organizational decision support

1
Using IDEF and QFD to develop an
organizational decision support methodology for
the strategic justification of computer-integrated
technologies international Journal of Project
Management 1995 Printed in Great Britain , by
Joseph Sarkis Donald H Liles , USA ???????
?? ? ????
2
Outline

• Abstract
• Introduction
• CIE background
• SMSE requirement
• QFD review
• IDEF0 review
• Methodology
• conclusiions

3
Abstract

• A research and development approach that
  integrates Quality Function Deployment (QFD) and
  IDEF0 functional modeling to determine the
  requirements and processes for the justification
  methodology is presented.

4
Introduction(?)

• Further global competitive pressures on
  manufacturing enterprises of all sizes.
• There need to be national,industrial,
  enterprise-level visions.
• Firms are able to form and function in a
  relatively short period of time?
• Agile enough

5
Introduction(?)

• A comprehensive definition for an integrated
  enterprise
• Colloect internal and external activities
• Linkage and coordination
• Focus on the development efforts and approach for
  a methodology to help in justifying or making a
  business case.
• Use two organizational tools to develop this
  methoology .

6
CIE technology justification background(?)

• CIEcomputer-integrated enterprise
• The benefits of CIE technology
• Increase customer responsiveness
• Flexibility of organizations
• Higher-quality products and services
• Shorter leadtimes
• Improve process controls

7
CIE technology justification background(?)

• Issues in the adoption of CIE technology
• High capital costs and risks
• Myopic approaches to justification
• Inappropriate capital budgeting procedures
• Quantification delimma
• Prediction of benefits over extended period of
  time
• Technological uncertainties
• there is little emphasis on the specific
  requirements of SMSEs when it comes to justifying
  the acquisition of CIE technology. SMSEssmall
  and medium-sized enterprises

8
SMSE requirements

• Low-cost
• Easy to use
• Some of the unique financial constrains
• Learning and training devices
• The strategic and financial factors that are most
  dominant in SMSE

9
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) review(?)
10
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) review(?)

• A tool that is used to ensure in a systematic way
• Driven by the demands of customer
• Concurrent engineering and design for manufacture
• Figure1 shows the central element of a QFD
  analysis.(House of quality)
• Associated with each requirement is an importance
  value that has to be elicited from the customer.

11
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) review(?)
12
IDEF0 review(?)

• A functional modeling technique was developed for
  systems design and analysis for the US Air Force
  ICAM program.
• An acronym for ICAM definition
• There are a number of tools within the IDEF
  family . (http//www.idef.com)
• Functions are presented by boxes and
  arrows(figure 2)

13
IDEF0 review(?)
14
IDEF0 review(?)
15
Methodology(?)

• Project team
• Customer team defined the requirements for QFD
  matrices
• Expert team members provided input to the QFD
• First QFD matrics (figure 4)
• Customer team defined the requirements for QFD
  matrices
• Second QFD matrices and IDEF0 definition

16
Methodology(?)
17
Relationship matrix
18
Conclusions

• The competitive-evaluation parts of the quality
  houses (see Figure 1) can be used to evaluate
  as-is and to-be models of business processes
  without having to develop detailed models.
• Benchmark data can also be used as target values
  of the product-planning matrix for each of the
  activities.
• The IDEF0 models are not only composed of
  activities.