IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v22y2019i1p80-94.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantification of changeability level for engineering systems

Author

Listed:
  • Carl F. Rehn
  • Sigurd S. Pettersen
  • Jose J. Garcia
  • Per O. Brett
  • Stein O. Erikstad
  • Bjørn E. Asbjørnslett
  • Adam M. Ross
  • Donna H. Rhodes

Abstract

This paper outlines a generic method for quantifying changeability level, to support better decision making in the early stages of design of engineering systems. Changeability represents the ability of a system to change form, function, or operation, and is a collective term for characteristics such as flexibility, adaptability, and agility. Quantification of changeability level must not be confused with valuation of changeability. The level of changeability in a design is essentially under the control of the designer. Two aspects of changeability are discussed, the first being how to structure changeable design alternatives using the Design for Changeability (DFC) variable. The DFC variable represents combinations of path enablers built into a design. Path enablers are characteristics of systems enabling them to change more easily. The second aspect is to quantify the level of changeability for a given design alternative, based on change cost and time. For the latter, we propose two measures for quantification: (1) bottom‐up, measuring the reduction of cost and time enabled for each relevant change, and (2) top‐down, measuring the span of change opportunities at given cost and time thresholds. A case study of a ship is presented to demonstrate the proposed generic method.

Suggested Citation

  • Carl F. Rehn & Sigurd S. Pettersen & Jose J. Garcia & Per O. Brett & Stein O. Erikstad & Bjørn E. Asbjørnslett & Adam M. Ross & Donna H. Rhodes, 2019. "Quantification of changeability level for engineering systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 80-94, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:22:y:2019:i:1:p:80-94
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.21472
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21472
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.21472?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eppinger, Steven D. & Browning, Tyson R., 2012. "Design Structure Matrix Methods and Applications," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262017520, December.
    2. Donald Gerwin, 1993. "Manufacturing Flexibility: A Strategic Perspective," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 395-410, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alfnes, Erlend & Gosling, Jonathan & Naim, Mohamed & Dreyer, Heidi C., 2023. "Rearticulating supply chain design and operation principles to mitigate uncertainty in the Norwegian engineer-to-order shipbuilding sector," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Uwe Beyer & Oliver Ullrich, 2022. "Organizational Complexity as a Contributing Factor to Underperformance," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Seebacher, Gottfried & Winkler, Herwig, 2014. "Evaluating flexibility in discrete manufacturing based on performance and efficiency," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 340-351.
    3. Alfaro, José A. & Tribo Gine, José Antonio, 2007. "Impact of the Operations Manager's dual role on inventory policy," DEE - Working Papers. Business Economics. WB wb076612, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía de la Empresa.
    4. Malen, Joel, 2015. "Motivating And Enabling Firm Innovation Effort: Integrating Penrosian And Behavioral Theory Perspectives On Slack Resources," Hitotsubashi Journal of commerce and management, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 49(1), pages 37-54, October.
    5. Yang, L. & Ng, C.T. & Cheng, T.C.E., 2011. "Optimal production strategy under demand fluctuations: Technology versus capacity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(2), pages 393-402, October.
    6. Astrid Jung, 2001. "Are Product Innovation and Flexible Technology Complements?," CIG Working Papers FS IV 01-07, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG), revised Feb 2003.
    7. Morgan Dwyer & Bruce Cameron & Zoe Szajnfarber, 2015. "A Framework for Studying Cost Growth on Complex Acquisition Programs," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(6), pages 568-583, November.
    8. Félicia Saïah & Diego Vega & Harwin de Vries & Joakim Kembro, 2023. "Process modularity, supply chain responsiveness, and moderators: The Médecins Sans Frontières response to the Covid‐19 pandemic," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(5), pages 1490-1511, May.
    9. Enrico Teich & Thorsten Claus, 2017. "Measurement of Load and Capacity Flexibility in Manufacturing," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 18(4), pages 291-302, December.
    10. Junguang Zhang & Xiwei Song & Hongyu Chen & Ruixia (Sandy) Shi, 2016. "Determination of critical chain project buffer based on information flow interactions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(9), pages 1146-1157, September.
    11. Jin Li & Lulu Zhou & Xufan Zhang & Zhihong Chen & Feng Tian, 2018. "Technological Configuration Capability, Strategic Flexibility, and Organizational Performance in Chinese High-Tech Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.
    12. Jörg Claussen & Christian Essling & Christian Peukert, 2018. "Demand variation, strategic flexibility and market entry: Evidence from the U.S. airline industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(11), pages 2877-2898, November.
    13. Carsten Eckel, 2009. "International trade, flexible manufacturing, and outsourcing," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(4), pages 1449-1472, November.
    14. Gebauer, Judith & Lee, Fei, 2007. "Enterprise System Flexibility and Implementation Strategies-Aligning Theory with Evidence from a Case Study," Working Papers 07-0113, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    15. Moshfique Uddin & Anup Chowdhury & Geoffrey Wood, 2022. "The resilience of the British and European goods industry: Challenge of Brexit," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(4), pages 934-954.
    16. Pinjala, Srinivas Kumar & Pintelon, Liliane & Vereecke, Ann, 2006. "An empirical investigation on the relationship between business and maintenance strategies," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 214-229, November.
    17. Liu, Zhixue & Ding, Ronggui & Wang, Lei & Song, Rui & Song, Xinyi, 2023. "Cooperation in an uncertain environment: The impact of stakeholders' concerted action on collaborative innovation projects risk management," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    18. Robert Schmidt & Kasper Sanchez Vibaek & Simon Austin, 2014. "Evaluating the adaptability of an industrialized building using dependency structure matrices," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1-2), pages 160-182, February.
    19. Fitzgerald, Guy & Barad, Miryam & Papazafeiropoulou, Anastasia & Alaa, Ghada, 2009. "A framework for analyzing flexibility of generic objects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 329-339, November.
    20. Subarna Basnet & Christopher L Magee, 2017. "Artifact interactions retard technological improvement: An empirical study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:22:y:2019:i:1:p:80-94. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.