings and less efficient work. 1988). Altschuller. 8. people often act on the basis of recognizing well-known ‘patterns’ and ‘characteristics’. The creative process in Fig. preferably with other creative people participating. The creative process follows the same principles for IPD and DPD.

VR technology can be seen as MAD aids (Ottosson. p. Early in the development process. so does also the thinking. which means to do the opposite (Evatt. 1:4. Therefore. Reorganizing is useful especially to save space — and is sometimes called ‘packing’. 1998). CAE tools should be used for complicated products during the development process (Ottosson. for re-engineering of existing products. The productivity of prototype-driven design measured in user satisfaction per man hour has been shown to be ‘superior’ (Schrage..” (Schrage. few differences exist between IPD and DPD. it is important to produce models and prototypes that the product developers and test people can hold in their hands and touch. the more important it is that models and prototypes are given to as many people as possible. possibilities. One reason is that the product development team — and test users — have the 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 1047 1049 1048 1050 1051 1053 1052 763 Fig. p. In doing so. since the eye often deceives our judgment even when the presentation is on paper in scale 1:1. If models are practically impossible to make to scale 1:1. and also to immediately test them on buyers and users to obtain their feedback (cf. we have found the old recommendations of scales 1:2. substitute. rapid prototyping (e. The engineering process from concept to final new product/product variant. These are enlargement and reduction (Evatt. the analyzing aids used in IPD/CE/SE are not of much help except for FMEA/FTA. It is also important to produce work models and prototypes frequently until a final solution has been realized. 1998). as simple materials are quick and easy to change. it is important in innovative product development to produce many rough sketches. 6). should therefore be used before using harder material. From our experience. although DPD has advantages 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 1 1 . 746 747 8. clay. Our experience has shown that the more people involved in the development process. FFF — Free Form Fabrication) is often useful when function and dimensions are decided after some idea iterations. the softer the material that should be used. 1996).There are some simple ways of performing modifications and combinations that we have found to be especially usable. To make sure that design intentions are met. in our experience. This is especially the case if the only sense used is eyesight. and potential at low cost. Furthermore. Sometimes. The earlier in the development process. and prototypes. When a functional model exists. which can be called ‘parametric design’. This is due to the fact that models and prototypes are produced to answer questions and to give impulses for development that cannot be described in written or spoken form. 1996). and eliminate solutions. 2000. 2002). In order to verify the solutions. it is important to perform simulations and tests as often as possible (see next section). However. for large objects and complicated products. We have found it useful to combine. The EDM/PDM files must be updated for each such iteration. is useful. Thus. 2000. paper. Fig. models. 9. we have found verification with only one human sense to be less reliable. 764 765 766 767 768 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 modifying and combining solutions. Ottosson / Technovation XX (2002) XXX–XXX 9 when unexpected problems arise — which they unfortunately have a tendency to do. 79). while managing prototypes and simulations is about managing power and influence. inversing the solutions.g. Verification To be able to quickly develop a functional prototype that pioneer buyers and users will like. To reorganize or recombine the solutions (also called ‘crossover’ (Vajna et al.. Quote: “When a model starts to harden up. Important to bear in mind also is that prototypes and simulations are always ‘political’. Pictures transformed on the computer screen or transformed in a VR helmet never give the same impression as when holding a model or a prototype in one’s hands. etc. wood. it is extremely important to perform simulations and tests often in the development process. The strength of rough prototyping media is also that they encourage playing with ideas.4 5 1 2 3 2 1 1045 3 1046 ARTICLE IN PRESS S. Thus. 2000)) is closely related to inversing solutions. our tests have shown that the use of CAE tools early in the development process often prove to be limiting to creativity and can also slow down the tempo compared to when BAD-PAD-MAD are used (Ottosson. 73). 1:10 to be recommendable..

and prototyping cycles used per unit of time. To summarize. the more simulations. Heurista WDK 24. Consequently. Conclusions To get unfurbished and extensive feedback in real time with the aim of being able to make adjustments without delays. an overall view of how DPD is performed compared to IPD is shown in Fig. 2001. the more useful and technically perfect the final product will be. Integrated Product Development. L. of which DPD is an example. New York. P = Product development.. while in IPD. Great to Good. unwanted surprises are reduced and corrections are implemented faster for DPD than for classical methods. Springer Verlag. 2001).. prototypes. it is not unusual for companies to spend thousands of hours developing detailed specifications that are invalidated by the initial prototype or the initial market confrontation. as a result. Models and prototypes help us to get a better understanding of ourselves and our priorities and help us to avoid mistakes and misunderstandings. Principal differences between IPD and DPD resulting in theoretical and practical shorter product development times (D = Data collection. Note.M. Evatt. which is not the case with IPD. M. that frequent prototyping easily leads to adding an increasing number of features to make the prototype even better so that the product will finally have more features than the user actually needs or wants to pay for. they are thought of as being linear.4 5 1 2 3 2 1 3 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 ARTICLE IN PRESS 10 S. Zu ¨ rich. prototypes are typically used to elicit market feedback well before final versions of the product are tested. time and costs are reduced in the development process when DPD is used. which can be likened to traffic lights (see Fig. Models and prototypes are thus important visualizing tools for developers. Structured Creativity: A Misnomer? In: Eder. and customers. A = Analyses. To cut down development costs and to shorten ‘time to market’. 1988. In prototyping cultures. 2000). which are the opposite of prototype-driven cultures. it is important to have experienced team members that can take advantage of every possibility to speed up the process. This is in accordance with recent findings on rapid business development (Collins. 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 This is because the gates. Ottosson / Technovation XX (2002) XXX–XXX 105 105 same mental picture to work from when they are all able to touch the model (sometimes called mock-up) and later the physical prototypes. however. the management principle for DPD is ‘Management by Walking Around’. Advanced Product Quality Planning and Control Plan. 10. This is a problem especially in software development. 1987. M. Collins. E. the common management principle is ‘Management by Objective’. especially in the early development phases. G. 105 105 Fig. Unexperienced team members can be used later in the work when detail work is to be done but it can be dangerous for the outcome if they are used early in the project work. managers. the more informal control of DPD is more direct than classical methods that rely largely on formal written reports. The self-adjusting principle of DPD can be compared to a traffic island instead of traffic lights. For classical methods such as IPD/CE/SE. Harper Business.A. which are standard in IPD (dark grey in the figure).S. 1994.. 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 1 1 .. M = Market development.. 106 106 106 106 832 9. Engineering Design and Creativity. As can be seen. As a rule. New York. one principal difference is that the gates. users. APQP. many attempts have been made to cut down on the number of prototypes in the development process. Thus. Andreasen. however.C. 1). Early in the process. Such business cultures are sometimes called specification cultures (‘spec-cultures’). ‘Specdriven cultures’ draw heavily from market-research data — which is of little use for innovations — before concepts are moved into the prototyping cycle. J. severely reduce the average development speed (Ottosson et al. and GM. as we cannot foresee everything in a theoretical way. 10. Hein. For design studies — especially of large objects — digital mock-ups (DMU) serve the same purpose. Chrysler. Creativity is an Exact Science..DPD has proved to give advantages. According to our observations. The activities in DPD are non-linear and non-continuous.). Gordon and Breach Science. Berlin. 10) undergoes continual development while the projects are in progress using DPD. I = Idea Generation. 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 References Altschuller. Ford. T = Production development). The concept (grey in Fig. (Ed. where the concept is developed once to start with. 1996. have been exchanged with more frequent Concept Group meetings.

W.. Autogenetic Design Theory — A Contribution to an Extended Design Theory.. ¨ rbundet. S. S. Uitgeverij 010. Bercey. New York. Ottosson / Technovation XX (2002) XXX–XXX 11 Freisleben. Nevins. Clement. Baltimore. Otto-von¨ t. Ottosson. D. 1998. Rinhart and Winston. Knellner. 2000. H. Vajna. 2001. 2000.. 1985. Qualified Product Concept Design needs a Proper Combination of PAD–MAD before PDM.)...g. 2002b. of the Workshop EDC. M. Heurista. Serious Play. Bewertung der Nutzen neuer Technologien in der Produktentwicklung (in German). Mekanfo Stockholm In Swedish. pp.. U.T. (Eds. Hacker. VDI-Verlag GmbH Du ¨ sseldorf 2001. R. His entrepreneurial activities include.. Planetary Organizations. Dynamic Development Structures of Integrated Product Development. J. Magdeburg. Otto-von-Guericke-Universita ¨ t. etc. 2001. Koch.g. Hundal. J. growth and expansion of Handiquip AB until it was sold to an American company at the turnover of 17 MSEK. Boosting Creativity in Technical Development. E. Participation Action Research — A Key to Improved Knowledge of Management. He has also International experiences from Estonia. New York. Virtual Reality in the Product Development Process. T. etc. Glasgow. Rotterdam. 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 941 953 942 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 106 105 104 103 102 101 100 994 981 971 962 1 1 .. The 80/20 Principle. Finally. 1998. Sig Ottosson has 20 years of industrial managment including. Ottosson. the units Flex-Link Systems and Linear Actuators). Also the redesign and implementation of the new Innovation Management Programme at Halmstad University that is still in use and that has been an example for other university programmes in Sweden and abroad (e.. S. S. Vajna. 2001. Argentina. August 21-23. International Conference on Engineering Design ICED01. 1999. Germany. New York. 2001. 1998. 1965. (EU-projects). C. Whitney. Time-driven Product Development. L..4 5 1 2 3 2 1 3 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 ARTICLE IN PRESS S. eCFO — Sustaining Vaue in the New Corporation. innovation management and product development within ITT-Flygt AB. Integrated Product Development Process. SKF AB. pp. H.L. John Wiley & Sons.. Tjeckian. Harvard Business School Press. 1995. Journal of Engineering Design. Boston..L.. pp.R.. 81–86. S. S. Ottosson. S. C.D. S. Engineering Design and Creativity. 1989. New York... Bulgaria. pp. Lessons for Students in Architecture. Schabacker. 35–39. Technovation — the International Journal of Technological Innovation and Entrepreneurship 19. Holmdahl.. Roy. U.).. 2000. Parsaei. Lindeman. Product Design & Development. The Art of Science of Creativity. 461-468. Estonia. Guericke-Universita Hertzberger. Bjo ¨ rk.. ¨ mer. PhD thesis in Integrated Product Development. Mack. Technovation — the International Journal of Technological Innovation and Entrepreneurship. New York. etc..M. IUC Skaraborg AB. Olsson. 107–119. W. Magdeburg. start up and growth of Nordinvent Support AB.. 1995..S. McGraw-Hill. S.. Ottosson. Ross. S. 3–15. 2000 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference.F... Gestaltung und Optimierung von Producktetwicklungsprozzessen mit einem wissenbasierten Vorgehensmodell (in German).. Proc. in press. J. Concurrent Design of Products and Processes. Dunleavy. P. (Ed. Agentina. Germany (September).E. Ottosson.. D.. Schulman. Sketching Pache. F.22.. Journal of Engineering Design 9 (2). Nov 1995. Eppinger.. Holt. 2002a. and turn around products within Frontec AB. start up and growth of SKF New Products (e. Burchardt. Handiquip AB. S. Ulrich.. USA (September 10-13). Ro Behaviour and Creativity in Conceptual Engineering Design. planning of the new laboratory of ITT Flygt AB. John Wiley & Sons. G. J. 2001. Journal of Engineering Design 9 (2). Read.. Maryland. Schrage. In: Usher. Die neue Richtline VDI 2209: Praxiserprobte Hinweise zur 3D-Produktmodellierung (in German) In: VDI-Berichte 1614. New York. J. Ottosson.. The Myth of Control & Initiative in Product Development. McGraw Hill. Currency Doubleday. Workshop in Magdeburg. A.). Germany. Vajna. Integrerad Produktutveckling. PhD thesis in Integrated Product Development. D. in press. 3 . In: Eder. the start up and growth of Center for Product Development Research at Halmstad University and turnaround of Frontec Research and Technology AB (125 employees). K.. M. 1998. 59–84. Pilsen. M. Bramante. start up.. 1991. etc. M..