Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Available ScienceDirect
online
Availableatonline
www.sciencedirect.com
at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000

ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000
ScienceDirect
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

ProcediaProcedia
CIRP 00CIRP
(2017)
104000–000
(2021) 1149–1154
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

54th
CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems
th
54 CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems
A Methodology for Flexible Configuration of Change Management
A Methodology 28th for
CIRPFlexible Configuration
Design Conference,
Processes May 2018, of Change
Nantes, FranceManagement
Processes
A new methodology a,to analyze the functional and physical architecture of
Sajedeh Haghia,*, Fabian Sipplaa, Lukas Zinkaa, Gunther Reinhartaa
existing products
Sajedeh for *,anFabian
Haghi assemblySipploriented
, Lukas product familyReinhart
Zink , Gunther identification
Institute for Machine Tools and Industrial Management, Technical University of Munich, Boltzmannstr. 15, Garching 85748, Germany
a

Paul Stief *, Jean-Yves Dantan, Alain Etienne, Ali Siadat

Institute for Machine Tools and Industrial Management, Technical University of Munich, Boltzmannstr. 15, Garching 85748, Germany
a

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-89-289-15436; fax: +49-89-289-15555. E-mail address: sajedeh.haghi@iwb.tum.de

* Corresponding
Écoleauthor. Tel.:Supérieure
Nationale +49-89-289-15436; fax: +49-89-289-15555.
d’Arts et Métiers, Arts et Métiers ParisTech, LCFCsajedeh.haghi@iwb.tum.de
E-mail address: EA 4495, 4 Rue Augustin Fresnel, Metz 57078, France

*Abstract
Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 3 87 37 54 30; E-mail address: paul.stief@ensam.eu
Abstract
The short product life cycles combined with individual products, permanent cost pressure, and rapid technological innovation make change
management
The short productan indispensable element of
life cycles combined withmanufacturing companies.
individual products, The ability
permanent to react and
cost pressure, efficiently towards the innovation
rapid technological dynamic market
make and its
change
Abstract
requirements represents a key success
management an indispensable elementfactor in the manufacturing
of manufacturing companies.industry. Hence,tothis
The ability paper
react introduces
efficiently a methodology
towards the dynamicfor flexible
market andchange
its
management processes,
requirements represents supporting
a key success companies
factor inin the
an efficient and individual
manufacturing industry. configuration
Hence, this of theirintroduces
paper processes based on changefor
a methodology project.
flexible change
Inmanagement
today’s business environment,
processes, supporting thecompanies
trend towards
in anmore product
efficient variety andconfiguration
and individual customization of is unbroken.
their processesDue to this
based development,
on change project.the need of
agile andThe
© 2021 reconfigurable production
Authors. Published systems B.V.
by Elsevier emerged to cope with various products and product families. To design and optimize production
© 2021 as
systems The Authors.
well Published
as to choose the by Elsevier
optimal B.V. matches, product analysis methods are needed. Indeed, most of the known methods aim to
product
This
©
This is
is aan
2021 The
an open access
Authors.
open access article
Published
article under
by
under the CC
Elsevier
the on
CCtheBY-NC-ND
B.V.
BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
analyze
Peer-review
This product
underor one product
responsibility family
of the physical
scientific level.
committee Different
of the th product
54CIRPCIRP families, however,
Conference may differSystem
on Manufacturing largely in terms of the number and
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
is an open access article under CC BY-NC-ND license 54th Conference on Manufacturing System
nature of components. This fact impedes an efficient comparison and choice of appropriate
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 54 CIRP Conference on Manufacturing System
th product family combinations for the production
system. A new
Keywords: methodology
Change Management; is proposed
Flexibility;to analyze existing
Configuration; products inIndicator
Key Performance view of their functional and physical architecture. The aim is to cluster
these products
Keywords: in new
Change assembly Flexibility;
Management; oriented product families
Configuration; KeyforPerformance
the optimization of existing assembly lines and the creation of future reconfigurable
Indicator
assembly systems. Based on Datum Flow Chain, the physical structure of the products is analyzed. Functional subassemblies are identified, and
a1.functional
Introductionanalysis is performed. Moreover, a hybrid functional and physical architecture
are defined graph (HyFPAG)
as Manufacturing is the output
Changes (MC)which
[4]. depicts the
Technical
1. The ability
between of
Introduction
similarity a manufacturing
product families by providingcompany designto support
adapt to its both,are production
Change (TC)
defined system usedplanners
as an and
asis Manufacturing product
Changesdesigners.
overarching term, An illustrative
(MC)addressing
[4]. both
Technical
products
example and
The ofability manufacturing usedsystems
to explaintocompany
of a ismanufacturing
a nail-clipper changing
the proposedtoconditions
adapt its
methodology. is AnChange
industrial(TC)
changes incase study
theisproduct
used onastwoanproduct
(EC) and families of steering
in the term,
overarching production columns
(MC)both
addressing of
[5].
becoming
products and
thyssenkrupp an increasingly
manufacturing
Presta France is thenimportant
systems
carriedto element
out to givein
changing maintaining
conditions
a first industrialis evaluation
The
changes of the
term proposed
in theTechnical approach.
product (EC) Change
and inManagement
the production(TCM) (MC) [5]. is
©becoming
2017 The Authors.
long-term an Publishedimportant
competitiveness
increasingly by Elsevier
[1]. B.V. of
A multitude
element in internal
maintaining and consequently
The defined asChange
term Technical the approach for organizing
Management (TCM) and is
Peer-review under
external factors
long-term responsibility of the
affects manufacturing
competitiveness [1]. A scientific committee
companies
multitude andofleads
of internal theand
28th
to CIRP Design Conference 2018.
controlling thedefined
consequently processas ofthemaking approach alterations to technical
for organizing and
a permanent
external need
factors for adaptation
affects manufacturingand optimization.
companies and Depending
leads to change objects
controlling the[4]. The technical
process of making change objects include
alterations a wide
to technical
Keywords: Assembly; Design method; Family identification
on the company,
a permanent need forchanges causeand
adaptation a significant
optimization. proportion
Depending of range of
change changes
objects that technical
[4]. The can occur within
change a company,
objects include a from wide
financial
on and personnel
the company, changesexpenses.
cause a significant proportion of introduction
range of changes of a new thatproduct
can occurvariant to theaautomatisation
within company, from of
In the context
financial of change
and personnel management, three primary change
expenses. a process step
introduction of ainnew
the product
process variant
chain. toTothe deal with this high
automatisation of
objects
In theare identified:
context
1. Introduction of the
change company
management, organization, product
three primary and
change of the product
anumber
process of step range
varieties
in the and
and characteristics
complexity,
process Tomanufactured
chain.efficientdealand thisand/or
concurrently
with high
production
objects [2]. This the
are identified: paper aims toorganization,
company support manufacturing
product and assembled in this system.
effectiveofmanagement
number varieties andof Inchanges
this context,
complexity, the main
isefficient
a prerequisite. challenge
For this
and concurrently in
companies
Due to in[2].
production theThis
the improvement
fast paper of production
aims
development to support
in the systems towards
manufacturing
domain of modelling
effective and analysis
purpose, different
management is changes
reference
of now not isonly
processes to cope
a have been with
prerequisite. Forsingle
defined in
this
efficient
companies and
in effective
the improvementimplementation
of production
communication and an ongoing trend of digitization of changes
systems in and
the
towards products,
recent years
purpose, adifferent
limited
withproduct
the aim
reference range toor existing
processes have product
standardize beenthe families,
definedchange in
productionand
efficient
digitalization, systems.
effectiveHence,
manufacturing the focus is
implementation
enterprises ofon
are the latter
changes
facing in two
important the but also to
management
recent yearsbe ablewithto analyze
process [3–6].aim
the and to compare
However, products
in practice,
standardize the tochange
due define
to the
change objects:
production product
systems. and
Hence, production.
the focus
challenges in today’s market environments: a continuing The
is on product
the changes
latter two new product
diverse
management range families. It
of changes
process can and
[3–6]. be observed inthat classical
their requirements,
However, practice, itexisting
due is
to not
the
are referred
change
tendency to asproduct
objects:
towards Engineering
reduction Changes
andofproduction. (EC).
TheAn
product development EC times
product ischanges
defined
and product
possiblefamilies
diverse to define
range ofarechanges
regrouped
and andin function
implement a “one
their of
fitsclients or itfeatures.
all” solution
requirements, for
is not
as
are“an alteration
referred to as made to
Engineeringparts, drawings
Changes or
(EC). software
An
shortened product lifecycles. In addition, there is an increasingEC that
is have
defined However,
the change
possible toassembly
management
define and oriented product
process
implement a families
[6]. Hence
“one are
fitssome hardly
all” to find.
preliminary
solution for
already
as
demand been
“an alteration
of released
made during
customization, to parts,the
being atproduct
drawings design
or
the same timeprocess”
software in that [3].
have
a global theOn
works the product
identified
change managementfamily
the need level,for
process products differ
flexibilization
[6]. Hence some mainly in two
of change
preliminary
Production
already been system
releasedas the change
during the object
product can comprise
design
competition with competitors all over the world. This trend, process” of “any
[3]. main
works characteristics:
managementidentifiedprocess (i)
theas the number
a research
need of components
for deficit and
and a challenge
flexibilization (ii)that
of change the
alteration
Production made
system to the
as factory
the changeor its
objectelements
which is inducing the development from macro to micro can that
comprise have of been
“any type
needsoftocomponents
management process(e.g.
be addressed amechanical,
[1,4,6,7].
as research deficitelectrical,
and a electronical).
challenge that
released or
alteration
markets, are already
made
results to
in the in operations”.
factory
diminished These
orlotitssizes duetypes
elements to of changes
thataugmenting
have been Classical methodologies
A standardized
needs to be addressed and[1,4,6,7].considering
structured change mainly single products
management process
released or are already in operations”. These
product varieties (high-volume to low-volume production) [1].types of changes or A solitary,
standardizedalready andexisting
structured product
changefamilies
management analyze the
process
To cope with
2212-8271 this
© 2021 Theaugmenting variety
Authors. Published as wellB.V.
by Elsevier as to be able to product structure on a physical level (components level) which
This is an open
identify
2212-8271 access
possible
© 2021 Thearticle under
optimization
Authors. the CCpotentials
Published BY-NC-ND license
in the(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
by Elsevier B.V. existing causes difficulties regarding an efficient definition and
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 54th CIRP Conference on Manufacturing System
production system, it is important to have a precise (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license knowledge comparison of different product families. Addressing this
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 54 CIRP Conference on Manufacturing System
th

2212-8271 © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

This is an©open
2212-8271 2017access article Published
The Authors. under theby CC BY-NC-ND
Elsevier B.V. license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
Peer-reviewunder
Peer-review under responsibility
responsibility of the
of the scientific
scientific committee
committee of28th
of the the 54th
CIRPCIRP
DesignConference
Conferenceon Manufacturing System
2018.
10.1016/j.procir.2021.11.193
 1150 Sajedeh Haghi et al. / Procedia CIRP 104 (2021) 1149–1154
2 Sajedeh Haghi, et al. / Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000
is generally perceived as advantageous, supporting companies
in the identification, planning and implementation of changes
[8]. However, companies need a certain degree of flexibility to
handle individual changes. A rigid reference process lead to
conduction of avoidable process steps and activities. As a
result, more personnel resources are involved than effectively
needed. In addition, it results in an excessive processing time,
which delays the actual implementation of a change and thus
contradicts the guiding principle of an agile company.
Flexibilization offers the potential to avoid redundant
organizational and financial efforts and accordingly handle
changes more efficiently. This paper presents a detailed
methodology for Flexibilization of TCM (FTCM), with the aim
to address the trade-off between standardization and
flexibilization.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: section
2 provides an overview of relevant preliminary works. Section
3 introduces the developed FTCM-Methodology. This is
followed by a summary and outlook on future research
activities in section 4.
2. State of the Art
For the development of the FTCM-Methodology three main
areas are identified; reference processes for TCM,
flexibilization approaches and characteristics introduced to
describe different TC objects. The latter is needed to enable a
change-specific adjustment of the reference process and
consequently its flexibilization. In the following, the most
relevant publications in these fields are presented.
Several preliminary publications aim to define reference
processes for change management. A systematic literature
review was conducted to revise the existing reference
processes, following the guidelines suggested by BROCK ET AL.
[9]. Based on the general literature scope, the literature search
was conducted. The identified literature was further filtered by
screening the title and abstract. In the last step, the relevant
publications were analysed thoroughly. Figure 2 presents an
overview of the existing reference processes for change
management, and the level of details, shown by the number of
process steps. A brief description of the reference processes is
presented in section 3.2.
Fig. 1. Overview of the existing reference processes in the literature
Software tailoring is often seen as the origin of process
flexibilization. XU AND RAMESH introduced a four-step process
for software tailoring [10]. MARTINEZ-RUIZ ET AL. studied
software tailoring processes in practice and identified element
insertion or deletion, followed by element modification and the
adjustment of relationships between elements as the most
common approach [11]. Although the need for process tailoring
and flexibilization in the field of change management has been
recognized by various authors [4,12,13], few concrete
approaches exist in the literature. AßMANN suggests different
methods for implementation of ECs depending on the type of
change [12]. ABRAMOVICI presents an adaptive Engineering
Change Management (ECM) based on the goals of ECs [14].
Both approaches remain on a high level of abstraction and do
not offer concrete rules for the adaptation of the process. KOCH
presents an adaption of the Manufacturing Change
Management (MCM) process, following a categorization of
changes into three classes: standard, optional and extended [4].
Based on this classification, he describes concrete rules for the
adaptation of the process regarding process steps, activities,
and deliverables. However, this offers only a limited degree of
flexibility, as just three different change types are defined,
which do not fully reflect the diversity of individual changes
within a company.
For a change-individual adaptation of change process, the
characterization of change objects is needed [12]. This allows
a detailed description of the change and eliminates the general
categorization. Several properties are named in the literature to
describe technical changes, nevertheless these are partially
based on different nomenclatures. Change propagation is one
of the most commonly used characteristics to describe changes
[3,4,15–17]. Complexity is another key property, closely linked
to change propagation [12,14,18]. Other characteristics include
the safety relevance of the change [14,18], urgency [19] or
necessity [4,14,20], financial impact [4,12,14,17,21], novelty
[17], stage of change or life cycle [22,23] and change origin or
cause [5,14,15,22]. Additionally some publications define
estimation of the time frame needed to process the change
[4,12,17] or the change object [12,21] as characteristics that can
be used to describe a change. These factors can be used to
specify a change project and adjust the change management
process accordingly.
3. FTCM-Methodology
This paper presents a four-step approach for the
development of the FTCM-Methodology, building up on a
concept presented in an earlier work [24]. Figure 2 provides an
overview of the steps involved.
Fig. 2. Overview of the approach used for the development of the FTCM-
Methodology
The requirements that need to be fulfilled by the flexible
TCM process are defined during the first step. In the second
step, a detailed TCM reference process is derived based on the
existing ECM and MCM processes in the literature. The
derived reference process establishes the foundation for the
FTCM-Methodology. Based on the defined requirements,
possible flexibilization approaches are considered for FTCM.
Additionally, a set of flexibility factors are established,
enabling the configuration of the reference process based on
change characteristics. Ultimately, the derived reference
process, the selected flexibilization approach, and the
 Sajedeh Haghi et al. / Procedia CIRP 104 (2021) 1149–1154
Sajedeh Haghi, et al. / Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000
flexibility factors are combined into an FTCM-Methodology in
the last step. The developed methodology is to be evaluated
based on the requirements defined in the first step. However,
the detailed evaluation falls outside the scope of this paper.
3.1. Definition of Requirements for Development of FTCM-
Methodology
As the main objective of the FTCM is to increase the process
efficiency, increase of efficiency is defined as the overarching
requirement. An increase in efficiency is interpreted as a
reduction of the time required for the processing of changes,
under the condition that the results should maintain at least the
same quality level in comparison to the TCM process before
the flexibilization. Hence, two additional requirements are
derived: process flexibilization for decreasing the processing
time and effective management for ensuring the quality of the
TCM. Additionally, the applicability in practice is considered
as the methodology can ultimately only enhance the status quo
if it is used in practice.
3.2. Derivation of a Detailed Reference Process for TCM
To enable flexibilization of TCM, a reference process
including both, MCM and ECM steps, is required. This
provides the basis for applying the flexibility approach.
Therefore, ECM and MCM processes from literature are
compared and a comprehensive process is derived. The
processes considered cover more than 20 years of research in
TCM and display different levels of detail (see figure 1).
In the following, the processes are shortly summarized, and
the main similarities and differences are discussed. DIN 199-4,
FRICKE and REDDI AND MOON present the ECM process on a
very high level and therefore only include the most important
process steps [25–27]. The majority of the processes developed
show a broad overview of the process steps with certain aspects
being detailed. For example, CONRAT focuses on the
interaction with customers and suppliers in the ECM process
[21], while TERWIESCH & LOCH integrate the use of
interdisciplinary teams [28]. AßMANN details the
implementation of the solution [12], ECKERT ET AL. distinguish
the start of the ECM process for emergent and initiated changes
[15], while TAVCAR AND DUHOVNIK integrate documentation
of the change in detail and add extended knowledge
management in a second process [6]. PROSTEP IVIP proposes a
detailed process for MCM with the focus on the acceptance of
the change request and the transition to the change order,
whereas implementation and documentation are only described
on a high level [29]. The process developed by RÖßING
specifies the initiation, implementation, and follow-up phase
[5]. LINDEMANN AND REICHWALD offer an in-depth problem,
cause and change propagation analysis, and detailed
development of solution alternatives [30]. JARRATT ET AL. and
KOCH offer the most extensive processes for ECM and MCM
respectively [3,4].
The high level of detail integrated in the reference process
leads to increased possibilities for the flexibilization of the
process. The MCM process proposed by KOCH offers the
highest level of detail in current literature, including the gates
defined between different phases. Hence, this was used as the
foundation for the development of a reference process for
flexibilization. Subsequently, all the other thirteen processes
1151
3
identified in the literature (see figure 1) were compared to the
MCM process defined by KOCH. If the steps presented in the
literature provided further detail to the process chain, they were
integrated into the reference process. Steps similar to the ones
already available in the current state of the reference process
were analyzed by a literature review on the degree of similarity
and it was then decided if they add a new aspect to the process
or are redundant. Especially the phases for change propagation
analysis [5], in-depth problem and cause analysis [30] as well
as the overall knowledge management [6] were elaborated in
more detail during this step. Additionally, process steps to
evaluate and classify the change in the beginning of the process
were included in the reference process. Finally, the termination
points and iterations defined in the literature as well as the
information flow between the process steps were integrated
into the reference process. For the latter, the process steps and
their input on following steps described in the different
literature sources were analyzed. Ultimately, the gates were
defined along the reference process and the result was reviewed
and challenged multiple times to identify unnecessary process
steps. This has led to a reference process comprised of 117
steps and 7 phases. The developed reference process is
presented with the help of Design Structure Matrix (DSM) [31]
in the supplementary data.
The first phase of the reference process focuses on an initial
assessment of the change. In the second phase, an in-depth
problem and cause analysis is performed. The main objective
of this phase is to generate as much understanding as possible
about the change. In addition, all involved stakeholders get
informed about the upcoming change and a first rough change
plan proposal is created. The phase is concluded with the
release of the change request. Phase three focuses on change
propagation analysis. First, solutions are developed on a
concept level to be considered for the analysis of the change
propagation. The phase provides a general understanding of the
problems causing the change, the implications, and
propagations on other parts of the system. To conclude phase
three, the first potential solutions are reviewed, and the most
promising ones are selected to start the in-depth solution
development in phase four. The selected solutions are
simulated, discussed, and tested with prototypes. The solutions
are then evaluated on whether they fulfill the requirements
defined or if further iterations are necessary. After approving
the final solution, the change request is transformed into a
change order. In phase five, the implementation of the selected
solution is planned in detail. This includes the setup of a
sourcing and implementation plan as well as the alignment of
the change plan with stakeholders. At the end of this phase, a
decision is made on whether the change will be implemented,
and which timeline will be followed. The actual
implementation of the change is performed in phase six.
Therefore, the change process is scheduled, and work packages
are defined. After implementing the change, quality and
performance tests are conducted based on which the
implementation is approved, or rework is initiated. Finally, in
phase seven, the TC is reviewed and evaluated, lessons learned
are derived, and the acquired knowledge is documented.
The reference process is developed as a stage-gate process,
which involves the definition of gates at the end of each phase.
1152 Sajedeh Haghi et al. / Procedia CIRP 104 (2021) 1149–1154
4 Sajedeh Haghi, et al. / Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000
The gates serve as quality assurance points with a specific set
of deliverables required to pass the gate. This allows for the
management of the interactions and assures the effectiveness
of TCM.
3.3. Selection of Suitable Flexibilization Approach
The different phases of the TCM reference process need
different levels of flexibility to achieve the best results. In
particular, the phase of solution development demands
additional flexibility on how and when to iterate. Therefore, the
authors suggest two flexibility approaches to be integrated into
the FTCM-Methodology. Both approaches are based on a
stage-gate process as defined by COOPER [32].
3.3.1. “Stage-Gate + Select” Approach
The “Stage-Gate + Select” approach is based on the
predefined reference process with flexibilization being enabled
by selecting which steps of the process need to be activated for
a particular change. For this purpose, the change is
characterized by flexibility factors (section 3.4) to allow for a
decision, indicating which process steps are necessary for the
individual change. The inactive steps are left out (see figure 3).
Fig. 3. Visual representation of the “Stage-Gate + Select” approach
The “Stage-Gate + Select” approach offers only a limited
number of configuration options, as it is restricted by the
process steps in the reference process. The potential for
flexibility increase is therefore limited but sufficient for most
phases of the TCM process. The approach is oriented towards
the TCM process currently applied in practice and only
demands for minor extension through the definition of
flexibility factors. This facilitates its implementation in
practice and complies with the defined requirements.
Furthermore, the concept behind this flexibilization approach
has been established in TCM literature [4,24]
3.3.2. “Stage-Gate + Iterate” Approach
While the “Stage-Gate + Select” approach enables process
flexibilization by excluding a set of process steps depending on
the type of change, another approach for flexibilization is the
adaptation of the extent to which process steps are executed.
Hence, the “Stage-Gate + Iterate” approach is introduced for
the “solution development” phase in the reference process,
particularly to be used for highly complex and novel changes.
As the development of solutions for highly complex changes
may require a set of iterations for specific steps, but not the
complete phase.
As its name implies, this approach is also based on a stage-
gate approach but integrates a more agile process between the
gates. To ensure structure and effectiveness, the reference
process is defined for the iterative part as well. The process
steps defined in the solution development phase are followed
on the first run. Once the phase is completed, the team can
decide if the current status is sufficient to pass the gate, or if an
iteration is needed. In this iteration, the team can decide which
steps and to what extent should be conducted (see figure 4).
This enables extended flexibility in the TCM process while
offering the same control mechanisms by the use of gates. In
exchange, the transparency of the steps performed in the stage
is reduced. The approach requires additional implementation
effort, as similar approaches have been only used in product
development.
Fig. 4. Visual representation of the “Stage-Gate + Iterate” approach
3.4. Determination of Flexibility Factors
As described in the state of the art, the literature offers a
variety of factors that can be used to describe a change project.
These factors can be served to adjust the TCM process in
accordance with the change project and its characteristics.
Based on the literature review, a comprehensive list of factors
was created. It is important to note that not only the significance
of the factor in describing a change needs to be considered, but
also its impact on the configuration of TCM process. For
example, the estimation of the change propagation is essential
to decide the required extent in which the change propagation
analysis should be conducted. In contrast, a factor like
estimated time frame, which is important for the overall CM
planning, has no implications on the process steps involved for
the implementation of a change and hence does not need to be
included as a flexibility factor. Under consideration of this
perspective and to ensure the applicability of the methodology,
the initial list was then reduced to 10 factors, with exclusion of
the factors that are not relevant for the flexibilization of TCM.
To enable mathematical linking of different flexibility
factors in the FTCM-Methodology, the flexibility factors are
classified, and each classification is assigned an evaluation
value. As the evaluation needs to be conducted in an early stage
of the change process, the classifications were based on simple
description of the change object. Table 1 provides an overview
of the selected factors, their definition, and the classifications.
For some factors such as “supplier involvement”, an
elementary classification with “yes” and “no” is adequate. For
other factors such as “financial impact”, a first estimation of
the change in the distinctions low, medium or high is sufficient.
For novelty, urgency, stage of change and change origin, a
more precise classification is needed to clearly distinguish
between different changes. Therefore, classifications from
literature were reviewed and the most suitable ones were
integrated into the FTCM-Methodology [15,33–35].
3.5. Integration of Developed Elements into FTCM-
Methodology
In the final step, the reference process, the flexibilization
approaches, and the flexibility factors are integrated into the
FTCM-Methodology. For this purpose, a method for activating
process steps with the “Stage-Gate + Select” approach is
defined and the implementation of the “Stage-Gate + Iterate”
approach is discussed in more detail.
As discussed in 3.3.1., the “Stage-Gate + Select” approach
is applied in all phases except for the solution development.
The application follows an “if-then” statement, indicating that
certain criteria need to be fulfilled for the process step to be
activated. There are three different scenarios based on which
 Sajedeh Haghi et al. / Procedia CIRP 104 (2021) 1149–1154
Sajedeh Haghi, et al. / Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000
the activation can be conducted. These are described briefly in
the following.
In the first scenario, the activation of a step depends on the
activation of a previous step. For example, the process step
“test the prototype” is only activated, if the change request
involved the creation of a prototype by the suppliers. In case
the creation of a prototype is left out, the process step “test the
prototype” is also deactivated.
In the second scenario, only one single flexibility factor
determines the activation of the process step. Hence, this factor
needs to be evaluated. The evaluation is based on the
classifications presented in section 3.4. The evaluation is then
compared to the average value possible for the flexibility factor
(Mx). For example for the “safety relevance” as a flexibility
factor, Mx is equal to 0.5, as the factor is classified with two
levels “no” and “yes”, and two values of 0 and 1 accordingly
(see table 1). The average values are calculated based on the
defined scale and independent of the change object. For the
change object, the flexibility factors is evaluated and presented
with Ex. If the evaluation value of a change object (Ex) exceeds
the average value (Mx), the impact of the flexibility factor is
strong enough and leads to activation of the process step. For
example for the process step “5.2. select and integrate
supplier”, the only flexibility factor that affects this process
step is “supplier involvement”. This means to decide if this
process step should be conducted or can be skipped, the
flexibility factor “supplier involvement” should be evaluated.
For a change object, this factor was evaluated with “yes” (Ex=1,
see table 1). The comparison of the Ex with the Mx (which in
this case is equal to 0.5), clarifies the need for activation of this
process step for this specific change object.
In the third scenario, the activation depends on several
flexibility factors. Here, the same logic applies as presented in
the second scenario in terms of evaluation value and mean
value. In addition, the values are multiplied with a weighting
factor (Wx) for each flexibility factor. This is necessary as not
every flexibility factor contributes to the same extent to the
activation of a specific step. The weighting factors are
company-specific, depending on the type of the industry or the
size of the company. For example in the preparation of a
prototypical implementation of the developed methodology,
for the process step “2.6. informal consultation with
specialists”, six flexibility factors were identified as relevant to
make a decision regarding the need to conduct or leave out this
process step. The identified factors were safety feature,
complexity, change propagation, novelty, financial impact and
Table 1. Flexibility factors, their classification and assigned evaluation value
1153
5
urgency. The two factors of complexity and novelty were
identified as factors with higher relevance to make this
decision, and hence were given a higher weighting factor. The
logic behind was that the complexity of the change object
reflects a higher necessity to involve the specialist as early as
possible, in comparison to the financial impact of the change
(as another identified flexibility factor). The weighting factors
per process step and flexibility factors need to be defined before
the implementation of the FTCM-Methodology within the
company. The method however provides the framework for
easy adjustment and application. The weighted evaluation
factors are summed up over all contributing flexibility factors
and compared to the sum of the weighted mean values of those
factors.
For the “solution development” phase in the reference
process, the “Stage-Gate + Iterate” is chosen as the
flexibilization approach. The application of the approach is not
based on a logical “if-then” statement, but rather relies on the
assessment and the experience of the team responsible for the
change. Therefore, an additional gate is implemented in the
solution development phase after the first run-through of the
solution concept development. At this gate, the team evaluates
the current solution concept based on the prototype built, the
cost analysis made, and the defined requirements for the
change. The team members should then decide if the project
can proceed towards the main gate at the end of phase four, or
if specific steps in the solution development need to be
repeated. If the team decides to iterate, not every step of the
reference process needs to be repeated but a decision can be
made on which specific steps need an iteration. This ensures
efficient processing.
As both flexibilization approaches are based on a stage-gate
approach and a reference process, the effort for switching
between the two is manageable. For well-known changes with
low complexity, the additional effort for “Stage-Gate + Iterate”
over “Stage-Gate + Select” might not be needed. The gate at
the end of the “change propagation analysis” phase can
therefore be used to decide which approach should be applied
for the solution development phase.
For the initial evaluation of the developed methodology, a
set of expert interviews with two companies in the automotive
and machinery industry was conducted. Overall, the potential
for increase of efficiency and flexibilization of the processes
were reviewed as high. The proposed methodology was
evaluated as promising for the increase of effectivity in TCM.
Concerning the application in practice, the effort for
1154 Sajedeh Haghi et al. / Procedia CIRP 104 (2021) 1149–1154
6 Sajedeh Haghi, et al. / Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000
implementation was viewed as low, but a fear of skipping the
steps in practice was pointed out. Furthermore, the reference
process steps, the weighting of the flexibility factors, and the
selection of flexibility factors influencing the activation of
certain process steps were perceived as highly industry-specific
and therefore the developed methodology needs to be tailored
to the specific requirements of the respective company.
Overall, through consideration of the defined requirements
in each development step, a universally valid flexibilization
methodology for the technical change management process is
proposed, which will be further evaluated in future work.
4. Summary and Outlook
In order to stay competitive in today’s volatile market, an
efficient and effective TCM process is a vital element for
manufacturing companies. The efficiency of the TCM process
can be increased through flexibilization. To this end, this paper
proposes a methodology enabling a flexible configuration of
the change management process, based on specific
characteristics of the change project. The essential steps for the
development of the methodology, including the definition of
requirements, derivation of a reference process, selection of a
suitable flexibilization approach, and determination of
flexibility factors are presented.
Further research activities will aim to establish a KPI-based
framework for the evaluation of the performance of TCM.
Additionally a roadmap for the implementation and evaluation
of the FTCM-Methodology in the industry will be developed.
Furthermore, the potential of data analytics for the efficient
design and support of the TCM is to be examined. For example,
a data-based change characterization can be used as a basis for
change-specific flexibilization of the process.
Acknowledgments
The authors express their gratitude to the German Research
Foundation (DFG) for the funding of the subproject T07 as part
of the Collaborative Research Center 768 "Managing Cycles in
Innovation Processes – Integrated Development of Product
Service Systems Based on Technical Products".
Appendix A. Supplementary data
The detailed reference process for technical change
management associated with this paper can be found in the
online version at doi:10.17632/4p3rb8ws9t.1.
References
[1] ElMaraghy W, ElMaraghy H, Tomiyama T, Monostori L (2012)
Complexity in engineering design and manufacturing. CIRP Annals
61(2):793–814.
[2] Wiendahl H-P, ElMaraghy HA, Nyhuis P, Zäh MF, Wiendahl H-H, Duffie
N, Brieke M (2007) Changeable Manufacturing - Classification, Design
and Operation. CIRP Annals 56(2):783–809.
[3] Jarratt TAW, Eckert CM, Caldwell NHM, Clarkson PJ (2011) Engineering
change: an overview and perspective on the literature. Res Eng Design
22(2):103–24.
[4] Koch J (2017) Manufacturing Change Management – a Process-Based
Approach for the Management of Manufacturing Changes.
Universitätsbibliothek der TU München, München.
[5] Rößing M (2007) Technische Änderungen in der Produktion -
Vorgehensweise zur systematischen Initialisierung, Durchführung und
Nachbereitung. Zugl.: Kaiserslautern, Techn. Univ., Diss., 2007. Techn.
Univ, Kaiserslautern.
[6] Tavčar J, Duhovnik J (2005) Engineering change management in
individual and mass production. Robotics and Computer-Integrated
Manufacturing 21(3):205–15.
[7] Ryan ET, Jacques DR, Colombi JM (2013) An ontological framework for
clarifying flexibility-related terminology via literature survey. Syst. Engin.
16(1):99–110.
[8] VDA Engineering change management reference process (White
Paper):https://www.prostep.org/fileadmin/downloads/Whitepaper_ECM_
Reference_Process_V2.0.3.pdf.
[9] J. Brocke, A. Simons, Björn Niehaves, K. Riemer, Ralf Plattfaut, A. Cleven
(2009) Reconstructing the giant: On the importance of rigour in
documenting the literature search process..
[10] Xu P, Ramesh B (2008) Using Process Tailoring to Manage Software
Development Challenges. IT Prof. 10(4):39–45.
[11] Martínez-Ruiz T, Münch J, García F, Piattini M (2012) Requirements and
constructors for tailoring software processes: a systematic literature review.
Software Qual J 20(1):229–60.
[12] Aßmann G (2000) Gestaltung von Änderungsprozessen in der
Produktentwicklung. Zugl.: München, Techn. Univ., Diss, 2000. Utz Wiss,
München.
[13] ProSTEP iViP e. V. Manufacturing Change Management (White Paper):
Management von Änderungen in der Produktion
[14] M. Abramovici, Fahmi Bellalouna, J. C. Göbel (2010) Adaptive Change
Management for Industrial Product-Service Systems.
[15] Eckert C, Clarkson PJ, Zanker W (2004) Change and customisation in
complex engineering domains. Res Eng Design 15(1):1–21.
[16] Bauer H, Brandl F, Reinhart G (2018) Vorgehen zur individuellen
Gestaltung der Änderungsauswirkungsanalyse in der Produktion.
Zeitschrift für wirtschaftlichen Fabrikbetrieb 113(12):819–23.
[17] Sharafi A (2013) Knowledge Discovery in Databases: Eine Analyse des
Änderungsmanagements in der Produktentwicklung. Zugl.: München,
Techn. Univ., Diss., 2012. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden.
[18] Kalus G, Kuhrmann M (2013) Criteria for software process tailoring: a
systematic review. undefined.
[19] Diprima M (1982) Engineering Change Control and Implementation
Considerations. PRODUCT. & INVENT. MGMT., 23(1), pp.81-87.
[20] Elezi F, Maier T, Lindemann U (2013) Engineering change management
challenges and management cybernetics. undefined.
[21] Conrat Niemerg J-I (1997) Änderungskosten in der Produktentwicklung.
[22] Ahmed S, Kanike Y (2007) Engeering change during a product's
lifecycle. INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENGINEERING
DESIGN, ICED’07.
[23] Wildemann H (2018) Änderungsmanagement: Leitfaden zur Einführung
eines effizienten Managements technischer Änderungen. 26th ed. TCW-
Verlag, München.
[24] Sippl F, Haghi S, Wagner S, Reinhart G (2020) Flexibilisierung des
Änderungsmanagements. ZWF 115(6):394–8.
[25] Deutsches Institut für Normung DIN 199-4:Terminology associated with
technical drawings and parts lists: Berlin 1981-10.
[26] Fricke E (2006) Der Änderungsprozess als Grundlage einer
nutzerzentrierten Systementwicklung. Zugl.: München, Techn. Univ., Diss.,
1998. 2nd ed. Utz, München.
[27] Krishna R. Reddi, Y. Moon (2009) A framework for managing
engineering change propagation.
[28] Terwiesch C, Loch CH (1999) Managing the Process of Engineering
Change Orders: The Case of the Climate Control System in Automobile
Development. Journal of Product Innovation Management 16(2):160–72.
[29] ProSTEP iViP e. V. Manufacturing Change Management
(Recommendation) Management of changes during production (White
Paper)
[30] Lindemann U, Reichwald R, (Eds.) (1998) Integriertes
Änderungsmanagement. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg.
[31] Eppinger SD, Browning TR (2012) Design structure matrix methods and
applications. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
[32] Cooper RG (1990) Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new
products. Business Horizons 33(3):44–54.
[33] Sharafi A (2013) Knowledge Discovery in Databases: Eine Analyse des
Änderungsmanagements in der Produktentwicklung. Zugl.: München,
Techn. Univ., Diss., 2012. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden.
[34] DiPrima, M. (1982) Engineering change control and implementation
considerations. Production and inventory management 23:81–7.
[35] Reidelbach M (1991) Engineering change management for long lead time
production environment. Prod Inv Manag J 2:84–8.