Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCardin, Michel-Alexandre
dc.contributor.authorKolfschoten, Gwendolyn L.
dc.contributor.authorFrey, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorde Neufville, Richard L
dc.contributor.authorDe Weck, Olivier L
dc.contributor.authorGeltner, David M
dc.date.accessioned2016-12-16T18:03:26Z
dc.date.available2016-12-16T18:03:26Z
dc.date.issued2012-10
dc.date.submitted2011-10
dc.identifier.issn0934-9839
dc.identifier.issn1435-6066
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/105851
dc.description.abstractThe design of engineering systems like airports, communication infrastructures, and real estate projects today is growing in complexity. Designers need to consider socio-technical uncertainties, intricacies, and processes in the long-term strategic deployment and operations of these systems. Flexibility in engineering design provides ways to deal with this complexity. It enables engineering systems to change in the face of uncertainty to reduce impacts from downside scenarios (e.g., unfavorable market conditions) while capitalizing on upside opportunities (e.g., new technology). Many case studies have shown that flexibility can improve anticipated lifecycle performance (e.g., expected economic value) compared to current design and evaluation approaches. It is a difficult process requiring guidance and must be done at an early conceptual stage. The literature offers little guidance on procedures helping designers do this systematically in a collaborative context. This study investigated the effects of two educational training procedures on flexibility (current vs. explicit) and two ideation procedures (free undirected brainstorming vs. prompting) to guide this process and improve anticipated lifecycle performance. Controlled experiments were conducted with ninety participants working on a simplified engineering systems design problem. Results suggest that a prompting mechanism for flexibility can help generate more flexible design concepts than free undirected brainstorming. These concepts can improve performance significantly (by up to 36 %) compared to a benchmark design—even though users did not expect improved quality of results. Explicit training on flexibility can improve user satisfaction with the process, results, and results quality in comparison with current engineering and design training on flexibility. These findings give insights into the crafting and application of simple, intuitive, and efficient procedures to improve lifecycle performance by means of flexibility and performance that may be left aside with existing design approaches. The experimental results are promising toward further evaluation in a real-world setting.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipNational University of Singapore (Faculty Research Committee via MOE AcRF Tier 1 grant WBS R-266-000-061-133)en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Engineering Systems Divisionen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Systems Design and Management Programen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Center for Real Estateen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipMitre Corporationen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canadaen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipFonds québécois de la recherche sur la société et la cultureen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipMIT-Portugal Programen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipSUTD-MIT International Design Centre (IDC)en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipCambridge-MIT Instituteen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipFondation Desjardinsen_US
dc.publisherSpringer Londonen_US
dc.relation.isversionofhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00163-012-0145-xen_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alikeen_US
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/license/by-nc-sa/4.0/en_US
dc.sourceSpringer Londonen_US
dc.titleEmpirical evaluation of procedures to generate flexibility in engineering systems and improve lifecycle performanceen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.citationCardin, Michel-Alexandre, Gwendolyn L. Kolfschoten, Daniel D. Frey, Richard de Neufville, Olivier L. de Weck, and David M. Geltner. “Empirical Evaluation of Procedures to Generate Flexibility in Engineering Systems and Improve Lifecycle Performance.” Research in Engineering Design 24, no. 3 (October 13, 2012): 277–295.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Aeronautics and Astronauticsen_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Mechanical Engineeringen_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planningen_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Engineering Systems Divisionen_US
dc.contributor.mitauthorFrey, Daniel
dc.contributor.mitauthorde Neufville, Richard L
dc.contributor.mitauthorDe Weck, Olivier L
dc.contributor.mitauthorGeltner, David M
dc.relation.journalResearch in Engineering Designen_US
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's final manuscripten_US
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticleen_US
eprint.statushttp://purl.org/eprint/status/PeerRevieweden_US
dc.date.updated2016-08-18T15:20:52Z
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderSpringer-Verlag London
dspace.orderedauthorsCardin, Michel-Alexandre; Kolfschoten, Gwendolyn L.; Frey, Daniel D.; de Neufville, Richard; de Weck, Olivier L.; Geltner, David M.en_US
dspace.embargo.termsNen
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-9886-7512
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-6677-383X
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1024-7555
mit.licenseOPEN_ACCESS_POLICYen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record