Economic Growth, Business Innovation and Engineering Design

  • Gunnar Sohlenius
  • Leif Clausson
  • Ann Kjellberg
Part of the Springer Series in Advanced Manufacturing book series (SSAM)


Scientific knowledge of engineering within innovative industrial decision processes has a great potential to improve quality and productivity in industrial operations and hence improve profitability. This is a precondition for economic growth, which in turn is necessary to improve welfare. Innovative processes have to combine creativity with quality and productivity in order to achieve profitability and growth. The most important ways to improve profitability in industrial production are through an improved ability to meet more advanced requirements in new products and processes by using new knowledge and inventions and higher productivity through investments in more advanced and automatic tools. This is the fundamental mechanism behind industrial production seen as an engine of welfare. Besides the real world of the products and the production processes, the mechanisms for this development can be classified into three worlds. These are the decision world, the human world and the model world. In striving to obtain increased welfare through industrial production, fundamental knowledge about these worlds and about their relations to the products and processes has to be developed. This paper is a contribution to this understanding, which is necessary in order to combine Total Quality Management, (TQM) and Total Productivity Management (TPM) into Total Effective Management (TEM) by understanding Means.


Economic growth Innovation process Decision theory 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

1.7 References

  1. [1]
    Sandell, P. Sohlenius, G. et al., 1976, Kundorderstyrd Produktion-PRODEVENT, (Order Controlled, Customer Adapted Production — PRODEVENT) (in Swedish), Sveriges Mekanförbund.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Sohlenius, G., 1992, “Concurrent Engineering,” CIRP Annals Vol.41/2/1992.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Johnson, H. T. Bröms, A., 2000, “Profit Beyond Measure,” The Free Press.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Sohlenius, G., 2000, “Productivity, Quality and Decision Theory Based upon Axiomatic Design,” Proceedings of ICAD 2000, First International Conference on Axiomatic Design, 2000, Boston, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Hubka, V., Eder, W.E., 1988, “Theory of Technical Systems: A Total Concept Theory for Engineering Design,” Springer Verlag, ISBN 0-387-17451-6.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Andreasen, M.M, 1992, “The Theory of Domains,” Workshop on Understanding Function and Function to Form Evolution, 1991, Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Andreasen, M.M., 1992, “Designing on a “Designer’s Workbench” (DWB),” Proceedings of the 9th WDK Workshop, 1992, Rigi, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Aganovic, D., Nielsen, J., Fagerström, J., Clausson, L., Falkman, P., 2002, “A Concurrent Engineering Information Model based on the STEP Standard and the Theory of Domains,” Proceedings of DESIGN 2002, Dubrovnik, Croatia.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Suh, N.P., 1990, The Principles of Design, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-504345-6.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Suh, N.P., 1995, “Design and Operation of Large Systems,” Journal of Manufacturing Systems, Vol.14, No.3, pp. 203–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Suh, N.P., 2001, Axiomatic Design, Advances and Applications, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-513466-4.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Sohlenius, G., Fagerström, J., Kjellberg, A., 2002, “The Innovation Process and the Principal Importance of Axiomatic Design,” Proceedings of ICAD2002, Second International Conference on Axiomatic Design, 2002, Cambridge, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Moestam Ahlström, L., Kjellberg, A., Sohlenius, G., 2002, “Principles and Experiences concerning Sustainability in Product Realisation,” XIIth World Productivity Congress, 2002, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Fagerström, J., Moestam Ahlström, L., 2001, “Demands on Methods for Developing Work Focused on Concurrent Engineering,” Proceedings of ICPR-16, 2001, Prague, Czech Republic.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Clausson, L., Fagerström, J., Aganovic, D., Sahlin, M., 2002, “Business Process Engineering by Utilizing Design Theories and Methods,” Proceedings of CIRP 1 st International Seminar on Digital Enterprise Technology, DET’02, Durham, UK.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Hubka, V., Eder, W.E., 1996, Design Science: Introduction to the needs, scope and organization of engineering design knowledge, Springer Verlag, ISBN 3-540-19997-7.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Pahl, G., Beitz, W., 1996, Engineering design: a systematic approach, (original title, Konstruktionslehre), Springer, Berlin, ISBN 3-540-19917-9.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Ulrich, K. T., Eppinger, S. D., 2000, Product Design and Development, The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc., ISBN 0-07-229647-X.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Sahlin, M., Fagerström, J. Clausson, L. Aganovic, D. Sohlenius, G., 2002, “Concurrent Decision Making for High-tech Products and Supply Systems,” Design 2002, Dubrovnik, Croatia.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Fagerström, J., Aganovic, D., Nielsen, J., Falkman, P., 2002, “Multi-Viewpoint Modeling of the Innovation System: Using a Hermeneutic Method,” Proceedings of ICAD 2002, Cambridge, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Aganovic, D., Pandikow, A., 2002, “Towards Enabling an Innovation Process for Extended Manufacturing Enterprises,” Proceedings of CIRP 1 st International Seminar on Digital Enterprise Tech., DET’02, Durham, UK.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Clausing, D. Fey, V., 2004, Effective Innovation, ASME Press.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Clausson, L., 2003, “Innovation of Business System and Process,” 2003 International CIRP Design Seminar, Grenoble, France.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Clausson, L., 2003, “Business Innovation by utilizing Engineering Design Theories and Methods,” Int. Working Conference, Total Quality Management — Advanced and Intelligent Approaches, 2003, Kragujevac, Serbia.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Sohlenius, G, Kjellberg, A., Clausson, L., 2003, “Economic Growth, Industrial Production and TQM,” International Working Conference, Total Quality Management — Advanced and Intelligent Approaches, 2003, Kragujevac, Serbia.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Kjellberg, A., 1998, “Teams-What’s Next?,” CIRP Annals, Vol. 47, No.1Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Sohlenius, G. Kjellberg, A. Holmstedt, H., 1999, “Productivity, System Design and Competence Management,” World Xith Productivity Congress, 1999, Edinburgh, U.K.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gunnar Sohlenius
    • 1
  • Leif Clausson
    • 2
  • Ann Kjellberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Royal Institute of Technology - KTHStockholms LänSweden
  2. 2.Dept. of Production Engineering School of Industrial Engineering and ManagementRoyal Institute of Technology (KTH)StockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations