PRODUCT AND SERVICE DESIGN TRA 3151, FGCU

Learning Objectives LO3–1: Know the issues associated with product design and the typical processes used by companies. LO3–2: Illustrate how different criteria can impact the design of a product. LO3–3: Contrast how service products can have different design criteria compared to manufactured products.

The Product Design Process Companies continuously bring new products to market Product design is integral to success Product design differs significantly depending on the industry Companies often outsource major functions Contract manufacturer: an organization capable of manufacturing and/or purchasing all the components needed to produce a finished product

Importance of New Products Percentage of Sales from New Products 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Position of Firm in Its Industry Industry leader Top third Middle third Bottom third

IMPACT OF MARKET INTRODUCTION ON PROFIT Cumulative Profits over life of product 3X 2X X 1X Time (months) 6 months early 6 months late

Core Competency Core competency: the one thing a company can do better than its competitors A core competency has three characteristics: It provides potential access to a wide variety of markets It increases perceived customer benefits It is hard for competitors to imitate

Humor in Product Design As the customer wanted it. © 1984-1994 T/Maker Co. As Marketing interpreted it. © 1984-1994 T/Maker Co. As Engineering designed it. © 1984-1994 T/Maker Co. As Operations made it. © 1984-1994 T/Maker Co. 7

Bad designs How much is the gas?

Bad designs Guess which switch controls the projector screen? How do you raise the window?

Product Development Few Successes Number 2000 1500 1000 500 Ideas 1750 2000 Design review, Testing, Introduction Market requirement 1500 1000 Functional specifications 1000 Product specification 500 500 100 One success! 25 Development Stage 21

Product Development System Evaluation Introduction Test Market Functional Specifications Design Review Product Specifications Customer Requirements Ability Ideas Scope of product development team Scope for design and engineering teams © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Six Phases of the Generic Development Process (Formal Process) Phase 0: Planning Phase 1: Concept development Phase 2: System-level design Phase 3: Design detail Phase 4: Testing and refinement Phase 5: Production ramp-up

Phase 0: Planning Precedes project approval Begins with corporate strategy Includes assessment of technology developments and market objectives Output is the project mission statement

Phase 1: Concept Development Needs of the target market are identified Alternative product concepts are generated and evaluated One or more concepts are selected for further development and testing Concept: a description of the form, function, and features of a product

Phase 2: System-Level Design Definition of the product architecture Decomposition of the product into subsystems and components Final assembly scheme for the production system is usually defined Output: Geometric layout of the product Functional specifications for each subsystem Preliminary process flow diagram

Phase 3: Design Detail Complete specification of the geometry, materials, and tolerances for all parts Identification of all the standard parts to be purchased from suppliers Process plan is established Tooling is designed Output: Drawings describing the geometry of each part and its tooling Specifications of purchased parts Process plan

Phase 4: Testing and Refinement Construction and evaluation of multiple preproduction versions of product Same geometry and material as production version Not necessarily fabricated with the actual production processes Prototypes tested to determine if the product will work as designed

Phase 5: Production Ramp-Up Product is made using the intended production system Need to train workers and resolve any remaining problems Products may be supplied to preferred customers for evaluation Transition to ongoing production is gradual

The Generic Product Development Process

Generic Product Development Process Generic: begins with a market opportunity and team selects appropriate technologies to meet customer needs, Ex: sporting goods, furniture Technology-push products: firm begins with new technology and looks for a market. Ex: Tyvek envelopes, 3D printers Platform products: built around a preexisting technological subsystem, Ex: Electronics, printers

Generic Product Development Process Continued Process-intensive products: production process has an impact on the properties of the product Product characteristics are constrained by the production process, Ex: Snack foods, cereals, chemicals Customized products: new products are slight variations of existing configurations, Ex: Batteries, containers, motors High-risk products: technical or market uncertainties create high risks of failure, Ex: Pharmaceuticals, space systems

Generic Product Development Process Continued Quick-build products: rapid modeling and prototyping enables many design-build-test cycles, Ex: software, cell phones Complex systems: systems must be decomposed into several subsystems and many components, Ex: airplanes, jet engines, automobiles.

Summary of Variants of Generic Product Development Process

Quality Function Deployment Interfunctional teams from marketing, design engineering, and manufacturing Begins with listening to the customer Uses market research Customer preferences are defined and broken down into customer requirements House of quality 6

Quality Function Deployment Identify customer wants Identify how the good/service will satisfy customer wants Relate customer wants to product hows Identify relationships between the firm’s hows Develop importance ratings Evaluate competing products Compare performance to desirable technical attributes © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Competitive assessment QFD House of Quality How to satisfy customer wants Interrelationships What the customer wants Customer importance ratings Competitive assessment Relationship matrix Weighted rating Technical evaluation Target values © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 1

House of Quality Example Your team has been charged with designing a new camera for Great Cameras, Inc. The first action is to construct a House of Quality © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

House of Quality Example What the Customer Wants Relationship Matrix Technical Attributes and Evaluation How to Satisfy Customer Wants Interrelationships Analysis of Competitors What the customer wants Customer importance rating (5 = highest) Lightweight 3 Easy to use 4 Reliable 5 Easy to hold steady 2 Color correction 1 © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

House of Quality Example What the Customer Wants Relationship Matrix Technical Attributes and Evaluation How to Satisfy Customer Wants Interrelationships Analysis of Competitors Low electricity requirements Aluminum components Ergonomic design Auto exposure Auto focus Paint pallet How to Satisfy Customer Wants © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

House of Quality Example What the Customer Wants Relationship Matrix Technical Attributes and Evaluation How to Satisfy Customer Wants Interrelationships Analysis of Competitors High relationship Medium relationship Low relationship Lightweight 3 Easy to use 4 Reliable 5 Easy to hold steady 2 Color corrections 1 Relationship matrix © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

House of Quality Example What the Customer Wants Relationship Matrix Technical Attributes and Evaluation How to Satisfy Customer Wants Interrelationships Analysis of Competitors House of Quality Example Company A Company B G P F G P P Lightweight 3 Easy to use 4 Reliable 5 Easy to hold steady 2 Color corrections 1 Our importance ratings 22 5 How well do competing products meet customer wants © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

House of Quality Example Low electricity requirements Aluminum components Ergonomic design Auto exposure Auto focus Paint pallet What the Customer Wants Relationship Matrix Technical Attributes and Evaluation How to Satisfy Customer Wants Interrelationships Analysis of Competitors Relationships between the things we can do © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

House of Quality Example What the Customer Wants Relationship Matrix Technical Attributes and Evaluation How to Satisfy Customer Wants Interrelationships Analysis of Competitors Lightweight 3 Easy to use 4 Reliable 5 Easy to hold steady 2 Color corrections 1 Our importance ratings 22 9 27 27 32 25 Weighted rating © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

House of Quality Example What the Customer Wants Relationship Matrix Technical Attributes and Evaluation How to Satisfy Customer Wants Interrelationships Analysis of Competitors House of Quality Example Target values (Technical attributes) Technical evaluation Company A 0.7 60% yes 1 ok G Company B 0.6 50% yes 2 ok F Us 0.5 75% yes 2 ok G Failure 1 per 10,000 Panel ranking 2 circuits 2’ to ∞ 0.5 A 75% © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

House of Quality Example Lightweight 3 Easy to use 4 Reliable 5 Easy to hold steady 2 Color correction 1 Our importance ratings Low electricity requirements Aluminum components Ergonomic design Auto exposure Auto focus Paint pallet Company A Company B G P F G P P Target values (Technical attributes) Technical evaluation Company A 0.7 60% yes 1 ok G Company B 0.6 50% yes 2 ok F Us 0.5 75% yes 2 ok G Failure 1 per 10,000 Panel ranking 2 circuits 2’ to ∞ 0.5 A 75% 22 9 27 27 32 25 House of Quality Example Completed House of Quality © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Completed House of Quality Matrix for a Car Door Customer requirements information forms the basis for this matrix, used to translate them into operating or engineering goals

Value Analysis (Engineering) Ratio of value / cost Assessment of value : 1. Can we do without it? 2. Does it do more than is required? 3. Does it cost more than it is worth? 4. Can something else do a better job 5. Can it be made by less costly method, tools, material? 6. Can it be made cheaper, better or faster by someone else?

Cost Reduction of a Bracket via Value Engineering © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall