Shortcomings of sequential engineering and advantages of concurrent engineering in product development have become better understood. However, the transformation from a sequential engineering environment to a concurrent engineering environment remains challenging. A dynamic transformation approach by combining the focused application of ‘design for X’ (DFX) with the extensive use of business process re-engineering (BPR) is discussed in this paper. The main role of DFX is to provide the drive, focus, vision and concurrence necessary for BPR, while the main role of BPR is to institutionalize good practice and make improvement permanent and continuous.
GatenbyD.A.FooG.Design for X (DFX): Key to competitive, profitable products. AT and T Tech. J., May–June 1990, 2–13.
2.
SwiftK.G.Design for Assembly Handbook, 1981 (Salford University Industrial Centre Limited, UK).
3.
MilesB.L.Design for assembly–a key element within design for manufacture. Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs, Part D, Journal of Automobile Engineering, 1989, 203(D1), 29–38.
4.
BoothroydG.DewhurstP.KnightW.Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly, 1994 (Marcel Dekker, New York).
5.
YoussefM.A.Design for manufacturability and time to market–Part 1: Theoretical foundations. Int. J. Ops Prod. Manag., 1994, 14 (12), 6–21.
6.
HuangG.Q. (Ed.) Design for X: Concurrent Engineering Imperatives, 1996 (Chapman and Hall, London).
7.
BryantT.ChanD.BPR–to redesign or not to redesign?Bus. Change Re-engng, 1996, 3 (2), 52–61.
8.
MillerG.A.The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psycholog. Rev., 1956, 63, 81–97.
9.
ClarkK.B.FujimotoT.Product Development Performance, 1991 (Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts).
10.
ClausingD.P.Total Quality Development: A Step-by-Step Guide to World-Class Concurrent Engineering, 1993 (ASME Press, New York).
11.
GatenbyG.T.LeeP.M.HowardR.E.HushyarK.LayendeckerR.WesnerJ.Concurrent engineering: An enabler for fast, high-quality product realization. AT and T Tech. J., January-February 1994, 34–47.
12.
HammerM.ChampyJ.Re-engineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution, 1993 (Harper Business, New York).
13.
JohnssonH.McHughP.PenleburgA.WheelerW.Business Process Reengineering, 1993 (John Wiley Chichester).
14.
RemenyiD.WhittakerL.The cost and benefits of BPR. Bus. Change Re-engng, 1994, 2 (2), 51–65.
15.
BoothroydG.AltingL.Design for assembly and disassembly. Ann. CIRP, 1992, 41(2), 625–636.
16.
HuangG.Q.MakK.L.The DFX shell: A generic framework for applying Design for X tools. Int. J. Computer Integrated Mfg, 1998, 17 (to appear).
17.
BoundsG.HewittF.Xerox: Envisioning a corporate transformation. J. Strategic Change, 1995, 4 (3), 3–17.
BoothroydG.Design for manufacture and assembly: The Boothroyd-Dewhurst experience. In Design for X: Concurrent Engineering Imperatives (Ed. HuangG.Q.), 1996, pp. 19–40 (Chapman and Hall, London).
20.
OsbornA.F.Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Problem Solving, 3rd edition, 1963 (Scribner, New York).
21.
SuzueT.KohdateA.Variety Reduction Program: A Production Strategy for Product Diversification, 1988 (Productivity Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts).
22.
ZwickyF.The morphological approach to discovery, invention, research and construction. In New Methods of Thought and Procedure (Eds ZwickyF.WilsonA.G.), Symposium on Methodologies, Pasadena, 1967, pp. 316–317 (Springer, Berlin).
23.
NorrisK. W.The morphological approach to engineering design. In Conference on Design Methods (Ed. JonesJ.C.), 1963, pp. 115–141 (Pergamon Press, London).
MiyakawaS.OhashiT.IwataM.The Hitachi new assemblability evaluation method. Trans. N. Am. Mfg Res., Institution (NAMRI) of the SME, the NAMR Conference XVIII, Pennsylvania State University, Dearborn, 23–25 May 1990.
26.
CarterD.E.BakerB.S.Concurrent Engineering: The Product Development Environment for the 1990s, 1992 (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts).
27.
EvansS.Common failure modes and success factors. In Concurrent Engineering (Eds ParsaeiH.R.SullivanW.G.), 1993, pp. 42–60 (Chapman and Hall, London).
28.
CohenL.Quality Function Deployment: How to Make QFD Work for You, Engineering Process Improvement Series, 1995 (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts).
