Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T06:15:33.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

BENCHMARKING OF RISK MANAGEMENT METHODS WITH REGARD TO VARIATIONS AS A SOURCE OF RISK

Part of: Design Organisation and Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2020

S. Rapp ,
M. Altner  and
A. Albers
S. Rapp*
Affiliation:
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany
M. Altner
Affiliation:
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany
A. Albers
Affiliation:
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany
*
*simon.rapp@kit.edu

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

When developing new systems, there is always some kind of reference to existing systems. Various approaches aim at describing qualitatively different characteristics of such connections, often depicted as some form of variation. Among other things, this is done with regard to innovation potential and development risk. In this paper, we investigate the extent to which established methods of risk management refer to modelling approaches for variations by means as mentionend above. After a litertaure search 11 methods and method clusters are analyzed more in detail within a method benchmark.

Keywords

risk managementengineering changedesign guidelinesproduct generation engineering (PGE)reference system
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference , Volume 1 , May 2020 , pp. 677 - 686
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Albers, A., Bursac, N. and Wintergerst, E. (2015), “Produktgenerationsentwicklung – Bedeutung und Herausforderungen aus einer entwicklungsmethodischen Perspektive”, Stuttgarter Symposium für Produktentwicklung (SSP) Stuttgart, 19. Juni 2015 ; Hrsg.: H. Binz, Vol. 3.Google Scholar
Albers, A. et al. (2017), “Die Frühe Phase der PGE - Produktgenerationsentwicklung”, Stuttgarter Symposium für Produktentwicklung 2017 (SSP) Produktentwicklung im disruptiven Umfeld, Vol. 4. https://doi.org/10.18419/opus-9559Google Scholar
Albers, A. et al. (2018), “Reference Products in PGE – Product Generation Engineering: Analyzing Challenges Based on the System Hierarchy”, 28th CIRP Design Conference, Vol. 28, pp. 469–474. https://doi.org/10.5445/IR/1000084050Google Scholar
Blessing, L.T.M. and Chakrabarti, A. (2009), DRM, a Design Research Methodology, Springer London, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-587-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, C. and Ward, S. (2003), Project risk management: Processes, techniques and insights, 2nd ed., Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar
Chauhan, A.S. et al. (2018), “Examining the State of Risk Management Research in New Product Development Process”, Engineering Management Journal, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2018.1446120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denning, S. (2013), “What went wrong at Boeing”, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 36–41. https://doi.org/10.1108/10878571311323208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DIN EN 60812 (2015), Fehlzustandsart- und -auswirkungsanalyse (FMEA), Vol. 03.120.01 No. 60812, Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.31030/2328411Google Scholar
Eckert, C., Clarkson, P.J. and Zanker, W. (2004), “Change and customisation in complex engineering domains”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-003-0031-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldhusen, J. and Grote, K.-H. (2012), Pahl/Beitz Konstruktionslehre: Methoden und Anwendung erfolgreicher Produktentwicklung, 8., vollst. überarb. Aufl. 2013, Springer Berlin, Berlin, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29569-0Google Scholar
Fink, A. and Siebe, A. (2016), Szenario-Management: Von strategischem Vorausdenken zu zukunftsrobusten Entscheidungen, Campus Verlag, Frankfurt, New York.Google Scholar
Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), “A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies”, Health information and libraries journal, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heesen, M. (2009), Innovationsportfoliomanagement: Bewertung von Innovationsprojekten in kleinen und mittelgroßen Unternehmen der Automobilzulieferindustrie, Zugl.: Duisburg-Essen, Univ., Diss, 2009, Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-8392-3Google Scholar
Henderson, R.M. and Clark, K.B. (1990), “Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing”, Administrative science quarterly, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 9–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISO 31000. (2018), Risikomanagement: Leitlinien, Vol. 03.100.01 No. 31000, 12th ed., DELTAdoc, BEST Collection 28; ISO komplett; DVD-2019.Google Scholar
Jarratt, T.A.W. et al. (2011), “Engineering change: an overview and perspective on the literature”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 103–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-010-0097-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keizer, J.A., Vos, J.-P. and Halman, J.I.M. (2005), “Risks in new product development. Devising a reference tool”, R and D Management, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 297–309. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2005.00391.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramer, F. and Kramer, M. (1997), Bausteine der Unternehmensführung: Kundenzufriedenheit und Unternehmenserfolg, Innovations- und Technologiemanagement, 2. Auflage, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-60533-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langer, S. et al. (2012), Änderungsmanagement-Report 2012: Studienergebnisse zu Ursachen und Auswirkungen, aktuellen Praktiken, Herausforderungen und Strategien in Deutschland: Änderungsmanagement-Report 2012: Studienergebnisse zu Ursachen und Auswirkungen, aktuellen Praktiken, Herausforderungen und Strategien in Deutschland.Google Scholar
Madauss, B.-J. (2017), Projektmanagement: Theorie und Praxis Aus Einer Hand, 7th ed., Vieweg, Berlin, Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kano, N. et al. (1984), “Attractive Quality and Must-Be Quality”, Hinshitsu Quality, Vol. 14, pp. 39–48.Google Scholar
Oehmen, J. et al. (2010), “Risk Management in Product Design. Current State, Conceptual Model and Future Research”, Proceedings of the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, Vol. 1, https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2010-28539Google Scholar
Oehmen, J. and Lindemann, U. (2016), “Risiko- und Chancenmanagement in der Produktentwicklung”, In: Handbuch Produktentwicklung, Carl Hanser Verlag GmbH & Co. KG, pp. 59–98. https://doi.org/10.3139/9783446445819.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, Y.H. (2010), “A study of risk management and performance measures on new product development”, Asian Journal on Quality, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1108/15982681011051813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pavasson, J. and Karlberg, M. (2011), Variation Mode and Effect Analysis compared to FTA and FMEA in Product Development.Google Scholar
Reich, Y. and Paz, A. (2008), “Managing product quality, risk, and resources through resource quality function deployment”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820701327947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savci, S. and Kayis, B. (2006), “Knowledge elicitation for risk mapping in concurrent engineering projects”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 44 No. 9, pp. 1739–1755. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540500445321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schumpeter, J.A. (1934), The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle, Transaction publishers, New Brunswick.Google Scholar
Shimizu, H., Otsuka, Y. and Noguchi, H. (2010), “Design review based on failure mode to visualise reliability problems in the development stage of mechanical products”, International Journal of Vehicle Design, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 149. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJVD.2010.033827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terwiesch, C. and Loch, C.H. (1999), “Managing the Process of Engineering Change Orders: The Case of the Climate Control System in Automobile Development”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 160–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.1620160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, I.C. (1997), “A review of research into engineering change management: implications for product design”, Design Studies, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(96)00029-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar