Engineering project management for the global high technology industry by sammy g shina

Engineering Project Management for the Global HighTechnology Industry


About the Author
Sammy G. Shina, Ph.D., P.E., is a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of
Massachusetts Lowell (UML), and has lectured in the University of Pennsylvania’s ExMSE Program
and at the University of California Irvine. He is the coordinator of the Design and Manufacturing
Certificate, the Quality Engineering Certificate, mechanical engineering senior capstone projects, and
co-op education for the College of Engineering at UML. He is the founder of the New England LeadFree Electronics Consortium, which researches, tests, and evaluates materials and processes for
lead-free and RoHS compliance and conversion to nano-technology.
Dr. Shina is an international consultant, trainer, and seminar provider on project management,
quality methods in design and manufacturing, Six Sigma, and design of experiments (DoE), as well as
technology supply chains, product design and development, and electronics manufacturing, testing,
and automation. He worked for 22 years in high-technology companies developing new products and
state-of-the-art manufacturing technologies. Dr. Shina received B.S. degrees in electrical engineering
and industrial management from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, an M.S. degree in computer
science from Worcester Polytechnic Institute, and a Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineering from
Tufts University. He is the author of several best-selling books on concurrent engineering, Six Sigma,
green design, and engineering project management, and more than 100 papers.


Engineering Project Management for the Global HighTechnology Industry

Sammy G. Shina, Ph.D., P.E.

New York Chicago San Francisco
Athens London Madrid
Mexico City Milan New Delhi
Singapore Sydney Toronto

Copyright © 2014 by McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Except as permitted under the United States Copyright Act of 1976,
no part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system,
without the prior written permission of the publisher.
ISBN: 978-0-07-181537-6
MHID: 0-07-181537-6
e-Book conversion by Cenveo® Publisher Services
Version 1.0
The material in this eBook also appears in the print version of this title: ISBN: 978-0-07-181536-9, MHID: 0-07-181536-8.
McGraw-Hill Education eBooks are available at special quantity discounts to use as premiums and sales promotions, or for use in
corporate training programs. To contact a representative, please visit the Contact Us page at www.mhprofessional.com.
All trademarks are trademarks of their respective owners. Rather than put a trademark symbol after every occurrence of a trademarked
name, we use names in an editorial fashion only, and to the benefit of the trademark owner, with no intention of infringement of the
trademark. Where such designations appear in this book, they have been printed with initial caps.
Information has been obtained by McGraw-Hill Education from sources believed to be reliable. However, because of the possibility of
human or mechanical error by our sources, McGraw-Hill Education, or others, McGraw-Hill Education does not guarantee the accuracy,
adequacy, or completeness of any information and is not responsible for any errors or omissions or the results obtained from the use of
such information.
TERMS OF USE
This is a copyrighted work and McGraw-Hill Education and its licensors reserve all rights in and to the work. Use of this work is subject
to these terms. Except as permitted under the Copyright Act of 1976 and the right to store and retrieve one copy of the work, you may
not decompile, disassemble, reverse engineer, reproduce, modify, create derivative works based upon, transmit, distribute, disseminate,
sell, publish or sublicense the work or any part of it without McGraw-Hill Education’s prior consent. You may use the work for your own
noncommercial and personal use; any other use of the work is strictly prohibited. Your right to use the work may be terminated if you fail
to comply with these terms.
THE WORK IS PROVIDED “AS IS.” McGRAW-HILL EDUCATION AND ITS LICENSORS MAKE NO GUARANTEES OR
WARRANTIES AS TO THE ACCURACY, ADEQUACY OR COMPLETENESS OF OR RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED FROM
USING THE WORK, INCLUDING ANY INFORMATION THAT CAN BE ACCESSED THROUGH THE WORK VIA
HYPERLINK OR OTHERWISE, AND EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

McGraw-Hill Education and its licensors do not warrant or guarantee that the functions contained in the work will meet your
requirements or that its operation will be uninterrupted or error free. Neither McGraw-Hill Education nor its licensors shall be liable to
you or anyone else for any inaccuracy, error or omission, regardless of cause, in the work or for any damages resulting therefrom.
McGraw-Hill Education has no responsibility for the content of any information accessed through the work. Under no circumstances
shall McGraw-Hill Education and/or its licensors be liable for any indirect, incidental, special, punitive, consequential or similar damages
that result from the use of or inability to use the work, even if any of them has been advised of the possibility of such damages. This
limitation of liability shall apply to any claim or cause whatsoever whether such claim or cause arises in contract, tort or otherwise.


To my wife Jackie,
and our children and grandchildren.


Contents
Preface
Acknowledgments
1 The Engineering Project Lifecycle and Historical Development of Engineering Project
Management Tools and Techniques
1.1 The 1980s
1.1.1 Design for Manufacturing
1.1.2 Reducing Variability and Optimizing the Design
1.1.3 Design for Quality Tools: Six Sigma and Process Capability Cp and Cpk
1.2 The 1990s
1.2.1 Robust Design of the High-Technology Product
1.2.2 Low Costs for New Products
1.2.3 Time to Market
1.2.4 Meeting Expectations and Customer Satisfaction through QFD
1.3 The 2000s and Beyond
1.4 Conclusions
References and Bibliography

Discussion Topics
Problems
2 Product and Project Perspectives and Managing Different Types of Engineering Projects
2.1 The Overall Product Lifecycle Model
2.2 The Role of Technology in Product Development and Obsolescence
2.3 Technology Product Types and the Project Management Models Needed to Develop Them
2.3.1 Types of Products That Can Be Created with New Technology Adoption
2.3.2 Project Management Structures Needed to Support Product Creation
2.4 Creating an Environment for Successful Project Management
2.4.1 Create a Total Quality Culture within New Product Development Projects
2.4.2 Develop Product Focus Organizations within the Company
2.4.3 Emphasize the Team Focus Approach to Project Management
2.4.4 Implement a Phase Review Process for Project Management Control
2.4.5 Key Processes to Enhance the Project Management Process
2.5 Conclusions
References and Bibliography
Discussion Topics
Problems
3 Project Inception: Benchmarking, IP, and VoC
3.1 Benchmarking of Products and Processes
3.1.1 Attributes of Benchmarking Global Technology Companies
3.1.2 Evolution of Customer Expectations


3.1.3 Concerns about Benchmarking
3.2 Intellectual Property Concerns in New Technology Product Inception
3.2.1 Intellectual Property Trends in High-Technology Companies
3.2.2 Patent Law and Issues of Filing a Patent
3.2.3 Intellectual Property Infringement
3.2.4 Summary of Intellectual Property Issues for New Products

3.3 Voice of the Customer
3.3.1 VoC in Design to Market Products
3.3.2 Quality Functions Deployment
3.3.3 VoC Structured Methods in Design to Customer Projects
3.4 Conclusions
References and Bibliography
Discussion Topics
Problem
4 Voice of the Customer Case Study
4.1 Voice of the Customer Methods and Techniques
4.2 Voice of the Customer as Part of the Lean Product Development Tools and Processes
4.3 Preparing for the Voice of the Customer
4.4 Initiating the VoC; Summary of the Key Steps
4.5 Skill Sets Required for the Host IPT Team
4.6 Supplies Needed for the VoC Activity
4.7 Steps in Understanding VoC
4.8 Start of Affinitization When the IPT Team Does the Groupings
4.9 Label the Groupings
4.10 Analyze the Groupings
4.11 Capturing Customer Intents and Additional Project Success Criteria
4.12 What’s Next? Other Ways to Use the VoC
4.13 Lessons Learned from Use of the VoC
4.14 VoC Process Risks
4.15 Benefits from Using the VoC Process
Discussion Topics
Chapter Exercise
Suggested Discussion for Chapter Exercise
5 Engineering Project Justification, Financial Aspects, and Return on Investment
5.1 The Business Plan for New Products and Its Potential Impact on the Company’s Strategy
5.1.1 New Product Opportunities in Technology Companies

5.1.2 Collecting Data for the Business Plan
5.2 Techniques for Evaluating Projects Based on Economic Analysis
5.2.1 Return Factor or Benefit/Cost Ratio Calculations
5.2.2 Payback Period Calculations
5.2.3 Internal Rate of Return (aka Return on Investment)


5.3 Capital Equipment Planning and Acquisition Decision Based on Economic Analysis
5.3.1 Capacity Planning for Capital Equipment
5.3.2 Capacity Planning for Capital Equipment in the Electronics Industry
5.3.3 Issues with Manufacturing Machines ROI Calculations
5.4 Techniques for Increasing Management Confidence in the Economic Analysis
5.5 Conclusions
References and Bibliography
Websites
Discussion Topics
Problems
6 Make or Buy: Subcontracting and Managing the Supply Chain
6.1 The Lean Enterprise Concept and the Supply Chain
6.1.1 Development of Outsourcing
6.1.2 Competency versus Dependency
6.2 The Outsourcing Strategy to Be Considered and the Associated Pitfalls
6.2.1 Operational Issues When Outsourcing at Different Levels of the Product
Realization Process
6.2.2 Types and Levels of Outsourcing
6.3 The Changes to the Product Realization Process and Communications with the Supply
Chain
6.3.1 Supply Chain Development
6.4 The Supplier Selection Process
6.4.1 Criteria for the Supplier Selection Process

6.4.2 Presenting the Subcontracting Plan to Management
6.4.3 Issue to Address Before Signing a Contract with a Supplier
6.4.4 Outsourcing Quality Issues
6.4.5 Legal and Liability Issues in the Instruction to Bidders
6.4.6 Infrastructure to Manage Subcontractors
6.5 Summary and Case Studies of Subcontracting
References and Bibliography
Discussion Topics
Problems
7 Engineering Project Planning and Execution
7.1 Historical Approaches to Engineering Project Planning
7.1.1 Initial Project Planning Steps and Project Statement
7.1.2 Development Plans for Design to Customer Projects
7.1.3 Development Plans for DTM Projects
7.2 Project Requirements Definitions
7.2.1 Task Identification Plans
7.2.2 Project Planning Methodology
7.3 Engineering Project Scheduling Tools


7.3.1 Project Planning Tools and Techniques
7.3.2 PERT Chart Methodology
7.3.3 Steps in Creating and Implementing a PERT Chart
7.3.4 Example of the Planning of a PERT Chart
7.3.5 Determining Slack (Float) Time Extension
7.4 Methods and Techniques for Reducing Project Duration and Cost
7.4.1 Resource Leveling and Allocation
7.4.2 PERT Example 2
7.4.3 Estimating Expected Project Completion Time
7.4.4 Gantt Charts

7.4.5 Plans to Be Completed by the PM Prior to Project Start
7.5 The Causes of Engineering Project Execution Problems and How to Mitigate Project
Delays
7.5.1 Engineering Project Design Phase Delay Factors
7.5.2 Engineering Project Manufacturing Phase Delay Factors
7.6 Techniques for Monitoring Project Expense Progress and Estimating Project Completion
Profile
7.6.1 Earned Value Management System
7.6.2 Project Cost Measurement
7.6.3 Project Variances Extrapolated for Estimates at Completion
7.6.4 Earned Value System Example
7.7 Successful Project Execution and Lessons Learned
References and Bibliography
Discussion Topics
Problems
8 Engineering Project Phases, Control, Communications, Leadership, and Risk Assessment
8.1 The Phase Gate Review Process
8.1.1 Attributes and Metrics of Success for Each Design Phase
8.1.2 New Product Creation for the Global Economy
8.1.3 Phase Gate Design Reviews
8.1.4 Design Review Preparation
8.2 Types of Phase Gate Review Processes
8.2.1 Complex Product Phase Review Process
8.3 Implementing a Phase Gate Process
8.3.1 Changing Traditional Design Communications
8.3.2 Supplier Control and Communications Needs
8.3.3 Phase Review Process Communications Needs
8.4 Project Risk Assessment and Management
8.4.1 Steps in Risk Assessment and Management
8.4.2 Risk Identification and Qualification

8.4.3 Project Risk Analysis
8.4.4 Risk Handling Techniques


8.4.5 Risk Monitoring and Control
8.5 Managing Engineering Project Teams
8.5.1 Team Development Stages
8.5.2 Team Leadership and Interactions with Team Members
8.5.3 Engineering Career Stages
8.5.4 Team Motivation and Compensation Policies
8.5.5 Understanding and Nurturing Team Member Skills
8.6 Resolving Engineering Team Conflict and Managing a Successful Engineering Team
8.6.1 Understanding the Sources of Conflict and How to Mitigate Them
8.6.2 Conflict Resolution Strategies
8.6.3 Conflict Resolution Methodology and Settlement
8.6.4 Managing a Successful Team
8.7 Conclusions
References and Bibliography
Discussion Topics
Problems
9 Project Monitoring and Control Case Study
9.1 Key Project Monitoring and Control Processes
9.2 The Daily Stand-Up Board and Area
9.2.1 Area Design Essentials
9.2.2 Metrics and Status Elements
9.2.3 Setup and Operation
9.2.4 Lessons Learned
9.3 Other Uses for Stand-Up: Supply Chain, Operations, Red Flag, and Risk Register Reviews
9.3.1 Red Flag Reviews
9.3.2 Basic Elements of the Red Flag Review

9.4 Lessons Learned and Chapter Conclusions
Stand-Up Board Exercise
10 Engineering Project Communications
10.1 The Role of the Project Manager
10.2 A Communication Model
10.2.1 Noise
10.2.2 Impedance
10.2.3 Choosing the Right Medium
10.2.4 Using the Communication Model in Planning and Execution
10.3 Distance and Communication
10.4 Collaboration and Concurrent Engineering
10.4.1 Concurrent Engineering
10.4.2 Collaboration across the Value Chain
10.5 Collocated Teams
10.5.1 The Collocation Environment


10.5.2 Partial Collocation
10.6 Dispersed Teams
10.6.1 Dislocation
10.6.2 Time Differences
10.6.3 Language and Cultural Differences
10.6.4 Remote Meetings
10.6.5 Using Time Differences to Your Advantage
10.7 Technology and Communication
10.7.1 Project Websites
10.7.2 Security and Communication
10.7.3 Exchanging Engineering Product Data
10.8 Architecture as a Collaboration Tool
10.8.1 Developing the Architecture

10.8.2 Change Management and Architecture
10.8.3 Organizing around Architecture
10.8.4 Integration Risk
10.9 The Project Communication Plan
10.9.1 Stakeholder Registry and Team Directory
10.9.2 Communication Protocols
10.9.3 Activities and Resources
10.9.4 Stakeholders
References and Bibliography
Discussion Topics
11 Engineering Project and Product Costing
11.1 Project and Product Cost Relationship with Lifecycle Stages
11.1.1 The Start-Up Stage
11.1.2 The Growth Stage
11.1.3 The Maturity Stage
11.1.4 The Final Stage
11.2 New Product Cost Estimating Methodologies
11.2.1 Activity-Based Costing
11.2.2 ABC for Electronic Products
11.2.3 ABC Summary and Variance from Classical Cost Accounting
11.3 New Product Cost Estimating Process
11.3.1 Determination of Costs and Tracking Tools for New Product Development
11.4 Conclusions
References and Bibliography
Discussion Topics
Problem
12 Building and Managing Teams
12.1 Teams versus Groups: What’s the Difference?

12.1.1 When Are Teams Needed?
12.1.2 Differences: The Team Advantage
12.1.3 Selecting and Launching Teams: A Recipe for Success
12.1.4 Team Dynamics: The Four Phases
12.1.5 Roles and Responsibilities
12.2 Managing Events and Activities
12.2.1 Managing Meetings
12.3 Leading People and Managing Performance
12.3.1 Leadership Responsibilities
12.3.2 Motivating Team Members
12.3.3 Team Communications
12.3.4 Managing Conflict
12.4 Our Project Team Leadership Summary
References and Bibliography
Discussion Topics
A ROI Tables
Index


Preface
ngineering project management is becoming more important as technology companies compete
in a worldwide market for customers desiring high-quality and low-cost products. The project
manager (PM) has to be a jack of all trades, a product champion, a great organizer, a leader,
mentor, and motivator of the team; the PM has to be an effective communicator, a salesperson, a
financial analyst, and much more. The PM today must be an expert in technology, quality, cost,
teamwork, supply chains, and market dynamics. The PM must always balance priorities and make
good decisions regarding resource allocation, schedule variability, cost, technology adoption, and
risk management.
This book attempts to augment the basic project-management principles of scheduling, tracking,
and control of projects with answering many of the questions posed by the role of technology in new

product creation. Why do some companies thrive in the technology arena, while others start well but
cannot maintain the momentum? Why is it so difficult for companies to enter some markets? What are
the options available to companies for setting new product price and performance? What types of
organizational structures and methods are needed to successfully manage technical projects? How can
company resources and the supply chain be leveraged?
This book attempts to answer these questions by examining product lifecycles, project
management types, and where they should be used as well as tools and techniques of quality cost and
marketplace. Economic analysis of the project potential and how to best leverage internal resources
versus supply chains, as well as risk and rewards of project decisions, are also examined. The book
illustrates these principles with examples of current technology-company policies, some drawn from
the headlines and some from my own experience. I have an extensive history of managing many
development projects, consulting to technology companies, and researching the tools and techniques
of new product creation. In addition, long conversations and meetings with many of the creators of
project management tools, CEOs, and members of the boards of directors of companies, and several
expert-witness litigation cases, have given me a unique perspective of the challenges and concerns of
global technology companies.
The book also aims to help the PM to become more successful, using the technical, organizational,
financial, leadership, and communications skills covered in this book. Topics presented deal with the
historical development of the tools and techniques of project management through the last 40 years
and how to successfully use these tools for effectively managing technical projects. The PM can
understand the best use of the management structures explained in this book, depending on the
lifecycle of the product. The use of financial analysis and tools can effectively augment the PM’s
plans and decisions. Understanding the use of the global supply chain, its opportunities and risks, can
also help the PM in project and product cost formulation and schedule realization as well as
advocating decisions to management. The effective use of scheduling tools to plan, track, and control
projects is important for the PM in maintaining the product creation schedule and evaluating and
managing its risks. The effective communications skills, teamwork, and leadership covered in this
book will help the PM navigate successfully through these important but nontechnical issues.

E

About the Book Organization


This book is intended to introduce newly minted as well as experienced project managers in
technology companies to many of the issues regarding the use of project-management tools and
techniques and how to effectively apply them for new product creation. It is based on my experience
in researching, practicing, consulting on, and teaching project management for the last 40 years.
The approach I use in this book is to start with the historical development of project management
tools and then go on to what are the proper conditions for using these tools, why they were created,
and how they became widely adopted. The following chapters deal with the step-by-step elements of
technology product realization, starting with the technology product lifecycle and the management
organization best suited for each phase of the cycle. Technology management from research to
advanced development to adoption in new products is explained with examples of organizational
structure and timelines needed. Other chapters discuss the marketing aspects of customer expectations
and finding the best opportunity for new product success, with tools and examples of using them
effectively.
Once the market opportunity for the new product is realized, the hard work of the PM begins with
the business plan and economic analysis for the project. Issues of how to leverage internal resources
and the supply chain and how to select suppliers are presented. This is followed by the methodology
to organize and plan the development project, how to control projects using phases and milestones,
tracking a project’s progress, and reporting to management. In addition, the value and use of risk
management to estimate and mitigate risk are illustrated with the definitions of methods used and case
studies from industry.
The final chapters of the book deal with important skill development for the PM, including
communications, leadership, and teamwork. I asked experienced professionals who deal with these
issues to help me by co-authoring these chapters in order to share their own experiences and insight.
I hope this book will be of value to the neophyte as well as the experienced project managers in
technology companies, in particular, in the small- to medium-sized companies that do not have the
support staff and the resources necessary to have a well-organized project-management process. It is

beneficial to try out some of the principles and tools of project management outlined in this book and
meld them into the company culture. The experiences documented here should be helpful to encourage
many companies to venture out and develop new world-class products that can make them grow and
prosper for the future.
Sammy G. Shina, Ph.D., P.E.


Acknowledgments
he principles of engineering project management discussed in this book have been learned,
collected, and practiced through my almost 50 years in industry and academia. After graduation
from MIT, I worked in the high-technology industry for 22 years, followed by now 26 years on
the faculty of the University of Massachusetts Lowell. At the university, I have worked as a teacher,
then as a researcher and a consultant to different companies, increasing my personal knowledge and
experience in the fields of engineering project management, design, manufacturing, and quality.
I am indebted to several organizations for supporting and encouraging me during the lengthy time
it took to collect my materials, write the chapters, and edit the book—notably the University of
Massachusetts Lowell, for its continuing support for my courses, programs, and certificates,
especially the chairman of the Department of Mechanical Engineering, John McKelliget, and the ME
faculty. They supported me in my research and work on developing the book materials and approved
my plans for academic programs and certificates and encouraged me to organize, write, and edit this
book.
In addition, I want to give my thanks to Steve Chapman, publisher, and Michael McCabe, senior
editor, at McGraw-Hill. Steve was my editor for my previous four books on green design, Six Sigma,
and concurrent engineering. Michael was my editor for this book. Mike’s humor, encouragement, and
good spirit guided me through this book, and for that I am very grateful. I also wish to extend my
gratitude to Sheena Uprety of Cenveo Publisher Services for her prompt and efficient editing and
production of this book. In addition, I want to thank Marc Wakim of UML for proofing and editing of
the book; and Sharon Sambursky of SpectraLink Corporation, who lectured to my classes on the
topics of leadership and teamwork; and Srini Swaroop of Raytheon Corporation for his lectures to my
classes on risk management. I also want to thank the men who contributed chapters to this book—

Robert Campbell, Ralph Jordan, and David Nolte—and who worked together with me on planning
and organizing the topics. Each contributor brought with him his own deep experience and skill in his
specialty. I also want to thank the many family members who hosted me through the long period of
writing the book, including Brenda Shina of St. John’s Wood, London, and Nancy Shina Aguirre of
Ogden, Utah.
Many colleagues provided review and thoughtful criticism. In particular, I wish to thank Travis
Done, Jack Burnham, and Dick Ugolini of United Technologies Aerospace Systems. I also thank Tom
Bergeron, president of ISR Systems, United Technologies Aerospace Systems, for his support and
encouragement and for sharing legacy Goodrich/United Technologies approaches to program
management.
Finally, many thanks to my family for emotional support during the writing, editing, and
production of the book, including my wife Jackie, who edited the book with her superb English, our
children—Mike, Gail, Nancy, and Jon—and our grandchildren, who brought me great joy between the
many days of writing and editing. I also wish to thank the many students who have attended my
classes in engineering project management over many years and peppered me with questions and
challenges to explain the many topics, which cleared and refocused my mind. I wish them best
success in implementing engineering project management principles and methods in their companies.

T


Contributor Biographies
David A. Nolte (Chaps. 4 and 9) is a manager with ISR Systems, United Technologies Aerospace
Systems, Westford, Massachusetts, where he supports the development and evolution of program
management, ACE, and continuous improvement and lean product development culture. Mr. Nolte has
over 25 years of progressive management and engineering experience in defense industries,
government agencies, and nonprofit organizations. His experience ranges from field and test
engineering to program management.
Robert J. Campbell, Jr. (Chap. 10), is a mechanical engineer with a love for the technical discipline
of precision machine design and the interpersonal discipline of collaborative development. His

father, Robert Sr., taught him that a good engineer does not get lost in his circuit or mechanism, but
instead maintains sight of the whole. In the years since, Mr. Campbell has been fortunate to work with
and learn from other wise engineers and agile organizations that put this belief into daily practice. As
a consulting engineer, he had to adapt those practices to development teams that spanned
organizations and continents. Now, through his website engineerunbound.com, he helps engineers and
organizations to not only overcome the challenges posed by distributed development and remote
collaboration, but to achieve competitive advantage. Mr. Campbell is a licensed professional
engineer, with a masters of management science from the University of Massachusetts Lowell and a
BS in mechanical engineering from Virginia Tech. With several peers, he holds patents for precision
optical and mechanical systems and devices.
Ralph E. Jordan (Chap. 12) is the former director of Massachusetts’ Executive Office of Labor and
Workforce Development’s Office of Professional Development. Presently, he is a visiting lecturer
within the University of Massachusetts Lowell’s Manning School of Business, where he lectures on
professional communications, managing teams and projects, and leadership processes. While
relatively new to teaching at the undergraduate level, Mr. Jordan has a long history in training and
leading teams in total quality management, business process reengineering, and lean Six Sigma–type
initiatives within the high-tech and communications industries. He has held high-level management
positions in several high-tech companies. Mr. Jordan spent several years serving Massachusetts as
the undersecretary of economic affairs. He has led high-tech business initiatives in the Republic of
Korea, Kuwait, and the Republic of Slovenia.


CHAPTER 1
The Engineering Project Lifecycle and Historical Development
of Engineering Project Management Tools and Techniques
n this chapter, the historical perspective for the genesis of modern engineering project
management for high-technology companies will be reviewed. Emphasis will be placed on the
trends of each successive generation, starting with the 1980s and on to the new century. The trends
and tools of each decade will be outlined as well as the resulting shifts in total engineering project
management experiences. The resulting impact on the organizational structure of modern hightechnology companies, on managers, engineers, research and development, and the introduction of

highly specialized tools, will be examined. The challenges to the project manager in terms of
completing the project on time and within budget, while having the new product meet all design
specifications with the lowest manufacturing cost and quality, will be illustrated.
Engineering project management for the global high-technology industry began to be organized in
the last 50 years with the advent of the 1970s, as the Japanese technology industry competition began
to make a major impact on global U.S. companies’ competitive position. Due in part to the oil crisis
of the 1970s, U.S. consumers were looking for more energy-efficient smaller cars, and in the process,
were pleased to discover the higher-quality and customer-friendly Japanese cars, as compared with
their American counterparts. This created a thirst in American companies for all things Japanese and
began the focus on improving the new product development cycle and engineering project
management. New concepts were adopted widely and began to take effect, including the following:

I

• Just-in-time (JIT) to reduce inventories and shorten manufacturing cycle time
• Total quality management (TQM) to bring together a set of tools focused on process
improvements for the total enterprise
• Quality circles to involve production associates in improving the manufacturing process and
their duties and responsibilities
• Partnering with Japanese companies, such as the GM/Toyota partnership, to better understand
their manufacturing techniques for auto manufacturing plants in California
• The Taguchi method, which streamlined the difficult topic of design of experiments (DoE) and
took it from the preview of advanced-degreed statisticians into the hands of project and
design engineers
• Quality function deployment (QFD), which focused on better defining new product
specifications using customers’ input and competitive analysis (QFD will be further discussed
in Chap. 3 in this book)
Several American homegrown design, quality, and cost improvement tools also emerged to meet
the Japanese industry challenge. They include the following tools that were especially aimed at the
project development cycle:

• Design for manufacturing/assembly (DFM/DFA) to reduce product manufacturing cost


• Concurrent/collaborative engineering (CE) to focus on design project collaboration among the
different parts of the organization and shortening the new product development cycle
• Six Sigma (6σ) to merge the quality issues of design and manufacturing
These tools and techniques were developed to augment the Japanese-developed tools for
improving new product development quality and reducing cost. They focused on distinctly American
cultural and managerial nuances, being quite different from their Japanese counterparts.
A historical listing of these changing trends is summarized in Table 1.1. The chronology of the
effect of these trends will be examined for each decade as follows.

TABLE 1.1 Changing Historical Trends for Engineering Project Management

1.1 The 1980s
During this decade, companies were focused on increasing profits by matching their global
competitors in reducing the cost of new products while at the same time speeding up their
development. In addition, companies were intent on incorporating new technology into their products
as fast as possible and winning the race for their customers’ thirst for state-of-the-art product
performance. This resulted in the need for quickly introducing successive new products, with
increased technology adoption.
Innovative engineering project management was needed to adopt these new tools for reducing
cost, increasing quality, and shortening development time. The specific tools and techniques of choice
were as follows (to be explained later):
• DFM tools: Boothroyd-Dewhurst Incorporated (BDI) and GE/Hitachi (GE/Hit)
methodologies
• Variability reduction and design optimizing tools: classical DoE and the Taguchi method
• Design for quality tools: 6σ and process capability based on Cp and Cpk methodologies

1.1.1 Design for Manufacturing

DFM concepts were used for inputting feedback from the manufacturing part of the organization into
the design cycle. This would lead to reducing the number of parts in new products, encouraging the


reuse of older parts and reducing manufacturing cost. The DFM analysis should be performed early in
the design cycle so that recommendations could be fully implemented in new products. Two
techniques predominated:
1. The Boothroyd-Dewhurst Incorporated (BDI) is a system for rating parts in an assembly by
assigning a number to each part on the basis of part geometry. The numbers resulted in
assembly-time estimates and were then added up to determine total assembly time. There are
two numbering systems, one for the handling and another for insertion of parts. The resultant
estimated assembly time is compared with an ideal design time and a figure of merit (design
efficiency) is determined. The ideal design time is based on parts geometries that are
symmetrical and easy to insert. The assembly can then be redesigned, using three simple
guidelines to help reduce the number of parts and assembly time. The process is continued
until the maximum design efficiency is achieved.
The BDI methodology encourages the ease of assembly by focusing on parts’ geometry to
make the parts more symmetrical (or alternatively exaggerating asymmetry) and for easier part
orientation for subsequent handling by manual or automatic means. In addition, it encourages
the proper aligning of parts for ease of insertion into the assembly through geometry or part
features. The same principles could be used for other parts or materials. For example, lower
cost could be obtained by reducing the number of hole diameters in sheet-metal assembly or
moving the parting lines in the case of plastic parts mold design.
The BDI methodology grew out of universal part-numbering systems used to identify part
geometry by a specialized numbering code obtained from tables. A successful BDI analysis
results in the reduction of the number of parts and time to assemble these parts. This is
expressed through a higher design efficiency of the assembly as compared with an ideal
assembly of symmetrical and easy to join parts.
2. The GE/Hit method was developed jointly by the two companies. The GE/Hit method focuses
on reducing the number of assembly motions and encouraging design engineers to have parts

that assemble together through downward motions, called T-downs. The GE/Hit method is a
natural growth of industrial engineering systems that measured assembly times through time
and motion studies on the manufacturing floor. It discourages side or upward-assembly
motions, tight fits, and micro-positioning as well as complex joining or assembly processes.
These non-downward motions are given penalty points and then added up to produce a total
estimated assembly time. This total time is compared to an ideal number of downward
motions or T-downs. The ratio of the two numbers is the design efficiency.
There are no specific guidelines for increasing the efficiency number for the GE/Hit method. It is
adaptable to comparing competing designs or encouraging the design team to explore ideas to
increase the design efficiency. The GE/Hit method was not adopted as widely as the BDI
methodology, given that it does not encourage the reduction of parts, or provide specific instructions
to increase the design efficiency. Table 1.2 is a comparison of the two design efficiency measurement
systems.


TABLE 1.2 Comparison of DFM Design Efficiency Techniques

Both techniques above use symbolic or numerical methods to label individual parts based on
previous techniques for part-number classifications (BDI) or time and motion assembly analysis
(GE/Hit). They allocate penalty points to each part that was not ideal (either by geometry or assembly
motion). By adding all of the parts in an assembly, a design efficiency (or assembly efficiency) score
is generated that compares the assembly design to one with ideal parts or down motions. The goal is
to have the project manager (PM) set a desired efficiency number, which is significantly higher than
the company’s current product portfolio as well as benchmarking the competition’s design efficiency.
In summary, these DFM/DFA methodologies provided the following process for reducing cost:
• Evaluate new or alternate designs or assemblies, including competitors’ designs.
• Use assembly motions or part geometries to generate a design efficiency number as compared
with an ideal or alternate design.
• Improve the design efficiency by targeting an efficiency goal. A numerical goal or a
percentage improvement can be set based on the design efficiency of current products or the

competition’s designs.
• A redesign is encouraged if the new design does not meet the design efficiency goals.
Many comparisons have been made of the two methods (BDI, GE/Hit), as well as methods-time
measurement (MTM) studies, to calculate the design efficiency and the total assembly time for global
products. Different teams from University of Massachusetts Lowell graduate students compared the
same design using the same methodology (BDI or GE/Hit). Their design-efficiency and assembly-time
estimates were well within 20 percent among the different teams using the same method. When the
teams compared the same assemblies by using alternative methods (BDI or GE/Hit), the differences
in estimating the design efficiency were quite large. The difference narrowed to within 20 percent
when the ideal number of parts (as prescribed by the BDI method) was reached. This indicates that a
crucial step is needed for the GE/Hit method to reduce the number of parts before conducting the
efficiency analysis.
The results of successfully implementing DFM/DFA were important reductions in manufacturing
cost. This was partially offset by unintended consequences as well as posing some interesting
dilemmas of DFM:
• The need for early manufacturing input (especially when using the supply chain) required


•
•

•
•
•
•
•

propriety methodology to shield new products information from the competition.
The emphasis on fewer parts and changing their geometry resulted in part integration and more
complex but fewer parts.

The financial relationship of the design project with the supply chain was altered. The tooling
cost of all parts might be the same, but the profile is changed: more tooling costs for some
parts, but lower number of different parts.
While assembly time was reduced, it may have resulted in increased cost of fabricating the
individual complex parts as well as their tooling costs.
Disassembly of new products became more difficult as the parts became more complex and
joined mostly by nonscrew fastening methods such as snap fits.
Special tools were required for repairs and/or disassembly of complex parts that are snap fits.
Cost of repair and replacement of complex parts became more expensive.
Spare parts inventory and warehouse management were impacted considering the higher cost
of these complex parts.

A typical DFM/DFA design optimization process is shown in Fig. 1.1, the mounting of a printed
circuit board (PCB) in a product. It shows the new design (the one to the right of the figure) as having
a better design efficiency through the reduction of the number of parts by eliminating spacers, screws,
and nuts. The new parts are fewer in numbers but geometrically complex and more expensive than the
parts they replaced.


FIGURE 1.1 PCB mounting design optimization.

The need for manufacturing input early into the design cycle, especially when the part originated
in the supply chain, resulted in the need for early supplier involvement (ESI). ESI creates an
additional layer of security and intellectual property concerns for new products. Techniques had to be
developed to ensure new product propriety while the suppliers bid on the product early in the design
cycle.
Production capability needs could influence DFM/DFA input in terms of handling product size
and aspect ratio, especially in the PCB panel fabrication process. The PCB panels are set up in
standardized sizes, and DFM input should indicate the desired PCB geometry in the product.
Maintaining the ratio of the product PCBs to the panel geometry will result in substantial set-up and

materials cost reduction for the PCB fabrications process.
A typical progression of reducing the number of parts as well as assembly time per product is
shown for popular printers in the 1980s in Fig. 1.2. The data is based on analysis performed by
Hewlett Packard (HP). It shows that the IBM Proprinter, which was designed with DFM emphasis,
far outperformed its competitors in numbers of parts and assembly time. Each successive generation
of printer products did manage to reduce both parts and assembly time resulting in lower costs.


FIGURE 1.2 Printer competitive benchmarks in the 1980s: (IBM Proprinter; OKI data 182; Epson MX80; HP Think Jet; and HP
Quiet Jet).

1.1.2 Reducing Variability and Optimizing the Design
A popular technique to reduce costs by optimizing the design was the use of DoE techniques. DoE is
a tool to vary the design outcome or reduce the variability of the individual parts of the product. DoE
resolves design problems through fast design optimization using sample product production without
using complex numerical and/or simulation techniques. Before the wide adoption of DoE in the
1980s, the science was the privy of statisticians with advanced degrees. Many companies hired
statisticians with a master’s degree or Ph.D. to help educate their engineering and product design
staff. However, these new employees did not have the product and the process understanding to be
effective beyond teaching the DoE concepts to engineers and helping them with interpreting the
resulting analysis. Eventually, they had to be eased out of their positions once they completed tutoring
their training programs.
DoE can be used to gain more information about the design by having the project teams decide on
the relevant factors that influence a design and by assigning different values to each factor. DoE can
help discover how to manipulate a design by understanding the effect of each factor and whether the
design outcome or the variability can be improved, as shown in Fig. 1.3.

FIGURE 1.3 Objective of a typical DoE with four factors.

The Taguchi method, which became popular in the 1980s, is a technique to simplify the DoE

analysis. Developed by Genichi Taguchi of the Nippon Telephone Company, this was a
simplification of the classical DoE process through a step-by-step methodology and the use of special
tools and techniques to render the design and analysis much more straightforward. It was advocated
by Don Clausing, a manager at Xerox who translated Taguchi’s books and showed how the Xerox
copier design could be optimized using DoE techniques. The major contributions of Taguchi to
simplify DoE were as follows:
1. Visualizing the DoE. Taguchi introduced the visual tools of linear graphs and triangular tables
to clarify the experiment design stage and to show the relationship between factors and their
interactions.
2. Any interaction that was greater than a two-way interaction was considered to be small,
therefore it could be ignored. Another factor can thus be assigned to the interaction column,
ignoring the confounding (explained below) of the factor with the interaction. That allowed
for the following:
• Reducing the number of experiments based on the number of factors. For example, a fivefactor experiment at two levels would require 25 or 32 experiments, and is called full
factorial. The five-factor DoE can be performed in 16 experiments by ignoring four- and
three-way interactions and assigning the fifth factor to the four-way interaction column. This
is called a “half fraction factorial.”
• Three factors at three levels would require 33 or 27 full factorial experiments. If all
interactions are ignored, then up to four factors could be analyzed in a 23 = 9 experiments
DoE. The nine experiments are called “screening or saturated design,” since all of the
columns are being assigned to factors.
• Seven factors at two levels can be performed in a full factorial 27 or 128 experiments. By
assuming that all interactions (two and three way) are small and not statistically significant,
DoE analysis can be performed using only eight saturated design experiments.
• If interactions are assumed to be not significant, then factors can be assigned to the
interaction columns in a half-fraction or saturated design DoE. If the assumption is
incorrect, and interactions are indeed significant as found by subsequent statistical analysis,
then they could adversely interfere with the analysis of the DoE and the computed

contribution of each factor. This is called “confounding” of the factor with the interactions.
It can be resolved by running more experiments such as the remaining half fraction or the
full set of full factorial experiments.
In strategically choosing the eight experiments with seven factors at two levels, the effect of each
factor could be solved with eight equations using a simultaneous equations solution or Cramer’s rule.
This screening or saturated design of eight experiments can be seen in Fig. 1.4. Instead of using 128
experiments, full factorial design to study seven factors, only eight experiments (shown as filled in
squares) are needed for analysis of how each factor effects the design, assuming all interactions are
nonsignificant.