Using System Dynamics for Simulating Mechatronic New Product Development

  • Sanderson César Macêdo BarbalhoEmail author
  • Giselle Amaral Leite
  • Marly Monteiro de Carvalho
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics book series (PROMS, volume 280)


This research aims to propose a model for predicting the time performance of a mechatronic new product development. The proposal consists in a System Dynamics model to support the planning and execution phases of projects by simulating the influence of product complexity and team seniority on project times for a previous defined quality requirement. The proposed model adopts seniority and complexity as the variables to relate time and quality demands of mechatronic projects. To demonstrate the applicability of the proposed model, we tested it on a development project of a medical product: a Retinography device. The results of applying the proposed model made it possible to foresee the development time with a success rate of 100%. Thus, using the model, a given company could use complexity and seniority parameters, based on the project team composition and a list of product components for accurately foreseeing the time a product development project would take.


New product development Mechatronics System dynamics Project management Predictive model 


  1. 1.
    Ahmadinejad, A., Afsha, A.: Complexity management in mechatronic product development based on structural criteria. In: Proceedings of 2011 IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics, Istanbul, Turkey (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atman, C.J., et al.: Comparing freshman and senior engineering design processes: an in-depth follow-up study. Elsevier, 325–357 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barbalho, S.C.M., Rozenfeld, H.: Systematization of a new product development process in a company that designs mechatronic products. CIRP J. Manuf. Syst. 35, 68–86 (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barbalho, S.C.M., Rozenfeld, H.: A reference model to promote performance development by focusing on capability improvement. Product (IGDP) 62, 115–125 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brown, T.: Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation, 272 p. Harper Collins Publishers Inc, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Buur, J.: Mechatronics Design in Japan. Institute for Engineering Design, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby (1989)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carvalho, M.M., Rabechini, R.: Impact of risk management on project performance: the importance of soft skills. Int. J. Prod. Res. 53(2), 321–340 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Clark, K.B., Fujimoto, T.: Product Development Performance: Strategy, Organization and Management in the World Auto Industry. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1991)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clausing, D.: Total Quality Development: A Step-by-Step Guide to World-Class Concurrent Engineering. ASME, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Coscun, Y.D., et al.: Analysis of the relationship between the resiliency level and problem solving skills of university student. Procedia Sci. Direct, 673–688 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Danilovic, M., Browningt, T.: Managing complex product development project with design structure matrices and domain mapping matrices. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 25(2), 300–314 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dayan, M., Di Benedetto, C.A.: Antecedents and consequences of teamwork quality in new product development projects: an empirical investigation. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 12(1), 129–155 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dyer, J., Gregersen, H., Christensen, C.: The Innovator’s DNA: Mastering the Five Skills of Disruptive Innovators, 296 p. Havard Business Review Press, Boston (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Forrester, J.W.: Industrial Dynamics. The M.I.T. Press, Cambridge (1961)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Liu, W.-H., Cross, J.A.: A comprehensive model of project team technical performance. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 34(7), 1150–1166 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moulianitis, V.C., et al.: A model for concept evaluation in design an—application to mechatronics design od robot grippers. Mechatronics 14(6), 599–622 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Novak, S., Eppinger, S.D.: Sourcing by design: product complexity and the supply chain. Manag. Sci. 47(1), 189–204 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pahl, G., et al.: Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach, 3rd edn, 617 p. Springer-Verlag, London (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pidd, M.: Tools for Thinking: Modelling in Management Science, 3rd edn, 304 p. Wiley, Hoboken (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Popper, K.: The Logic of Scientific Discovery, vol. 56, 2nd edn. Routledge Classics, London (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Project Management Institute (PMI): A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide), 5ª edn. Minnesotta, Newtown Square (2013)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pugh, S.: Total Design. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA (1990)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sterman, J.D.: Bussiness Dynamics: System Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sterman, J.: System dynamics perspectives and modeling opportunities forresearch in operations management. J. Oper. Manag. 1(5), 39–40 (2015)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Strohmeier, S.: Development of interpersonal skills for senior project managers. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 10(1), 45–48 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tatikonda, M.V., Rosenthal, S.R.: Technology novelty, project complexity, and product development project execution success: a deeper look at task uncertainty in product innovation. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 47(1), 74–87 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wheelwright, S.C., Clark, K.B.: Revolutionizing Product Development: Quantum Leaps in Speed, Efficiency, and Quality. The Free Press, New York (1992)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wysocki, R., Mcgary, R.: Effective Project Management: Traditional, Adaptive, Extreme. Wiley Publishing, Indianapolis, IN (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sanderson César Macêdo Barbalho
    • 1
    Email author
  • Giselle Amaral Leite
    • 1
  • Marly Monteiro de Carvalho
    • 2
  1. 1.University of BrasíliaBrasíliaBrazil
  2. 2.University of São PauloSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations