Abstract:Shorteningthe length of time it takes to complete the product design chain (PDC) is anecessity in maintaining a competitive advantage. This study proposes to applythe thinking process (TP) approach to deal with three types of products: newproducts, upgraded products, and customized products. Three integration modes:series, parallel, and feedback for application in the PDC to find and to solveproblems are discussed in depth in this paper. This research study shows thatthe TP is a systematic approach to identifying the core problems, which may beutilized for product improvement.

Keywords:product design chain, thinking process

1.Introduction

While facing intensive global competition,rapid technological change, and the shifting patterns of world markets, a firm isexpected to maintain a competitive advantage. Thus, shortening the duration ofthe product design chain (PDC) is a necessity (Song, 1998; Twigg, 1998). ThePDCnormally deals with threetypes of products: new products, upgraded products, and customized products. The key factors identified in the PDC offer theprimary strategy for determining its future. Failing to identify the factorsnot only affects an organization’s competitiveness, but also affects corporateimage, financial value, R&D, marketing, production and operations, andhuman resources. As a result, the factors that influence the PDC process mustbe taken into consideration as relates to the three types of products(Globerson, 1997; Thomas, 1993). 

The PDC can be considered from two aspects:technical factors and customer feedback. Technical factors concerningmanufacturing are; strategic planning, market analysis, technical development,and product commercialization (Song, 1998). On the other hand, customerfeedback also plays an important role in successful product development. Customershave many ideas in mind when considering new products or services in regard tothe PDC. Hence, producers are supposed to listen to their customers’suggestions and keep closer ties with them. If products fit the customers’expectations, then this implies a higher likelihood of completing projects successfully(Crawford, 1997; Datar, 1996; Veryzer, 1998; Wheelwright, 1989). When takingall of this and their interactions into consideration, one can imagine howcomplex activities in the PDC can be. Many businesses employ techniques such asquality function deployment (QFD), concurrent engineering (CE), design formanufacturing (DFM), design for assembly (DFA), and modular design to help infocusing on key factors. These techniques contribute much during the conceptualstage, but in respect to implementation, there still exists much room forimprovement (Schroeder, 2000; Stevenson, 1999).