Engineering change decision analysis system and methodology

• US 6,871,182 B1
• Filed: 08/18/2000
• Issued: 03/22/2005
• Est. Priority Date: 11/10/1999
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Ford Motor Company
• Original Assignee: Ford Motor Company
• Inventors: Torolski, Michael Anthony, Portalatin, Gilbert, Winnard, Nancy Anne, Liposky, Lawrence Joseph, Fike, Barbara G., Winnard, David Edward, Bay, Janine Marie
• Primary Examiner(s): Hafiz, Tariq R.
• Assistant Examiner(s): BOSWELL, BETH V
• Application Number:
  US09/641,666
• Time in Patent Office: 1,677 Days
• Field of Search: 705/1, 705/7, 705/10
• US Class Current: 705/7.37
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06 Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06375 Prediction of business process outcome or impact based on a proposed change
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06395 Quality analysis or management
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/10 Office automation; Time management

Abstract

A system and method of operating a computer to perform risk and decision analysis of an engineering design change in a product are provided. The method includes the steps of displaying a list of change drivers that are causing the engineering design changes and receiving a selection of a change driver from a user, displaying a set of questions soliciting general cost information associated with the engineering design change, and displaying a set of questions soliciting change driver-specific information associated with the selected change driver. The method then receives answers to the set of general cost questions from the user, and also receives answers to the set of change driver-specific questions from the user. The method then computes an expected value associated with the engineering design change using the answers saved in memory, a value associated with not implementing the engineering design change using the change driver-specific answers saved in memory, and then compares the computer expected value with the value from not making the change to generate a recommendation of whether the engineering design change should be implemented in response to the comparison.

Claims

1. A method of operating a computer to perform an engineering change decision analysis of an engineering design change in a product, comprising:

displaying a list of change drivers that is are driving the engineering design change and receiving a selection of a change driver from a user;

displaying a first set of questions soliciting general cost information associated with the engineering design change, the first set of questions including (i) a highest, best, and lowest warranty variance estimate and probability for warranting the product manufactured with the engineering design change, and (ii) a highest, best, and lowest warranty variance estimate and probability associated with the product manufactured without product verification testing;

receiving answers to the first set of questions;

displaying a second set of questions soliciting change driver-specific information associated with the selected change driver, and receiving answers thereto;

computing with a computer a cost associated with the engineering design change using the answers to the first set of questions wherein computing the cost includes (i) computing a cost variance associated with warranty of the product manufactured with the engineering design change with and without product verification testing, (ii) computing a cost variance associated with producing the product manufactured with the engineering design change, the production cost variance including tooling and assembly costs, and (iii) summing the warranty cost variance with the production cost;

computing a value associated with not implementing the engineering design change using the change driver-specific answers; and

comparing the computed costs and value and generating a recommendation of whether the engineering design change should be implemented in response to the comparison.

2. The method, as set forth in claim 1, wherein displaying a set of general cost questions and receiving answers thereto comprise displaying a question requesting for highest, best, and lowest assembly cost variance estimates for manufacturing the product with the engineering design change, and respective probabilities, and receiving answers thereto.

3. The method, as set forth in claim 1, wherein displaying a set of general cost questions and receiving answers thereto comprise displaying a question requesting for highest, best, and lowest tooling cost variance estimates for manufacturing the product with the engineering design change, and respective probabilities, and receiving answers thereto.

4. The method, as set forth in claim 1, wherein displaying a set of general cost questions and receiving answers thereto comprise displaying a question requesting for highest, best, and lowest incremental piece cost variance estimates for manufacturing the product with the engineering design change, and respective probabilities, and receiving answers thereto.

5. The method, as set forth in claim 1, wherein displaying a list of change drivers comprises displaying a list including management directed, customer satisfaction, quality, cost, feasibility, and missed objective change drivers.

6. The method, as set forth in claim 1, wherein displaying a set of questions soliciting change driver-specific information comprises displaying a question requesting whether a required condition will be met by implementing a late engineering design change.

7. The method, as set forth in claim 1, wherein displaying a set of questions soliciting change driver-specific information comprises displaying a question requesting highest, best, and lowest warranty variance estimates for work on the product without the engineering design change.

8. The method, as set forth in claim 1, wherein displaying a set of questions soliciting change driver-specific information comprises displaying a question requesting a percentage of customers who purchase the product despite the lack of implementing the engineering design change.

9. A computer-implemented engineering change decision analysis system for analyzing an engineering design change in a product, comprising:

a graphical user interface operating on a computer to receive input comprising;

(i) selection of a change driver that is driving the engineering design change,

(ii) general cost information associated with the engineering design change, including (a) the highest, best and lowest warranty variance estimates and probability for warranting the product manufactured with the engineering design change, and (b) a highest, best and lowest warranty variance estimate and probability associated with the product manufactured without product verification testing and

(iii) change driver-specific information associated with the selected change driver; and

an analysis logic program operating the computer configured to;

(i) compute a cost associated with the engineering design change using the general cost information wherein computing the cost includes (a) computing a cost variance associated with warranty of the product manufactured with the engineering design chance and without product verification testing, (b) computing a cost variance associated with producing the product manufactured with the engineering design change, the production cost including tooling and assembly costs, and (c) summing the warranty cost variance with the production cost,

(ii) compute a value associated with not implementing the engineering design change using the change driver-specific information, and

(iii) compare the computer cost and value and generate a recommendation of whether the engineering design change should be implemented in response to the comparison.

10. The system, as set forth in claim 9, wherein the graphical user interface operable to receive an identification of specific data in the general cost information or the change driver-specific information to vary, and the analysis logic program operating the computer to vary the specific data, and compare the computer cost and value and generating an output in response to varying the specific data.

11. The system, as set forth in claim 9, wherein the graphical user interface is operable to receive general cost information comprising highest, best, and lowest assembly cost variance estimates for manufacturing the product with the engineering design change, and respective probabilities.

12. The system, as set forth in claim 9, wherein the graphical user interface is operable to receive general cost information comprising highest, best, and lowest tooling cost variance estimates for manufacturing the product with the engineering design change, and respective probabilities.

13. The system, as set forth in claim 9, wherein the graphical user interface is operable to receive general cost information comprising highest, best, and lowest incremental piece cost variance estimates for manufacturing the product with the engineering design change, and respective probabilities.

14. The system, as set forth in claim 9, wherein the graphical user interface is operable to receive the selection of the change driver comprising a selection from among management directed, customer satisfaction, quality, cost, feasibility, and missed objective change drivers.

15. The system, as set forth in claim 9, wherein the graphical user interface is operable to receive change driver-specific information comprising an indication of whether a required condition will be met by implementing a late engineering design change, and wherein the analysis logic program generating a recommendation of not implementing the engineering design change in response to the indication that the required condition will not be met.

16. The system, as set forth in claim 9, wherein the graphical user interface is operable to receive change driver-specific information comprising highest, best, and lowest warranty variance estimates for work on the product without the engineering design change.

17. The system, as set forth in claim 9, wherein the graphical user interface is operable to receive change driver-specific information comprising a percentage for customers who purchase the product despite the lack of implementing the engineering design change.

18. The system, as set forth in claim 9, wherein the graphical user interface is operable to receive change driver-specific information comprising a probability for addressing feasibility issues by changing assembly process, and by adding manpower and assembly time, instead of implementing the engineering design change.