Advances in Design pp 49-59

Part of the Springer Series in Advanced Manufacturing book series (SSAM)

Self Organization in Design

  • Bart R. Meijer

Abstract

Principles of self organization are discussed as a frame of reference and a source of ideas for new design processes that can deal with more complexity in less time. It is demonstrated that set-based concurrent engineering makes effective use of these principles. Taking this idea one step further, an evolutionary organization for design processes is proposed.

Keywords

self organization design processes evolutionary problem solving 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

4.6. References

  1. [1]
    Pahl G., Beitz W., 1996, Engineering Design; A Systematic Approach, 2nd ed., Translated by Wallace K., London, Springer, ISBN 3-540-19917-9.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Hubka V., Eder E., 1996, Design Science, London, Springer, ISBN 3-540-19997-7.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Suh, N.P., 2001, Axiomatic Design, Advances and Applications, Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Dill D.D., Pearson A.W., 1991, “The Self Designing Organization: Structure, Learning, And The Management Of Technical Professionals,” IEEE Conference on Technology Management: The New International Language, 1991, ISBN 0-7803-0161-7, pp. 33–36.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Maturana H., Varela F., 1980, Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living, London, Reidl, ISBN 90-277-1015-5.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Tomiyama, T., Takeda, H., Yoshioka, M., Shimomura Y., 2003, “Abduction For Creative Design,” Proceedings of ASME-DETC’03, DETC2003/DTM-48650.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Gershenson C., Heylighen F., 2003, “When Can We Call A System Self Organizing?” Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2801, December 2003, pp. 606–614.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Shannon, C.E., 1948, “A Mathematical Theory of Communication”, The Bell System Technical Journal, Vol.27, July + October 1948, pp. 379–443, pp. 623–656.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Kemperman J.E.B., Engelen J.M.L. van, 1999, “Operationalizing the Customer Value Concept”, Competitive Paper, 28thEMAC Conf: Marketing And Competition In The Information Age, 11–14 May 1999, Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Meijer, B.R., Voûte, H.J., Tomiyama T., 2003, “Communicating Context And Strategy For Collaborative Design In Networks And Corporations,” CIRP Design Seminar, 2003, Grenoble, France.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Meijer B.R., 2002, “From Reducing Complexity To Adaptive Organizations”, Proceedings or the IEEE-IEMC 2002, 18–20 August 2002, Cambridge, UK, ISBN 0-7803-7385-5, pp. 661–666.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Banzhaf W., Nordin P., Keller R.E., Francone F.D., 1998, Genetic Programming, An Introduction, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, ISBN 1-55860-510-X.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Ward A.C., Liker J.K., Cristiano J.J., Sobek II D.K.,“The Second Toyota Paradox: How Delaying Decisions Can Make Better Cars Faster”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 36, No.3, pp. 43–61.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bart R. Meijer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringDelft University of TechnologyCD DelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations