No abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether a design of experiments application in a company that works with robust design management (RDM) reflects the principles and practices of RDM. Design/methodology/approach -The findings of this paper are based on an empirical study of a medium-sized Swedish enterprise that develops and manufactures consumer products for domestic use and actively uses RDM. The study is comprised of an analysis of internal company documents, semi-structured interviews and e-mail correspondence. Findings -The study reveals a gap between principles and tool use; a feasible tool is applied but in a suboptimal mode with a low contribution in terms of increased robustness. This gap could be bridged by practices that describe, on an activity-based level, what needs to be done in order to fulfil the principles. Originality/value -The results of this case explain the difficulties that companies face when trying to introduce RDM. It also provides insights into RDM implementation work at the company in question.

No abstract

No abstract

While the concept of engineering design is well established and clearly defined, Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) is a relatively new concept aiming at Six Sigma performance by improved design activity. There are different engineering design models available in the literature which characterize design stages and thereby describe how engineering design activity can be systematized. The actual connection of DFSS with the more established contents of engineering design activity has been less emphasized in the literature. By reviewing the existing literature this paper clarifies the contributions of DFSS to the different stages of a systematic engineering design process. First engineering design models available in the literature are presented and the choice for one systematic design process is motivated. This process is then used as a reference for where and how DFSS contributions can take place.