شناسایی و مدلسازی شاخص های موثر در طراحی فرایند توسعه محصولات پیچیده هوافضایی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت تکنولوژی، گروه مدیریت تکنولوژی، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران

2 استاد ، دانشگاه صنعتی مالک اشتر، تهران، ایران.

3 استاد، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد ، واحد علوم و تحقیقات ، دانشگااه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران

4 استادیار ، دانشکده مهندسی مکانیک، دانشگاه صنعتی مالک اشتر ، تهران، ایران

چکیده

یکی از رموز موفقیت در توسعه محصول، مدیریت ریسک و سرمایه گذاری زمان و هزینه در مراحل اولیه است تا در آینده ناگزیر به انجام تغییرات پر هزینه نشویم. از این روی این مقاله با هدف شناسایی و مدلسازی پارامتر های تاثیر گذار در طراحی فرایند توسعه محصولات پیچیده هوافضایی صورت پذیرفته است،
این مقاله از نظر هدف کاربردی و از نظر روش شناسی، رویکرد ترکیبی می باشد. در بخش رویکرد کیفی از طریق مصاحبه و نظرسنجی دلفی فازی از مدیران و مهندسین سیستم، این عوامل در فرایند توسعه محصولات پیچیده هوافضایی، شناسایی شدند. در بخش کمی نیز با رویکرد دیمتل فازی، روابط علی و معلولی این عوامل تحلیل شد.
یافته ها و نتایج نشان می دهد، ریسک های فرایند توسعه محصولات پیچیده در شش دسته اصلی و 32 محرک ریسک، ویژگی های محصولات پیچیده در نه دسته و خصوصیات فرایند توسعه محصولات پیچیده در سه دسته شناسایی شدند، تعیین مهندسی سیستم بعنوان خصوصیت قرایند توسعه محصولات پیچیده از نوآوری های این مقاله می باشد. در نهایت با یک چارچوب علی با محوریت ریسک زمانبندی، روابط نظری بین این عوامل ارائه گردید. می توان بیان کرد این چارچوب علاوه براینکه عوامل کلیدی را در نظر می گیرد، بلکه فرضیه یا روابط نظری بین فرضیه ها را نیز نشان می دهد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Identification and Modeling of Effective factors in Designing the Process of Developing Aerospace Complex Products

نویسندگان [English]

  • ali kazemzadeh 1
  • manoucher manteghi 2
  • Abbas Tolouee Ashlaghi 3
  • jahangir jodey 4
چکیده [English]

The main successful keys of product development is risk management, and time- investing and cost in the early stages, so that we don't have to make costly changes in the future. and. Therefore, this paper aims identify and modeling the Effective factors in designing process of complex aerospace products ,
This paper intends for practical purpose and for methodological, is a mixed approach , In the quantitative section whit interviews and fuzzy Delphi surveys of system managers and engineers, these factors identified in the process of development complex aerospace products. , the causal relations of these factors were analyzed using the fuzzy DEMATEL approach In the qualitative section.
The findings and results shows the, identifying and classifying the complex product development process risks in six main categories and 32 risk drivers and also attributes of complex aerospace products in nine categories, and the characteristics of the complex aerospace product development process in three categories. The determining of system engineering as the characteristic of complex product development process is new findings of this paper. Finally, a causal framework provides theoretical relations between these factors. It can be argued that, in addition to taking into account key factors, it also illustrates the hypothesis or theoretical relations between the hypotheses.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • "Complex Products Development Process Risks"
  • "Complex Products Development Process Characteristics"
  • " Complex Products"
  • "Fuzzy Delphi"
  • "Fuzzy DEMATEL"
1-      آذر عادل و حجت فرجی، (1389). علم مدیریت فازی، ویرایش پنجم، انتشارات کتاب مهربان نشر
2-      اوما سکاران (1381) روش‌های تحقیق در مدیریت، ترجمه صائبی، محمد و شیرازی، محمود تهران: مرکز آموزش مدیریت دولتی.
3-      دلاور علی و کوشکی شیرین (1396)، روش تحقیق آمیخته، انتشارات ویرایش، چاپ دوم، ص 5-163
4-      Ahn. J. O. Jeung, H. S.Kim. J. S.and Choi, H. G. (2008). “A framework for managing risks on concurrent engineering basis”, Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and `Technology.
5-      Beck, N. (2000). Extreme programming explaind. Boston, Addison, Wesley, Technion Academic Press.
6-      BenHiam, Y. (2001). Information GP decision under sever uncertainty. Haifa
7-      Blanchard,S,B,Fabrycky,W,J, (2011), Systems engineering and analysis,fifth edition,pp 48-233
8-      Boehm, B. (1988), “A Spiral Model of Software Development and Enhancement,” IEEE Computer,, pp. 61-72
9-      Cheng, C.H. and Lin, Y. (2002). Evaluating the best main battle tank using fuzzy decision theory with linguistic criteria evaluation. European journal of operational research, 142(1), pp.174-186.
10-  Clark, KB and Fujimoto, T. (1991). “Product development performance: strategy, organization and management in the world Auto industry”. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA
11-  Clayton, M. J. (1997). Delphi: A technique to harness expert opinion for critical decision-making tasks in education. Educational Psychology, 17(4), 373-384
12-  Cooper.L.P. (2003). “A research agenda to reduce risk in new product development through knowledge management: a practitionerperspective”, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management.
13-  Creswell, John W. Plano Clark Vicki L, (2007),Dsigning and conducting mixed methods research,pp,12
14-  Creswell, (2009), Research Design: qualitative,quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, pp,325
15-  Drarian, W.U.Eppinger.S. (2011), Improving product development process design: a method for managing information flows, risks, and iterations, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 22, No. 10,pp.689-699
16-  Darian W,Unger, and Eppinger,Steven D. (2009). “Comparing product development processes and managing risk.” International Journal of Product Development, Vol. 8, No. 4,
17-  Darian W,Unger, and Eppinger,Steven D. (2006), " Improving Product Development Processes to Manage Development Risk" MIT Sloan Working Paper 4568-06, pp3- 25
18-  Denis Bassler, Josef Oehmen, Warren Seering, Mohamed Ben-Daya. (2011) A comparison of the integration of Risk management Principles in Product Development ApproachesProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED11), 15-18 August 2011, Copenhagen.
19- Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. and Behnam N. Tabrizi (1995) "Accelerating Adaptive Processes: Product Innovation in the Global Computer Industry" Administrative Science Quarterly 40(Mar.): 84-110.
20- Eppinger, Steven D. (1995) "Three Concurrent Engineering Problems in Product Development" Presentation,Cambridge, MA.
21-  Eppinger, Steven D., Daniel E. Whitney, Robert P. Smith, and David A. Gebala (1994) "A Model-Based Method for Organizing Tasks in Product Development" Research in Engineering Design 6: 1-13
22-  Gulati, Rosaline K. and Steven D. Eppinger (1996) "The Coupling of Product Architecture and Organizational
Structure Decisions" M.I.T. International Center for Research on the Management of Technology, Working Paper no.151
23-  Hobday M (1998). “Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation”. Research Policy, V 26, pp 689-710.
24-  Hobday, M., Rush, H., and J., Tidd, (2000). "Innovation in complex products and systems", Research Policy, 29, p 793-804.
25-  Hobday, M. Davies,A. (2005). The Business of Projects Managing Innovation in Complex Products and System, Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York,pp.20-55
26-  Hoo-Gon Choi,Seonmuk Park, Jongseong Kim, (2011)A Risk Management System Framework for New Product Development (NPD), IPEDR vol.4 © IACSIT Press, Singapore,pp,51-55
27-  Hugarth, R. M. (1978). A note on aggregating opinions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 21, 40-46.
28-  Jünger, Saskia., Sarah Brearley, Sheila Payne, Aukje K. Mantel-Teeuwisse, Thomas Lynch, Willem Scholten, Lukas Radbruch (2013), Consensus Building on Access to Controlled Medicines: A Four-Stage Delphi Consensus Procedure, Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, Volume 46, Issue 6, December 2013, Pages 897-910
29-  Kayis, B. Zhou,M. Savci,S. Khoo,Y.B. Ahmed, A. Kusumo R. Rispler A. IRMAS, development of a risk management tool for collaborative multi-site, multi-partner new product development projects Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management Vol. 18 No. 4, 2007 pp. 387-414
30-   Keeney, S., Hasson, F. & McKenna, H.P. (2001). A critical review of the Delphi technique as a research methodology for nursing. Internatinal Journal of Nursing Study, 38(2), 195-200.
31-  Keizer, J.A. Vos, J.P: (2003), Diagnosing risks in new product development. Eindhoven Centre for Innovation Studies.working pappers,
32-  Kerzner, H. (2009). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. 10th edition, John Wiley, New York.
33-  Khim T Yeo Yingtao Ren,, and Yingju Ren, (2014)Risk Management Capability Maturity and Performance of Complex Product and System (CoPS) Projects with an Asian Perspective Journal of Engineering, Project, and Production Management,pp 102-120
34-  Kiamehr, M., Hobday, M., and A., Kermanshahi, (2013) “Latecomer systems integration capability in complex capital goods: Thes case of Iran’s electricity generation systems”, Industrial and corporate change, 23 (3), p 689-716.
35-  Landeta J., (2006), "Current validity of the Delphi method in social sciences", Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 73, No. 5, pp: 467-82
36-  Lu and et al (2013). Environmental Strategic Orientations for ImprovingGreen Innovation Performance in Fuzzy Environment - Using New Fuzzy Hybrid MCDM Model, International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, Vol. 15
37-  Ludovic-Alexandre Vidal. (2009) Thinking project management in the age of complexity: particular implications on project risk management. Business administration. Ecole Centrale Paris.pp. 21-29, 83-87
38-  Mahler, M, (2014), A new framework for supporting and managing multi-disciplinary system simulation in a plm enviroment
39-  McGrath, M.E, (2001), product strategy for high technology companies. 2nd ED, New York, McGrath Hill
40-  Mello, Sheila (1997) "Product and Service Definition" Presentation, Boston: Product Development Consulting, Inc.
41-  Murmann PA (1994). “Expected development time reductions in the German mechanical engineering industry”. Journal of Product Innovation Management V11, pp 236-252
42-  Meijering,J.V., J.K. Kampen, H. Tobi (2013), Quantifying the development of agreement among experts in Delphi studies,Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Volume 80, Issue 8, October 2013, Pages 1607-1614
43-  Miller, R., Lessard, D. (2001), Understanding and Managing Risks in Large Engineering Projects. International Journal of Project Management 19, pp. 437–443
44-  Munhall PL. (2011) Nursing research. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
45-  Ramachandran, Natarajan, Noshir A. Langrana, Louis I. Steinberg, and Vakram R. Jamalabad (1992) "Initial Design Strategies for Iterative Design" Research in Engineering Design 4: 159-169.
46-  Reda, M. Lebcir, (2005), “A Framework for Project Complexity in New Product Development (NPD), Management Systems Department The Business School University of Hertfordshire Projects”pp 15-30
47-  Ricondo, I. Arrieta, J. A. Aranguren, N. (2016), NPD Risk Management: Proposed Implementation to Increase New Product Success. ResearchGate
48-  Reinertsen, Donald G. (1997) Managing the Design Factory: A Product Developer's Toolkit New York: The Free Press.
49-  Reppy, J. (Eds.), The Relations between Defense and Civil Technologies, Kluwer Academic London
50-  Sekaran, U. and Bougie, R. (2010) Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Aroach, John Wiley and Sons,
51-  Shenhar, A. J. (1998). “From theory to practice: Toward a typology of project management styles,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 45(1), 33- 48
52-  Shenhar, A. J. (1994). “Systems engineering management: a framework for the development of a multidisciplinary discipline,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 24(2), February, 327-332
53-  Singh, K., (2007) Quantitative social research methods, SAGE
54-  Smith, P.G., Merritt, G.M: (2002). Proactive Risk Management: Controlling Uncertainty in Product Development, Productivity Press.
55-  Smith, Robert P. and Steven D. Eppinger (1997b) "Identifying Controlling Features of Engineering Design Iteration" Management Science 43(3): 276-293.
56-  Smith, Robert P. and Steven D. Eppinger (1995) "Deciding Between Sequential and Parallel Tasks in Engineering Design" M.I.T. Sloan School of Management, Working Paper no.3858.
57-  Somerville, Jerry A (2008). Effective Use of the Delphi Process in Research: Its Characteristics, Strengths, and Limitations
58-  Tidd, J. (1995).“The development of novel products through intra- and interorganizational networks”. Journal of Product Innovation Management, V 12, pp 307-322.
59-  Vidal, Ludovic, Alexandre,. (2009) Thinking project management in the age of complexity: particular implications on project risk management. Business administration. Ecole Centrale Paris.pp. 21-29, 83-87.
60-  Walker, W., M. Graham, and B. Harbor, (1988). “From components to integrated systems: technological diversity and integration between the military and civilian sectors,” In: Gummett, P.
61-  Wei WW, Yu TL. (2007). Developing global managers' competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Expert System Application. 32(2): 499-507.
62-  Woodward, J. (1965). Industry Organization: Theory and Practice, Oxford Univ. Press.
63-  Yeh, T.M. and Huang, Y.L (2014). Factors in determining wind farm location: Integrating GQM, fuzzy DEMATEL, and ANP. Renewable Energy, 66, pp.159-169
64-  PMI (2009). Practice standard for project risk management. PMI – Project Management Institute, Pennsylvania, USA.
65-  Zhe Xu and Hongbo Li. (2017) Assessing Performance Risk for Complex Product Development: A Simulation-Based ModelPublished online in Wiley Online Library