IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal Timing of Reviews in Concurrent Design for Manufacturability


  • Albert Y. Ha

    (Yale School of Management, New Haven, Connecticut 06511-3729)

  • Evan L. Porteus

    (Stanford Business School, Stanford, California 94305)


Concurrent design can reduce the time required to develop new products and redesign old ones. In contrast to the conventional approach, in which the product design is (nearly) completed before it is "thrown over the wall" to the process design group, concurrent design for manufacturability, as conceptualized here, conducts a number of progress reviews during the product design process. Frequent reviews have two benefits: (1) (Parallel Development) process designers receive sufficient information about the design to enable them to work in parallel with the product designers, and (2) (Quality Control) flaws in the design are discovered soon after they are introduced, saving the time and resources required for redesign later. The disadvantage of frequent reviews is that each review requires setup/penalty time that otherwise would not be required. The optimal policy is derived for some special stationary cases of the model. When the parallel development benefit dominates, the review periods either increase or decrease according to the rate at which product design work empowers useful process design work to be conducted. When the quality control benefit dominates, the review periods will vary only to the extent that the quality related parameters change. Numerical examples illustrate the insights gained from the analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Albert Y. Ha & Evan L. Porteus, 1995. "Optimal Timing of Reviews in Concurrent Design for Manufacturability," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(9), pages 1431-1447, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:41:y:1995:i:9:p:1431-1447

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no


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

    Cited by:

    1. Jürgen Mihm & Christoph Loch & Arnd Huchzermeier, 2003. "Problem--Solving Oscillations in Complex Engineering Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 733-750, June.
    2. V. Krishnan & Karl T. Ulrich, 2001. "Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, January.
    3. Sosa, Manuel E., 2003. "Factors that influence technical communication in distributed product development : an empirical study in the telecommunications industry," Working papers WP 4123-00., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    4. Oliver Baumann, 2015. "Distributed Problem Solving in Modular Systems: the Benefit of Temporary Coordination Neglect," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 124-136, January.
    5. Christian Terwiesch & Christoph H. Loch, 1999. "Measuring the Effectiveness of Overlapping Development Activities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(4), pages 455-465, April.
    6. Scott A. Shane & Karl T. Ulrich, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: Technological Innovation, Product Development, and Entrepreneurship in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 133-144, February.
    7. repec:spr:grdene:v:19:y:2010:i:2:d:10.1007_s10726-008-9129-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Glen M. Schmidt & Evan L. Porteus, 2000. "Sustaining Technology Leadership Can Require Both Cost Competence and Innovative Competence," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 1-18, March.
    9. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    10. Stefan Thomke & David E. Bell, 2001. "Sequential Testing in Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 308-323, February.
    11. Akhilesh Bajaj & Sunder Kekre & Kannan Srinivasan, 2004. "Managing NPD: Cost and Schedule Performance in Design and Manufacturing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(4), pages 527-536, April.
    12. Nadia Bhuiyan & Donald Gerwin & Vince Thomson, 2004. "Simulation of the New Product Development Process for Performance Improvement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(12), pages 1690-1703, December.
    13. Qian, Yanjun & Xie, Min & Goh, Thong Ngee & Lin, Jun, 2010. "Optimal testing strategies in overlapped design process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 206(1), pages 131-143, October.
    14. Lin, Jun & Chai, Kah Hin & Brombacher, Aarnout C. & Wong, Yoke San, 2009. "Optimal overlapping and functional interaction in product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(3), pages 1158-1169, August.
    15. Nitindra R. Joglekar & Ali A. Yassine & Steven D. Eppinger & Daniel E. Whitney, 2001. "Performance of Coupled Product Development Activities with a Deadline," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(12), pages 1605-1620, December.
    16. Valle, Sandra & Vázquez-Bustelo, Daniel, 2009. "Concurrent engineering performance: Incremental versus radical innovation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(1), pages 136-148, May.
    17. Hua, Zhongsheng & Zhang, Xuemei & Xu, Xiaoyan, 2011. "Product design strategies in a manufacturer-retailer distribution channel," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 23-32, January.
    18. Shantanu Bhattacharya & V. Krishnan & Vijay Mahajan, 1998. "Managing New Product Definition in Highly Dynamic Environments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(11-Part-2), pages 50-64, November.
    19. Christoph H. Loch & Christian Terwiesch, 1998. "Communication and Uncertainty in Concurrent Engineering," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(8), pages 1032-1048, August.
    20. Joglekar, Nitindra R., 2003. "Performance of coupled product development activities with a deadline," Working papers WP 4122-00., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    21. Lin, Jun & Qian, Yanjun & Cui, Wentian & Miao, Zhanli, 2010. "Overlapping and communication policies in product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(3), pages 737-750, March.
    22. Yassine, Ali A. & Sreenivas, Ramavarapu S. & Zhu, Jian, 2008. "Managing the exchange of information in product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(1), pages 311-326, January.
    23. Chakravarty, Amiya K., 2001. "Overlapping design and build cycles in product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(2), pages 392-424, October.


    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:inm:ormnsc:v:41:y:1995:i:9:p:1431-1447. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mirko Janc). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.