Enhancing competitive advantage through a strategic product portfolio and design for variety in weather radar products
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2454-2156.IntJSciRep20241992Keywords:
DEMATEL, Design for variety, Goal programming, Quality function deployment, ModularityAbstract
Background: In today's competitive industrial landscape, companies are focusing on developing diverse product portfolios to maintain a competitive edge. This trend has led to the adoption of product portfolio strategies aimed at enhancing customer satisfaction and optimizing resource utilization.
Methods: This study introduces a model to enhance the design of weather radar products by integrating DEMATEL and Goal Programming (GP). The methodology involves identifying key indicators of variety in weather radar design, assessing component interdependencies, and determining component weightage for optimal functionality and cost-effectiveness.
Results: The DEMATEL and GP approach proved effective in optimizing the product family structure for weather radar systems. Key results include the identification and prioritization of variety indicators, evaluation of component interdependencies, and determination of component weightage, resulting in a more precise and operational design.
Conclusions: The proposed model for weather radar variety enhances customer satisfaction, meets market demands, and addresses the challenges of dynamic customer needs. This methodology offers valuable insights into managing product variety and complexity, enabling designers to quickly adapt to evolving customer requirements.
Metrics
References
Liu E, Hsiao SW. ANP-GP approach for product variety design. Int J Advan Manufact Technol. 2006;29:216-25.
Galizia FG, ElMaraghy H, Bortolini M, Mora C. Product platforms design, selection and customisation in high-variety manufacturing. Int J Product Res. 2020;58(3):893-911.
Saaty TL. Fundamentals of the analytic network process. InProceedings of the 5th international symposium on the analytic hierarchy process. 1999;12(14).
Tamura H, Akazawa K. Structural modeling and systems analysis of uneasy factors for realizing safe, secure and reliable society. J Telecommuni Informat Technol. 2005(3):64-72.
ElMaraghy H, Schuh G, ElMaraghy W, Piller F, Schönsleben P, Tseng M, et al. Product variety management. Cirp Annals. 2013;62(2):629-52.
Kipp T, Krause D. Design for variety–efficient support for design engineers. InDS 48: Proceedings Design 2008, the 10th international design conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia. 2008:425-432.
Hanna M, Schwede LN, Krause D. Model-based consistency for design for variety and modularization. InDS 96: The 20th International DSM Conference. 2018:239-248.
Baylis K, Zhang G, McAdams DA. Product family platform selection using a Pareto front of maximum commonality and strategic modularity. Res Engin Desi. 2018;29:547-63.
Hsiao SW, Ko YC, Lo CH, Chen SH. An ISM, DEI, and ANP based approach for product family development. Advan Engin Informat. 2013;27(1):131-48.
Küchenhof J, Tabel C, Krause D. Assessing the influence of generational variety on product family structures. Procedia CIRP. 2020;91:796-801.
Martin MV, Ishii K. Design for variety: developing standardized and modularized product platform architectures. Res Engin Des. 2002;13:213-35.
Zha XF, Sriram RD. Platform-based product design and development: A knowledge-intensive support approach. Knowledge-Based Syst. 2006;19(7):524-43.