In the competitive environment, the manufacturing companies must focus on the requirements of the customers, short time-to-market, superior product quality and reducing manufacturing cost. Facing the tendency of global competition, it is impossible and uneconomic to satisfy the all demands of customers by enterprise¡¦s own resources. To survive and make profits, concurrent engineering and collaborative design have become popular approaches to product development among supply chains. Concurrent engineering and collaborative design are two systematic approaches to the integrated, concurrent design of products and their related process. According to the past study, R&D will take an expenditure of fifty percent to ninety percent of the whole product life cycle. For considering product design, manufacturing and assembly, it will improve the communication and coordination in the concurrent engineering environment, and reduce the engineering design change. In this paper we focus on the requiring of product design. We propose a process model to support collaborative product development (CPD). The required multi-disciplinary information for CPD will be handled via the processes of classification, transformation, analysis and optimization to assist the product development. This study can to reduce the conflict of different professional knowledge, and possibility the communication problem with the project, to promote the efficiency of collaborative development.

The engineering and design of complex systems often requires that multiple design tasks be executed in parallel or overlapping efforts. When the design of individual subsystems is distributed among multiple organizations, challenges arise with respect to managing design productivity and coordinating successful collaborative exchanges. Research and development engineering projects compound these challenges further due to their inherently greater uncertainty. This report examines several factors that influence design productivity in the collaborative research and development environment, including the selection of subsystem interfaces, design information management, and complexity management. A collaborative research and development project to upgrade the Hobby-Eberly Telescope is introduced to provide case examples and illustrate the proposed value of subsequent management recommendations. / text

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / Up till now, architects collaborating with other colleagues did so mostly face-to-face (FTF). They had to be in the same space (co-located) at the same time. Communi-cation was ‘spontaneous’ and ideas were represented, whether verbal or non-verbal, by talking and using ‘traditional drawing tools’. If they were geographically displaced, the interaction was then space affected as well as the probability of being time affected. In this case communication was usually mediated through the tele-phone, and graphically represented ideas were sent by Fax or posted documents. Recently, some architectural firms started using modems and Internet connections to exchange information, by transferring CAD drawings as well as design informa-tion, through e-mail and file transfer protocol (FTP). Discussing ideas in architecture, as a more abstract notion, is different from discuss-ing other more concrete arguments using video conferencing. It is more important to ‘see’ what is being discussed at hand than ‘watch’ the other person(s) involved in the discussion. In other words the data being conveyed might be of more impor-tance than the mode of communication. Taking into consideration recent developments in computer and communication technologies this thesis investigates different communication channels utilised in architectural collaboration through Computer Mediated Collaborative Design (CMCD) sessions as opposed to FTF sessions. This thesis investigates the possi-ble effects these different channels have on collaborative design in general and col-laborative design communication in particular. We argue that successful CMCD does not necessarily mean emulating close prox-imity environments. Excluding certain communication channels in a CMCD envi-ronment might affect the flow and quantity of synchronous collaborative communica-tion, but not necessarily the quality and content of mutually communicated and rep-resented design ideas. Therefore different communication channels might affect the type of communication and not necessarily the content of the communication. We propose that audio and video are not essential communication channels in CMCD environments. We posit that architects will collaborate and communicate design representations effectively although with some differences, since those two chan-nels might cause interruptions and successful collaborative sessions can take place without them. For this purpose we conducted twenty-four one-hour experiments involving final year architecture students all working to the same design brief. The experiments were divided into three categories, FTF, full computer mediated collaborative design sessions (CMCD-a; audio-video conferencing plus whiteboard as a shared drawing space) and limited computer mediated collaborative design sessions (CMCD-b; with Lambda MOO used as a chat medium plus whiteboard as a shared drawing space). The experiments were video and audio taped, transcribed and coded into a custom developed coding scheme. The results of the analysed coded data and observations of the videotapes provided evidence that there were noticeable differences between the three categories. There was more design communication and less communication control in the CMCD-b category compared to the FTF and CMCD-a categories. Verbal communi-cation became shorter and straight to the point in CMCD-b as opposed to spontane-ous non-stop chat in the other two categories. Moreover in CMCD-b the subjects were observed to be more reflective as well as choosing and re-examining their words to explain ideas to their partners. At times they were seen scrolling back through the text of the conversation in order to re-analyse or interpret the design ideas at hand. This was impossible in FTF and CMCD-a sessions, since the sub-jects were more spontaneous and audio representations were lost as soon as they were uttered. Also the video channel in the CMCD-a category was ignored and hardly used except for the first few minutes of the experiments, for a brief exchange of light humour on the appearance of each subject. The results obtained from analysing the experiments helped us conclude that differ-ent communication channels produce different collaborative environments. The three categories of communication for architectural collaboration explored in our ex-periments are indicative of the alternatives available to architects now. What is not clear to architects is why they would choose one category over another. We pro-pose that each category has its own strengths and difficulties for architectural col-laboration, and therefore should be selected on the basis of the type of communica-tion considered to be most effective for the stage and tasks of the design project.

The intellectual contribution of this thesis lies within the area of computer supported co-operative work (CSCW), and more specifically, computer supported co-operative design (CSCD). CSCW is concerned with the development of information systems and technological support for multi-participant work activities. Research into CSCW seeks to understand how people and organisations interact with one another, and to integrate this understanding with the development of computer based tools to support real world settings. Much of the technology developed to support the work of designers has been developed to aid individuals working alone, with tools like computer aided drafting (CAD), scheduling, and database software. The growth of interest in ‘groupware’ has led many technology developers to adapt these design tools for use in group situations. However, joint activities are different from those performed alone, and organisational structures can both interfere with, and supplement co-operative work practices in a way that the current technologies cannot provide support for. To develop effective group design tools, we need to understand more about collaborative processes in design. This thesis draws from the theoretical underpinning of cognitive science and the methods of anthropology and sociology, in an interdisciplinary study of design performance in the construction industry. Fieldwork is used as a method of qualitative data collection and this is examined within the analytic framework of distributed cognition. The results of this analysis provide a useful and usable description of the work of design that technology developers can use to support collaborative design work. In line with the methods of distributed cognition, the activities observed in the workplace studies are examined in terms of their processes and representations. The resources that were available to the design participants are made explicit, as are their situation-specific work patterns. Two case studies of design are examined. The first of these describes design work in a civil engineering project, which involves a number of different design activities. The second describes the work of consulting engineers in building design, focusing on a more limited design role, which is used to back up and supplement areas of the first study that were understood to be particularly relevant. The findings of the study demonstrate how design processes operate simultaneously at personal, organisational and inter-organisational levels. The distinction between the formal, organisational procedures, and the informal, social processes that compliment them is examined to show how these are interrelated in the performance of the design task and their importance to the mechanisms used to co-ordinate actions. The findings of the study have implications for the development of novel technologies to augment the engineering design process, and have already been used in the development of assistive design technologies. The thesis demonstrates that the framework of distributed cognition can be used in the analysis of cognition within a setting, involving multiple individuals, in concert with 'natural' and 'artificial' artefacts. The thesis makes clear a number of processes in design that can only be examined from a perspective which includes the social dimensions of work. The methods of study focus on the resources in collaborative activities, whilst the analysis, structured in terms of the representations and processes of collaborative activity, shows that the method can be used effectively in the development of CSCW and CSCD technologies.

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / Up till now, architects collaborating with other colleagues did so mostly face-to-face (FTF). They had to be in the same space (co-located) at the same time. Communi-cation was ‘spontaneous’ and ideas were represented, whether verbal or non-verbal, by talking and using ‘traditional drawing tools’. If they were geographically displaced, the interaction was then space affected as well as the probability of being time affected. In this case communication was usually mediated through the tele-phone, and graphically represented ideas were sent by Fax or posted documents. Recently, some architectural firms started using modems and Internet connections to exchange information, by transferring CAD drawings as well as design informa-tion, through e-mail and file transfer protocol (FTP). Discussing ideas in architecture, as a more abstract notion, is different from discuss-ing other more concrete arguments using video conferencing. It is more important to ‘see’ what is being discussed at hand than ‘watch’ the other person(s) involved in the discussion. In other words the data being conveyed might be of more impor-tance than the mode of communication. Taking into consideration recent developments in computer and communication technologies this thesis investigates different communication channels utilised in architectural collaboration through Computer Mediated Collaborative Design (CMCD) sessions as opposed to FTF sessions. This thesis investigates the possi-ble effects these different channels have on collaborative design in general and col-laborative design communication in particular. We argue that successful CMCD does not necessarily mean emulating close prox-imity environments. Excluding certain communication channels in a CMCD envi-ronment might affect the flow and quantity of synchronous collaborative communica-tion, but not necessarily the quality and content of mutually communicated and rep-resented design ideas. Therefore different communication channels might affect the type of communication and not necessarily the content of the communication. We propose that audio and video are not essential communication channels in CMCD environments. We posit that architects will collaborate and communicate design representations effectively although with some differences, since those two chan-nels might cause interruptions and successful collaborative sessions can take place without them. For this purpose we conducted twenty-four one-hour experiments involving final year architecture students all working to the same design brief. The experiments were divided into three categories, FTF, full computer mediated collaborative design sessions (CMCD-a; audio-video conferencing plus whiteboard as a shared drawing space) and limited computer mediated collaborative design sessions (CMCD-b; with Lambda MOO used as a chat medium plus whiteboard as a shared drawing space). The experiments were video and audio taped, transcribed and coded into a custom developed coding scheme. The results of the analysed coded data and observations of the videotapes provided evidence that there were noticeable differences between the three categories. There was more design communication and less communication control in the CMCD-b category compared to the FTF and CMCD-a categories. Verbal communi-cation became shorter and straight to the point in CMCD-b as opposed to spontane-ous non-stop chat in the other two categories. Moreover in CMCD-b the subjects were observed to be more reflective as well as choosing and re-examining their words to explain ideas to their partners. At times they were seen scrolling back through the text of the conversation in order to re-analyse or interpret the design ideas at hand. This was impossible in FTF and CMCD-a sessions, since the sub-jects were more spontaneous and audio representations were lost as soon as they were uttered. Also the video channel in the CMCD-a category was ignored and hardly used except for the first few minutes of the experiments, for a brief exchange of light humour on the appearance of each subject. The results obtained from analysing the experiments helped us conclude that differ-ent communication channels produce different collaborative environments. The three categories of communication for architectural collaboration explored in our ex-periments are indicative of the alternatives available to architects now. What is not clear to architects is why they would choose one category over another. We pro-pose that each category has its own strengths and difficulties for architectural col-laboration, and therefore should be selected on the basis of the type of communica-tion considered to be most effective for the stage and tasks of the design project.

In order to support Social Innovation, Social Designers advocate for the use of collaborative design methodologies, inclusive design processes, which produce innovative design outcomes and inclusive societies. While there is a large amount of literature on this topic from a European and US perspective, there is little understanding regarding the effect large social disparity between stakeholders has on these types of engagements. The researcher describes this as cross-boundary collaborative design for social innovation, where "boundary" refers to social and collective identity such as, gender, race, class, etc., which is a reality in most South African collaborative design engagements and a gap in the literature. Thus, this thesis explores this gap by asking the research question, what practices, mindsets and interpersonal interactions help to support effective cross-boundary collaborative design for Social Innovation? In order to answer this question, the researcher conducted 32 interviews followed by a single focus group with disparate stakeholders engaged in these types of initiatives. Using a Constructivist Grounded Theory approach and applying the lens of Appreciative Inquiry to her interview questions, she recorded narratives that focused on moments of effectiveness within these cross-boundary collaborative design engagements. What emerged from the data was a strong link between the quality of relationships between the disparate stakeholders and the effectiveness of the collaborative design process - what she described as "generative" relationships (connections built on trust, vulnerability, friendship and respect) that blurred the social boundaries between the participants and helped them move across the social divides with ease. This in turn increased the generative nature of the collaborative design process. Furthermore, these generative relationships were often established outside of the design process, in a preliminary phase (pre-project) before a design engagement began because this phase allowed the stakeholders to focus solely on building relationships, instead of generating design solutions. However, the importance of generative relationships does not feature strongly in the current collaborative design literature. Instead, it focuses mainly on developing communication methods as a way to support boundary crossing and views relationship building as a secondary by-product of a good communication method. This thesis, however, concludes that in order to support effective cross-boundary collaborative design engagements, this process should be flipped and attention be given to first building generative relationships that can then help to support the effectiveness of the cross-boundary communication methods and ultimately improve the over all crossboundary collaborative design process.

The motivation of this research is the need for reducing time and cost associated with maintaining information and communication technology infrastructure for design and manufacturing in digitally networked environments, enhancing design communication and collaboration in distributed and collaborative design processes, and adapting to rapidly changing market demands. The objective of this dissertation is to propose a new design and manufacturing paradigm, namely, Cloud-Based Design and Manufacturing (CBDM), for enhancing collaborative product development in distributed settings. In this dissertation, the following challenges pertaining to CBDM are addressed: the systematic development of a conceptual framework and a holistic vision for CBDM systems; the development of a new approach for visualizing distributed and collaborative design processes, measuring tie strengths in a complex and large design collaboration network, and detecting design communities with common design activities in cloud-based design (CBD) settings from a social network perspective; and the development of a new approach that helps identify potential manufacturing bottlenecks and scale manufacturing capacity in cloud-based manufacturing (CBM) settings from a manufacturing network perspective. The contributions of this dissertation are categorized in three research domains: (1) proposing the first definition, a holistic vision, and an example of application scenario for CBDM, (2) modeling and analyzing information flow in cloud-based design for improving design collaboration, and (3) modeling and analyzing material flow in cloud-based manufacturing for planning manufacturing scalability.

In the context of internationally challenging economic, design has been regarded as a key factor in assisting design and manufacturing companies to survive. By using up-to-date computer-supported technology, the global design collaboration based on multidisciplinary and distributed environment is becoming a mainstream to new product development (NPD). However, during the process of collaborative design, risk is rarely mentioned. In particular, due to the complexity of design process and lack of efficient design decision-making, there have been some design collaboration failures across multiple companies. Some design projects cannot deliver the benefits as companies have expected through the collaboration. Moreover, a number of stakeholders, managers and designers expressed their disappointment at not seeing the projected savings in cost and time, which critically discredited the value of design collaboration. Many studies in academia and commercial cases have suggested that risk assessment can be applied as an effective means in the realm of design. Nevertheless, few of them conducted risk management research associated with design constraints under a collaborative environment from both theoretical and practical perspectives. In current risk practice, many risk practitioners simply report key risks to their management teams and no further analysis, which might subsequently result in confusion with excessive discussions. Consequently, to prevent the failure of design collaboration and perform a satisfactory risk assessment, it is important to perform risk management with an upstream perspective and at an operational level. An approach, called constraint-based design risk management (DRM) where a conceptual framework has been proposed on the basis of collaborative design features, risk management process and Theory of Constraints (TOC). Moreover, a DRM matrix has been developed to map, measure and mitigate collaborative design risk through evaluating the critical design constraints, and then specified design risk variables in the light of risk criteria. Design constraints are quantitative parameters that frequently affect main design processes and decisions. The combination of design constraints and risk criteria can be accessible and applicable by designers and design mangers. In addition, a Bayesian weighting method based on Bayesian theorem has been developed to measure collaborative design risk in a more efficient manner. Ultimately, a DRM tool has been created as a simulated scenario prototype, which incorporated with three case-study evaluations, to demonstrate the importance and effectiveness of using TOC and risk theory in the realm of design collaboration.

Collaboration has always been critical to the success of new product development teams, and the advent of geographically dispersed teams has significantly altered the way that team members interact. Multi-user computer-aided design (MUCAD) and crowdsourcing are two results of efforts to enable collaboration between geographically dispersed individuals. In this research, a study was done to investigate the differences in performance between MUCAD and single-user CAD teams, in which teams competed to create the best model of a hand drill. This was done across a three-day period to recreate the scenario found in industry. It was found that MUCAD increases awareness of teammates' activities and increases communication between team members. Different sources of frustration for single-user and multi-user teams were identified, as well as differing patterns of modeling style. These findings demonstrate that MUCAD software has significant potential to improve team collaboration and performance. A second study explored a number of potentially significant factors in MUCAD team performance, including leadership, design style, unfamiliar parts, knowledge transfer, individual experience, and team composition. In this study, teams of undergraduate mechanical engineering students worked together to complete tasks using NXConnect, a MUCAD plugin for NX developed at Brigham Young University. A primary finding was that having an appointed leader for a MUCAD team improves performance, in particular when that leader works with the team in creating the CAD model. It was also found that creating a framework to aid in organizing and coordinating the creation of the CAD model may decrease the time required for completion. In the final study, the possibility of using crowdsourcing to complete complex product design tasks was explored. In this study, a process for crowdsourcing complex product design tasks was developed, as well as a website to act as the platform for testing this process. A crowd consisting of engineering and technology students then worked together on the website to design a frisbee tracking device. The crowd was able to collaborate to accomplish some detailed product design tasks, but was not able to develop a complete product. Major findings include the need for more formal leadership and crowd organization, the need for better decision making mechanisms, and the need for a better model for engaging crowd members on a consistent basis. It was also found that crowd members had a greater willingness to pay for the product they developed than individuals who had not worked on the project. Results also show that although crowd members were often frustrated with the collaboration process, they enjoyed being able to work with a large group of people on a complex project.

Collaboration has always been critical to the success of new product development teams, and the advent of geographically dispersed teams has significantly altered the way that team members interact. Multi-user computer-aided design (MUCAD) and crowdsourcing are two results of efforts to enable collaboration between geographically dispersed individuals. In this research, a study was done to investigate the differences in performance between MUCAD and single-user CAD teams, in which teams competed to create the best model of a hand drill. This was done across a three-day period to recreate the scenario found in industry. It was found that MUCAD increases awareness of teammates' activities and increases communication between team members. Different sources of frustration for single-user and multi-user teams were identified, as well as differing patterns of modeling style. These findings demonstrate that MUCAD software has significant potential to improve team collaboration and performance. A second study explored a number of potentially significant factors in MUCAD team performance, including leadership, design style, unfamiliar parts, knowledge transfer, individual experience, and team composition. In this study, teams of undergraduate mechanical engineering students worked together to complete tasks using NXConnect, a MUCAD plugin for NX developed at Brigham Young University. A primary finding was that having an appointed leader for a MUCAD team improves performance, in particular when that leader works with the team in creating the CAD model. It was also found that creating a framework to aid in organizing and coordinating the creation of the CAD model may decrease the time required for completion. In the final study, the possibility of using crowdsourcing to complete complex product design tasks was explored. In this study, a process for crowdsourcing complex product design tasks was developed, as well as a website to act as the platform for testing this process. A crowd consisting of engineering and technology students then worked together on the website to design a frisbee tracking device. The crowd was able to collaborate to accomplish some detailed product design tasks, but was not able to develop a complete product. Major findings include the need for more formal leadership and crowd organization, the need for better decision making mechanisms, and the need for a better model for engaging crowd members on a consistent basis. It was also found that crowd members had a greater willingness to pay for the product they developed than individuals who had not worked on the project. Results also show that although crowd members were often frustrated with the collaboration process, they enjoyed being able to work with a large group of people on a complex project.