TY - GEN

T1 - Exploring differences between average and critical engineering changes: Survey results from Denmark

A1 - Langer,Stefan

A1 - Maier,Anja

A1 - Wilberg,J.

A1 - Münch,T.J.

A1 - Lindemann,U.

AU - Langer,Stefan

AU - Maier,Anja

AU - Wilberg,J.

AU - Münch,T.J.

AU - Lindemann,U.

PB - The Design Society

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - Change or modification has always been a fundamental part of engineering design. Changes to a <br/>design are the rule and not the exception [Clark &amp; Fujimoto 1991]. Engineering changes (ECs), as <br/>Jarratt et al. [2005] describe, are alterations made to parts, drawings or software that have already been <br/>released during the design process. Over the past decades, engineering change management has gained <br/>prominence in engineering design and product development literature, with a number of in-depth case <br/>studies (e.g. [Clarkson et al. 2004; Fricke et al. 2000; Giffin et al. 2009; Jarratt et al. 2010; Lindemann <br/>&amp; Reichwald 1998; Loch &amp; Terwiesch 1999; Vianello &amp; Ahmed-Kristensen 2011]), industry surveys <br/>(e.g. [Deubzer et al. 2005; Huang &amp; Mak 1999; Huang et al. 2003]), and reviews (e.g. [Ahmad et al. <br/>2011; Jarratt et al. 2010; Wright 1997]). <br/>Researchers describe and analyse a number of aspects of changes, such as characterisations of <br/>changes, causes, initiators, objectives, effects, and potential strategies, and software support to <br/>anticipate and handle changes. Studying characterisations of changes, some investigate late <br/>engineering changes (e.g. [Coughlan 1992]), others describe strategies to detect avoidable and to cope <br/>with unavoidable changes [Fricke et al. 2000], yet others characterise initiated design changes and the <br/>associated emergent modifications according to their development over time and potential effects on <br/>implementation within the allotted amount of time forming ripple, blossom, or avalanche patterns <br/>[Eckert et al. 2004]. <br/>Whilst differing in terms of focus and research design what all studies have in common is <br/>differentiating between engineering changes for better understanding of patterns of change, ultimately <br/>better to manage engineering changes. In this paper, we aim to continue this line of investigation and <br/>- examine differences between average and critical changes according to results from a survey <br/>with industry participants, and thereby <br/>- explore as to what makes changes critical. <br/>In this paper, we focus our description on results from an industry survey. With this in mind, the <br/>remainder of the paper is structured as follows: Section 2 describes in brief what motivated criticality <br/>of engineering changes as the research focus of this paper and outlines the data acquisition and <br/>analysis procedure. We present results of this study in Section 3. Section 4 summarises contributions <br/>and concludes with suggestions for further work.

AB - Change or modification has always been a fundamental part of engineering design. Changes to a <br/>design are the rule and not the exception [Clark &amp; Fujimoto 1991]. Engineering changes (ECs), as <br/>Jarratt et al. [2005] describe, are alterations made to parts, drawings or software that have already been <br/>released during the design process. Over the past decades, engineering change management has gained <br/>prominence in engineering design and product development literature, with a number of in-depth case <br/>studies (e.g. [Clarkson et al. 2004; Fricke et al. 2000; Giffin et al. 2009; Jarratt et al. 2010; Lindemann <br/>&amp; Reichwald 1998; Loch &amp; Terwiesch 1999; Vianello &amp; Ahmed-Kristensen 2011]), industry surveys <br/>(e.g. [Deubzer et al. 2005; Huang &amp; Mak 1999; Huang et al. 2003]), and reviews (e.g. [Ahmad et al. <br/>2011; Jarratt et al. 2010; Wright 1997]). <br/>Researchers describe and analyse a number of aspects of changes, such as characterisations of <br/>changes, causes, initiators, objectives, effects, and potential strategies, and software support to <br/>anticipate and handle changes. Studying characterisations of changes, some investigate late <br/>engineering changes (e.g. [Coughlan 1992]), others describe strategies to detect avoidable and to cope <br/>with unavoidable changes [Fricke et al. 2000], yet others characterise initiated design changes and the <br/>associated emergent modifications according to their development over time and potential effects on <br/>implementation within the allotted amount of time forming ripple, blossom, or avalanche patterns <br/>[Eckert et al. 2004]. <br/>Whilst differing in terms of focus and research design what all studies have in common is <br/>differentiating between engineering changes for better understanding of patterns of change, ultimately <br/>better to manage engineering changes. In this paper, we aim to continue this line of investigation and <br/>- examine differences between average and critical changes according to results from a survey <br/>with industry participants, and thereby <br/>- explore as to what makes changes critical. <br/>In this paper, we focus our description on results from an industry survey. With this in mind, the <br/>remainder of the paper is structured as follows: Section 2 describes in brief what motivated criticality <br/>of engineering changes as the research focus of this paper and outlines the data acquisition and <br/>analysis procedure. We present results of this study in Section 3. Section 4 summarises contributions <br/>and concludes with suggestions for further work.

KW - Engineering change management

KW - Change management

KW - Engineering change

KW - Design change

KW - Change cause

KW - Change effect

BT - Design 2012

T2 - Design 2012

ER -