Modelling the mutual dependencies between product architectures and a network of partners

Zolghadri, Marc; Baron, Claude; Girard, Philippe

doi:10.1504/ijpd.2010.032451

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is advantageous as traditionally 60-80% of new products and services fail once they are launched into the market (Zaltman, 2003). Furthermore, the concept of Concurrent Engineering (CE) has been proposed to overcome conventional 'over-the-wall' design and manufacturing problems (Yamamoto and Qudeiri, 2010;Zolghadri et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards innovation in Living Labs networks

Leminen

Westerlund

2012

IJPD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on Living Labs that are open user-centred environments for networked innovation development. Although the concept of open innovation has quickly attracted both the scientific and applied communities, research on Living Labs is scarce, and literature lacks understanding of the characteristics of the Living Labs model. We aim to describe what the Living Labs are from the innovation network perspective.Using a case study of a regional Living Labs initiative, we describe the key participants and their roles in the Living Labs network. In addition, we discuss their motives to participate in the network, as well as the outcomes and perceived challenges of innovation co-creation. According to our findings, Living Labs are a practical way of encouraging open innovation. They are dedicated inter-organisational environments that provide pertinent support for Concurrent Engineering's (CE) networked processes. The integration of users as co-producers in product development is imperative for success in the Living Labs model because it reveals their latent needs and enables unforeseen outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards innovation in Living Labs networks

Leminen

Westerlund

2012

IJPD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several researches [17,18] allowed us to analyze the main differences in their descriptions, as well as the roles involved in the process. A comparative study of processes identified the main deviations in their descriptions [19], the roles in either process and submitted ways and means to make these processes more operational by facilitating their cooperation in practice by looking for and defining the links needed between them [19] This was a prerequisite and a condition for successfully arriving at a generic process of project management: coordination, decision making, tracking, analysis, memorizing, follow-up and correction.…”

Section: Regarding Atlas Decways Offers New Proposalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Specifications of a method and tool to support the management of systems engineering projects

Baron

Esteban

Xue

et al. 2014

2014 International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) tools are widely used by the industry. However, they are not sufficient to guarantee the success of projects and too many projects still fail. Industrial groups have argued that these failures may be related to the managerial techniques used. Indeed organizational processes are more or less specifically mentioned in Systems Engineering (SE) standards but in practice project managers tend to rely more on their own standards which sometime set forth practices not in line with those of the SE domain, hence the reported discrepancies which very often lead to project failure. Thus to improve the companies' competitiveness when developing new products, cooperation between processes related to system development and Project Management (PM) is key to getting performance and success. This paper presents arguments which tend to support this theory and introduces an ongoing project of method and tool that aim at integrating both domains.

show abstract

“…Team-Based Design Structure Matrix [Tyson, 2001]; Partners dependency modeling [Zouggar et al, 2009]. Product∼ Project Domain Mapping Matrix [Mike and R, 2007]; Generalized Bill-Of-Materials and Operations [Zolghadri et al, 2010].…”

Section: Partner∼ Partnermentioning

confidence: 99%

A Co-evolution Oriented Change Analysis Framework in Product Development Project

Zhang

Zolghadri

Leclaire

et al. 2013

IFAC Proceedings Volumes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers. L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

show abstract

Modelling the mutual dependencies between product architectures and a network of partners

Cited by 11 publications

References 12 publications

Towards innovation in Living Labs networks

Towards innovation in Living Labs networks

Specifications of a method and tool to support the management of systems engineering projects

A Co-evolution Oriented Change Analysis Framework in Product Development Project

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About