Open Product Development

  • A. Riitahuhta
  • T. Lehtonen
  • A. Pulkkinen
  • P. Huhtala


Open Product Development Methodology is the future of design methodology. It contains three phases: 1. Proactive, strategy-based construction of product development knowledge 2. Fast, efficient product development utilising the right resources 3. Guarantee of product life-cycle knowledge. Each phase has its own methods, of which the following are presented in this chapter: Company Strategic Landscape, Product Family Design and Configuration Process, and the Combined Variation of Product, Manufacturing Processes and Networks. It is important to strengthen the head designer’s role and that the Product Architect takes new responsibilities in design, such as in the environmental review stage.


Product Development Open Innovation Product Family Product Configuration Product Family Design 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Andreasen MM (2010) Design research - past, present and future. Key note speech in NordDesign 2010. Aug. 25th 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden. 27p. Available:
  2. Assembly of European Regions (2010): Ecomomic Development/ AER Innovation Award. Available:
  3. Barker V, O’Connor D (1989): Expert system for configuration at digital: Xcon and beyond. Communications of the ACM 32(3):298-318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown D C (1998) Defining configuring. In Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, Special Issue on Configuration Design, Vol. 12, No. 4, Cambridge University Press, USA:301-305Google Scholar
  5. Chesbrough H (2003) Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business School Press. BostonGoogle Scholar
  6. Cooper, RF (2001) Winning at New Products: Accelerating the Process from Idea to Launch, Third EditionGoogle Scholar
  7. Harlou U (1999) Developing product families based on architectures – Contribution to a theory of product families. Dissertation, Technical University of Denmark, LyngbyGoogle Scholar
  8. Hvam L, Haug A, Mortensen N H (2010) Assessment of Benefits from Product Configuration Systems. In: Hotz I, Haselböck A (ed.) The Proceedings of Workshop on Configuration at the 19th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence ECAI 2010. Aug. 16th, 2010 Lisbon, Portugal:9-14Google Scholar
  9. Hvam L, Mortensen N H, Riis J (2008) Product Customization. Springer, 1st edition. ISBN-10: 3540714480:283Google Scholar
  10. Huhtala P, Pulkkinen, A Leskinen A (2010) An approach to model relations between product variety and manufacturing process variety. In: Dagman, A et al. (ed) NordDesign 2010 Conference, 25-27 August, 2010, Gothenburg, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  11. Intelligent Manufacturing Systems. Available from
  12. Lehtonen T (2007) Designing Modular Product Architecture in the New Product Development. PhD dissertation, Tampere University of Technology. Available:
  13. Lehtonen T, Juuti T, Riitahuhta A (2007) Observations on Design Methodologies in Industry. Proceedings of ICED07, ParisGoogle Scholar
  14. Open Innovation Strategy and Policy Group (OISPG) (2010) Available from:
  15. Pulkkinen A (2007) Product Configuration in Projecting Company: the Meeting of Configurable Product Families and Sales-Delivery Process. Dr. Tech. dissertation, Tampere University of Technology. Publication 712. ISBN: 978-952-15-1897-3:184Google Scholar
  16. Riitahuhta A (1988) Enhancement of the Boiler Design Process by the use of Expert System Technology. Helsinki. Acta Polytechnica scandinavica, Mechanical Engineering Series No. 92:122Google Scholar
  17. Riitahuhta A, Pulkkinen A (2001) Design for Configuration; A Debate based on the 5th Workshop on Product Structuring, Springer Verlag. Berlin. ISBN: 3540677399:222Google Scholar
  18. Riitahuhta A, Sääski J, Salonen T (2005) Simulation-based design practice. In: Clarkson J, Huhtala M. Engineering Design Theory and Practice: Asymposium in honour of Ken Wallace. Engineering Design Centre, University of Cambridge, UK:159Google Scholar
  19. Sabin D, Weigel R (1998) Product configuration frameworks - a survey. IEEE Intelligent Systems Magazine Vol 13, Issue: 4, July/Aug 1998:42-49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Soininen T (2000) An Approach to Knowledge Representation and Reasoning for Product Configuration Tasks. Ph.D. thesis. Helsinki University of Technology, Department of Computer Science and Engineering. Published in Acta Polytechnica Scandinavica, Mathematics and Computing Series. No. 111, Espoo 2000. ISBN: 951-666-560-8,ISSN: 1456-9418.Google Scholar
  21. Sviokla JJ (1990) An Examination of the Impact of Expert Systems on Firm: The Case of XCON. In: MIS Quarterly, Vol 14, No. 2 (Jun 1990):127-140Google Scholar
  22. Taloussanomat (2010) Crowdsourcing – joukkoäly tuotekehityksen työkaluna. Accessed 02 June 2010. Available:
  23. Weber C (2010) A New Approach to Describing Products and Product Development Processes: CPM – Characteristics-Properties Modelling, PDD – Property-Driven Development. Visiting lecture at Tampere University of Technology Finland, 23 September 2010Google Scholar
  24. Yu B (1996) A virtual configuration workbench for product development. Ph.D. thesis. CAD Centre. Dept. of Design, Manufacture and Engineering Management. University of Strathclyde. Glasgow, Scotland. UKGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Riitahuhta
    • 1
  • T. Lehtonen
    • 1
  • A. Pulkkinen
    • 1
  • P. Huhtala
    • 1
  1. 1.Tampere University of TechnologyTampereFinland

Personalised recommendations