The Pugh Controlled Convergence method: model-based evaluation and implications for design theory
Tóm tắt
This paper evaluates the Pugh Controlled Convergence method and its relationship to recent developments in design theory. Computer executable models are proposed simulating a team of people involved in iterated cycles of evaluation, ideation, and investigation. The models suggest that: (1) convergence of the set of design concepts is facilitated by the selection of a strong datum concept; (2) iterated use of an evaluation matrix can facilitate convergence of expert opinion, especially if used to plan investigations conducted between matrix runs; and (3) ideation stimulated by the Pugh matrices can provide large benefits both by improving the set of alternatives and by facilitating convergence. As a basis of comparison, alternatives to Pugh’s methods were assessed such as using a single summary criterion or using a Borda count. These models suggest that Pugh’s method, under a substantial range of assumptions, results in better design outcomes than those from these alternative procedures.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Arrow KE (1951) Social choice and individual values. Wiley, New York
Bechara AH, Damasio AR (2000) Emotion, decision making, and the orbitofrontal cortex. Cereb Cortex 10(3):295–307
Begley RL Jr (1990) Steering column concept selection for low cost and weight: transactions from the 2nd symposium on quality function deployment. QFD Institute, Ann Arbor
Box GEP, Draper NR (1987) Empirical model-building and response surfaces. Wiley, Hoboken
Buede D, Maxwell DT (1995) Rank disagreement: a comparison of multi-criteria methodologies. J Multi Criteria Decis Anal 4:1–21
Czerlinski JG, Gigerenzer G, Goldstein DG (1999) How good are simple heuristics? In: Gigerenzer G, Todd PM, the ABC Research Group (eds) Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 97–118
Constable G, Somerville B (2003) A century of innovation: twenty engineering achievements that transformed our lives. National Academies Press, Washington, DC
Diederich A (1997) Dynamic stochastic models for decision making under time constraints. J Math Psychol 41:260–274
Dym CL, Wood WH, Scott MJ (2002) Rank ordering engineering designs: pairwise comparison charts and Borda counts. Res Eng Des 13(4):236–242
Franssen M (2005) Arrow’s theorem, multi-criteria decision problems and multi-attribute preferences in engineering design. Res Eng Des 16(2005):42–56
Frey DD, Dym CL (2006) Validation of design methods: lessons from medicine. Res Eng Des 17(1):45–57
Gigerenzer G, Todd PM, the ABC Research Group (eds) (1999) Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford University Press, New York
Hazelrigg GA (1998) A framework for decision-based engineering design. ASME J Mech Des 120:653–658
Hazelrigg GA (1999) An axiomatic framework for engineering design. ASME J Mech Des 121:342–347
Johnson JG, Busemeyer JR (2005) A dynamic, stochastic, computational model of preference reversal phenomena. Psychol Rev 112(4):841–861
Katsikopoulos KV, Martignon L (2006) Naïve heuristics for paired comparisons: some results on their relative accuracy. J Math Psychol 50(3):488–494
Khan M, Smith DG (1989) Overcoming conceptual barriers—by systematic design. Proceedings of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers ICED, Harrogate
Lewis KE, Chen W, Schmidt LC (2006) Decision making in engineering design. ASME Press, New York
Li X, Sudarsanam N, Frey DD (2006) Regularities in data from factorial experiments. Complexity 11(5):32–45
Limayem F, Yannou B (2007) Selective assessment of judgmental inconsistencies in pairwise comparisons for group decision rating. Comput Oper Res 34:1824–1841
Miller K, Brand C, Heathcote N, Rutter B (2005) Quality function deployment and its application to automotive door design. Proc. IMecheE 219 part D: 1481–1493
Mistree F, Lewis K, Stonis L (1994) Selection in the conceptual design of aircraft. proc. of the 5th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO symposium on recent advances in multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, Panama City, FL AIAA-94-4382-CP
Pahl G, Beitz W (1984) Engineering design: a systematic approach. Springer-Verlag, Berlin
Pugh S (1981) Concept selection: a method that works. Proceeding of the international conference on engineering design ICED, Rome, Italy
Pugh S (1990) Total design. Addison-Wesley, Reading
Pugh S, Smith D (1976) The dangers of design methodology. First European Design Research Conference, Portsmouth
Saari DG, Sieberg KK (2004) Are partwise comparisons reliable? Res Eng Des 15:62–71
Saaty TL (2006) Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytical hierarchy/network processes. Eur J Oper Res 168:557–570
Salonen M, Perttula M (2005) Utilization of concept selection methods—a survey of Finnish Industry. ASME design engineering technical conferences, Long Beach
Scott MJ, Antonsson EK (1999) Arrow’s theorem and engineering design decision making. Res Eng Des 11(4):218–228
Scott MJ (2007) Quantifying uncertainty in multicriteria concept selection. Res Eng Des 17:175–187
See T-K, Gurnani A, Lewis K (2004) Multi-attribute decision making using hypothetical equivalents and inequivalents. ASME J Mech Des 126:950–957
Sen A (1993) Internal consistency of choice. Econometrica 61(3):495–521
Sen A (1998) The possibility of social choice: nobel prize lecture. Trinity College, Cambridge
Shimojo S, Simion C, Shimojo E, Scheier C (2003) Gaze bias both reflects and influences preference. Nat Neurosci 6(12):1317–1322
Simion C, Shimojo S (2006) Gaze manipulation biases preference decisions. J Vis 3(9):306, 306a. http://journalofvision.org/3/9/306/; doi:10.1167/3.9.306
Smith J, Kaufman H, Baldasare J (1984) Direct estimation considered within a comparative judgment framework. Am J Psychol 97(3):343–358
Solow RM (1957) Technical change and the aggregate production function. Rev Econ Stat 39(3):312–320
Swoyer C (1991) Structural representations and surrogative reasoning. Synthese 87:393–415
Takai S, Ishii K (2004) Modifying Pugh’s design concept evaluation methods. DETC2004–57512. ASME design engineering technical conferences, Salt Lake City, UT
Ullman DG (2002) Toward the ideal mechanical engineering design support system. Res Eng Des 13:55–64
von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1953) The theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Ward A, Liker JK, Christiano JJ, Sobek DK (1995) The second Toyota paradox: how delaying decisions can make better cars faster. Sloan Manage Rev 36(3):43–61
Yang MC (2007) Design methods, tools, and outcome measures: a survey of practitioners DETC2007–35123. Proceedings of the ASME des eng technical conferences, Las Vegas