Application of production management principles to engineering processes: An

explorative study
Johannes Hinckeldeyn1, Rob Dekkers2, Jochen Kreutzfeldt1

Department of Mechanical Engineering and Production, University of Applied Science, Hamburg, Germany
2
Business School, University of the West of Scotland, Paisley, United Kingdom
Corresponding author: Johannes.Hinckeldeyn@haw-hamburg.de

Abstract The capability to develop high quality products and processes constitutes the competitive advantage of
many engineering companies. In production management,
numerous tools exist for improving both effectiveness and
efficiency. This study explores the applicability of these production management principles to engineering management.
An academic focus group and engineering managers in seven
German companies were interviewed and the application of
several methods was identified. The outcomes confirm that
the application of production management principles to engineering processes is related to the degree of novelty that is
inherent to engineering projects in companies. Furthermore,
the application of production-based methods needs to be
embedded in a structured engineering process to be useful in
a company. However, most engineering management approaches focus on effectiveness rather than efficiency.
Keywords Engineering Management, Production
Management, Product Development, Process Development

I.

INTRODUCTION

The engineering process plays an important role in

technology-based companies. Their engineering and
manufacturing processes must be flexible in order to fulfil
individual customer requirements and to contribute to the
companys competitive advantage [1]. Furthermore, for
engineering processes, lead-time and productivity are
important factors to achieve customer satisfaction [2]. In
addition, the respective engineering activities have to be
efficient [3] [4]; this efficiency requirement has become
even more important during the recent economic crisis
[5]. Overall, it is, therefore, implied that engineering resources have to be both effectively and efficiently deployed during development and engineering activities.
The need to utilise engineering resources effectively
and efficiently is bolstered when there is a scarcity of engineers, as is the case in Germany. The German economy,
currently ranked fourth in the world [6], is dominated by
Hidden Champions [7], which are mostly small or medium enterprises (SMEs) and family-owned businesses.
These companies are often leaders in their specific niche
market. They have achieved success through flexible,
specialised and speedy fulfilment of customer requirements and delivering high quality products [8]. Despite
the current economic situation, these companies are still
suffering from a shortage of 44,000 academically skilled
engineers. This shortage created an estimated economic
loss of 6.6 billion in 2009 [9]. The required engineers are
usually responsible for development and engineering activities [10]. Increasing the engineering capacity is diffi-

cult and impractical, since other German-speaking countries, like Switzerland, are experiencing a similar scarcity
of engineers [11]. Another possible solution, however,
could be the application of production management principles to engineering processes in order to increase the
efficiency and effectiveness of the engineering resources
that are available.
Production management has developed an extensive
body of knowledge in how to increase effectiveness and
efficiency. Several authors have suggested the application
of production management principles to engineering management [12], e.g. Just in Time [13] or the adoption of
lean principles [14] [15]. The objective of this paper is to
investigate whether German SMEs have already adopted
principles from production management to their engineering processes. Furthermore, this study explores what the
conditions for applying these principles are and how they
might be applied. The results were achieved during a twostep research process. First, a focus group meeting with
several academics with a background in engineering or
production management was organised. Interviews with
managers in seven German engineering companies were
then conducted. Although explorative, this study represents the first systematic approach to investigate the application of production management principles to engineering management.
This paper describes the findings of this qualitative
study. The next section describes briefly the different engineering processes and their similarities to manufacturing processes. The research methodology is then described in section three, which is followed by the outcomes in section four. The findings of the study are discussed in the section after that, and the final section provides conclusions and issues for further research.
II. MANAGEMENT OF ENGINEERING PROCESSES
A thorough understanding of the development and
engineering processes is necessary to assess the applicability of production management principles; hence, a generic reference model has been developed for products
based on systems theories [16] [19], see Fig. 1. The primary engineering process can be divided into different
stages, which transform market demand and customer
requirements into instructions and specifications for products, processes or systems [17]. The higher process and
evaluation level layers, i.e. R&D management, correspond with a higher degree of novelty [18], which implies
potentially more iterations and requires more creativity.

2 of 5

Fig. 1. Generic reference model of the engineering process.

As a result, these layers will not be considered any further

in this paper, and the generic reference model of the primary engineering process and the information flow to
manufacturing will only serve as the basis for this study.
In addition to the information flow from engineering
to material supply, manufacturing and deployment, a
feedback loop connects these processes. The creation of a
product or service starts with the supply of materials and
progresses to the product lifecycle, including service, and
finally ends with disposal. During all these stages, observations may be made that result in feedback to the processes and may ultimately initiate engineering activities.
The feedback loops consist of four tiered layers and follow the evaluation mechanisms of the steady-state model
in [19]. Hence, engineering processes not only transform
customer requirements into information for the primary
production and development process, but they also cover
the incorporation of internal feedback into existing products and processes.
Based on the generic reference model, it is now possible to compare engineering and manufacturing processes (Table I). Engineering processes are more comparable to job shops than flow shops according to [20]. Due to
the specialisation of engineers, engineering departments
are often functionally organised [21]. This type of organisation fosters the flexibility necessary for the fulfilment of
individual customer requirements [22]. However, job
shops are known to have a complex planning process [23]
but limited productivity [24], which contradicts the efficiency and productivity objectives of production [25] and
engineering [26]. Hence, it might be expected that the
traditional organisation encourages the flexibility necessary for dealing with a wide range of customer requirements but at the same time does not offer the productivity
necessary to deal with a scarcity of engineering resources.

To improve productivity and control of engineering

activities, solutions have been put forward in industry. An
initial condition for productivity and control seems to be
the existence of a structured engineering process. Several
authors and organisations have developed ideal types of
engineering processes. Examples are the Stage-GateProcess [27] and the VDI-guideline 2221 [28]. Second,
the use of Order Entry Points [12] [29], modular designs
and product platforms [30] [31], [12] has been advocated
to counter the impact of customisation for the engineering
and manufacturing processes. This might be considered a
known approach in industry, even though its impact has
not been fully exploited for engineering management
[12]. A third approach could be multi-project management [32] [33], since projects are the preferred form of
organisation in engineering [34]. However, multi-project
management in engineering has not applied specific
modes of control and no structured solutions for efficiency increase has been developed to date [35]. These
facts imply that these three solutions address mostly effectiveness as opposed to efficiency.
This inference also implies that efficiency might only
be achieved through adequate control and planning. Planning within the production process can be differentiated
into three levels: operational, tactical and short-term planning, similar to engineering [36]. The control of the production process focuses usually on the timely fulfilment
of customer requirements. To meet these, throughput time
and process speed are important factors [37]. Assuming
the similarity between both production and engineering
processes (both viewed as a job shop), it must be investigated, whether production management principles can be
adopted for engineering management problems, while
accounting for differences (iteration, creativity and novelty).

3 of 5

IV. RESULTS

TABLE I
COMPARISON OF ENGINEERING AND PRODUCTION PROCESSES

Parameter

Engineering
Process

Input

Information,
expertise, personal capacity

Output

Information

Recurrence of
Activities
Recurrence of
Parts

Low to
medium
Low to
medium
Engineering
outcomes are
services, not
storable
Low to
medium precision
Shortage of
capacity, expertise and information
Iterative and
non-directional

Buffer Management

Scheduling

Reasons for
Bottlenecks
Sequence of
Operations
Degree of
Automation

Low

Job Shop

Flow Shop

Information,
personal and
machine capacity, material
Products and
spare parts
Low to
medium
Low to
medium
Buffers are
possible in
all stages of
the process
Medium precision in
scheduling
Shortage of
information,
capacity or
material
Iterative and
non-directional
Usually medium

Information,
personal and
machine capac
ty, material
Products and
spare parts
Medium to
high
Medium to
high
Buffers are
possible in
all stages of
the process
High precision
in
scheduling
Shortage of
information,
capacity or
material
Sequential
Usually high

III. METHODOLOGY
This explorative study seeks to find answers to three
research questions:
i. What is the validity of the generic reference model
(including novelty, iterations and feedback loops)?
ii. To what extent can engineering and manufacturing
processes be compared for the purpose of control and
planning?
iii. Which methods taken from production management
could be and are applied in engineering management?
For this study, two explorative research methods,
focus group meetings and problem-centred interviews,
were used to explore the application of tools and principles from production management to engineering management. A focus group 1 meeting [38] [39], two hours
long, was held with German academics. In addition, engineering managers from seven small and medium-sized
companies in Germany were interviewed. The companies
in the convenience sample were chosen in such a way that
all stages of Fig. 1 were covered. Table II displays the
companies size and in which engineering process steps
each is involved. Problem-centred interviews [40] were
introduced. The average duration of an interview was one
hour. The accumulated data of both methods was evaluated by a qualitative content analysis [41], and the results
are presented in the next section.

The Academic Focus Group is labeled in tables by the letter A.

During the focus group meeting, the generic reference

model was confirmed as well as the assumed differences
between engineering and production. Since all participants had experience with the management of engineering
processes, it was also asserted that the skill level of individual engineers constitutes a limiting factor. Furthermore, the focus group meeting confirmed the possibility
for applying production management approaches to engineering management albeit that the participants emphasised the impact of novelty and creativity on the capability
for planning and control.
All seven interviewees were requested to report
methods from production management, which they have
adopted for engineering management problems. The findings are shown in Table III. The columns show the applied production management approaches that were
deemed useful by the interviewees. The results can be
classified into four areas: (i) quality management, (ii)
standardisation of processes, (iii) planning and (iv) control.
All the interviewees from industry identified quality
management as an important approach to their engineering processes. Thus, they try to learn from production
management. In addition, some engineering managers
reported the existence of a quality assurance department
for engineering processes; these departments are responsible for correcting and proofreading engineering information.
To assure the quality in engineering, some interviewees have introduced a structured engineering process. Together with quality management and standardisation, both
taken from production management, mainly address effectiveness.
For planning, a structured engineering process appears to be the foundation; additionally planning is someTABLE II
INVESTIGATED ENGINEERING COMPANIES

No
1
2
3
4

Branch
Tooling for Plastics Industry
Tooling for Metal
Bending
Plant Engineering
for Refrigeration
Automated Tooling Machines

Staff
5
6
10
200

Engineering Process Step

Product Design, Engineering,
Production Engineering
Product Design, Engineering,
Production Engineering
Engineering, Process Engineering
Product Design, Engineering,
Production Engineering
Product Design, Engineering,
Production Engineering,
Production Process Support
Process Design, Process
Engineering, Production
Process Support

Automotive Supplier

100

Food Industry

500

Production Engineering Consulting

180

Production Engineering,
Production Process Support

Academic Focus
Group

Product Design, Engineering,

Production Engineering,
Product Process Support

4 of 5

TABLE III
OUTCOMES OF INTERVIEWS AND FOCUS GROUPS

x
x

x
x

x
x

x
x

x
x
x

x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Value Stream Mapping

Standardised Processes

Segmentation

Quality Management

Prioritisation

Parameterisation

Lean Management

KANBAN / Heijunka

Functional Planning

Different Levels of Planning

Decentralised Planning

N
o
1
2
3
4
5 x
6
7
A

Cost Planning

Continuous Improvement Process

Production Management Approaches

x
x

x
x
x

times based upon production management principles. One

interviewee mentioned the necessity of a segmented engineering process for planning and control dependent on the
customer of the engineering order. Furthermore, engineering projects often benefit from lessons learnt from earlier
projects (sometimes by parameterisation). These experiences can also be used for continuous improvement of the
engineering processes. Another solution is to plan based
on specialisation, as found in job shops. An additional
way is to differentiate between several levels of planning
accuracy, akin to planning levels in production. An application of decentralised planning solutions, similar to
autonomous work groups, could also be found. However,
the overview of applied approaches might be incomplete,
due to the limited number of interviews.
Control approaches were less common than planning
approaches. This might be due to the lack of a structured
engineering process in some companies, which is necessary for control modes. However, cases of lean management, KANBAN principles, and value stream mapping
were documented.
An interesting perspective came about from the food
and automotive interviewees whose areas are highly regulated. Participants from these branches argued that they
need to structure and standardise their engineering processes to meet regulations and the requirements to document their internal processes. The regulatory pressure
upon these companies might even call for the application
of production management principles to engineering;
however, this specific area needs further investigation.
V. DISCUSSION
The possibility to apply production management
principles to engineering management was positively
evaluated by all participants. This finding agrees with
existing literature, e.g. [12] [14]. However, approaching

engineering exactly like production was accepted by no

one. The reason for this is the degree of novelty that is
inherent to engineering projects; an increasing degree of
novelty usually limits the possibility to apply previous
experience associated with recurrence. This finding implies that principles from production management are
only applicable to engineering if they can account for the
novelty required.
An initial condition for the application of production
management principles is the existence of a structured
engineering process, as also proposed by [16] [17]. The
engineering process should be structured in a similar
manner to the production process. This requirement is
important, since even production management principles
can only be applied to production if processes are structured and specified.
Additionally, the prevalence for methods related to
quality management indicates that most companies are
seeking to increase effectiveness of engineering management. In this way, they aim to contribute to overall productivity of both engineering and manufacturing. However, this emphasis might indicate the potential contribution of efficiency measures to increase productivity.
Other known solutions, like Order Entry Points and multiproject management, aim to increase effectiveness over
efficiency. Hence, this leads to the inference that the impact of efficiency measures through planning and control
is under-researched.
VI. CONCLUDING REMARKS
The objective of this study was to explore the application and applicability of production management principles to engineering management. According to the findings, it is possible to draw parallels between production
and engineering management. By using production management methods, effectiveness and efficiency in engineering can be increased and therefore support companies, allowing them to enhance their overall productivity.
A structured engineering process is critical for the
application of production management measures, although the degree of novelty is a limiting factor; and that
structuring should facilitate planning and control. However, the outcomes of the focus group indicate that measures for effectiveness prevail above those for efficiency,
consistent with the limited literature available on this
topic.
Yet, this study is limited by its qualitative nature and
by the low number of participants. The next steps are to
develop a holistic framework of applicable production
management methods to engineering based on a larger
number of interviews and to explore the potential impact
of efficiency measures. The proposed framework will be
tested and verified using quantitative and qualitative research methods.

5 of 5

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank all participants and
Mitchell Smith for proofreading an early version.

[21]

REFERENCES

[23]

[1] E. Westkmper, Introduction in the organization of production (in German), Springer, Berlin, 2005, pp.16 - 20.
[2] S.C. Wheelwright und K.B. Clark, Creating project plans
to focus product development, Harvard Business Review,
vol. 70, 1992, pp. 70-82.
[3] R.B. Handfield, Effects of concurrent engineering on
make-to-order products, in IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 41, 1994, pp. 384-393.
[4] M.A. Schilling and C.W.L. Hill, Managing the New Product Development Process: Strategic Imperatives, in The
Academy of Management Executive, vol. 12, 1998, pp. 6781.
[5] E. Beinhocker, I. Davis, and L. Mendonca, How the world
looks like after the crisis (in German), in Harvard Business
Manager, October 2009, pp. 18 - 28.
[6] UNCTAD, UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics, United Nations Publication, 2008.
[7] B. Venohr and K.E. Meyer, The German Miracle Keeps
Running: How Germanys Hidden Champions Stay Ahead
in the Global Economy, Berlin: University of Applied Science Berlin, 2007.
[8] U. Berkermann, J. Eckert-Kmen, and N. Nemarnik, Mechanical engineering 2020: Global market medium sized
businesses (in German), IKB, 2009.
[9] O. Koppel, Shortage of engineers in Germany- Amount and
economic consequences (in German) Kln: Association of
German Engineers (VDI), 2009.
[10] S. Krebs, Engineers in Mechanical and Plant Engineering,
VDMA, 2007.
[11] M. Gehrig and T. Fritschi, Shortage of engineers in Switzerland and Kanton Graubnden (in German), Dec. 2008.
[12] R. Dekkers, Engineering management and the Order Entry
Point, in International Journal of Production Research,
Vol. 44, 2006, pp. 4011-4025.
[13] H. Wildemann, Just-in-time in R & D: Guideline for JIT in
research and development (in German), Mnchen: TCW
Transfer-Centrum, 1994.
[14] P. Adler, A. Mandelbaum, V. Nguyen, and E. Schwerer,
Getting the most out of your product development process, Harvard Business Review, 1996, pp. 134 - 152.
[15] G. Schuh, H. Baum, M. Lenders, and J. Mller, Lean
Innovation (in German), in wt Werkstattechnik online,
vol. 100, 2010, pp. 310 - 316.
[16] U. Pulm, A systematic view of product development (in
German), Dissertation Style, Technische Universitt
Mnchen, 2004.
[17] DIN ISO 9000, Quality management systems Fundamentals and vocabulary, in Quality management systems,
Berlin: Beuth Verlag GmbH, 2005, pp. 22 - 25.
[18] S. Simon, Junction of research and development (in
German), in Handbook global production, Hanser
Fachbuchverlag, 2006, pp. 350 - 371.
[19] R. Dekkers, (R)Evolution: organizations and the dynamics
of the environment, New York: Springer, 2005.
[20] H. Steyn, Project management applications of the theory
of constraints beyond critical chain scheduling, in Interna-

[24]

[22]

[25]
[26]

[27]
[28]

[29]

[30]
[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]
[35]

[36]
[37]

[38]
[39]
[40]
[41]

tional Journal of Project Management, vol. 20, Feb. 2002,

pp. 75-80.
P.D.T. O'Connor, The Practice of Engineering Management: A New Approach, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1994.
H. Dyckhoff, Production Management (in German), Berlin,
Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2007.
R. Vahrenkamp, Production Management (in German),
Mnchen: Oldenbourg Verlag, 2008.
J. Tiedtke, Characteristics of different productions (in
German), in Allgemeine BWL, 2007, pp. 439-454.
W.T. Stewart and R.J. Calloway, Engineering productivity: The management of improvement, in Engineering
Management International, vol. 1, May. 1982, pp. 109-116.
C.T. Maravelias und C. Sung, Integration of production
planning and scheduling: Overview, challenges and opportunities, in Computers & Chemical Engineering, vol. 33,
December 2009, pp. 1919-1930.
R.G. Cooper, Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products, in Business Horizons, vol. 33, 1990, pp.
44-54.
VDI-Gesellschaft Entwicklung Konstruktion Vertrieb,
VDI Guideline 2221 Systematic approach to the
development and design of technical systems and product,
(in German), in VDI-Handbuch Produktentwicklung und
Konstruktion, Dsseldorf: VDI-Verlag, 1993, pp. 1-44.
M. Rudberg and J. Wikner, Mass customization in terms
of the customer order decoupling point, Production Planning & Control: The Management of Operations, vol. 15,
2004, pp. 445-458.
T.W. Simpson, J.R.A. Maier, and F. Mistree, Product
platform design: method and application, Research in Engineering Design, vol. 13, 2001, pp. 2 - 22.
M.H. Meyer und J.M. Utterback, The product family and
the dynamics of core capability, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology (MIT), working paper, Sloan School of Management, 1992.
S. Fricke and A. Shenbar, Managing multiple engineering
projects in a manufacturing support environment, in IEEE
Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 47, 2000,
pp. 258-268.
A.P. Van der Merwe, Multi-project management-organizational structure and control, in International
Journal of Project Management, vol. 15, Aug. 1997, S.
223-233.
J. Rump, F. Schabel, D. Alich, and S. Groh, Managerial
project management. A survey (in German), Mannheim:
IBE, 2010.
J. Dahlgren and J. Sderlund, Modes and mechanisms of
control in Multi-Project Organisations: the R&D case, in
International Journal of Technology Management, vol. 50,
2010, S. 1-22.
C.M. Chang, Engineering Management: Challenges in the
New Millennium, Prentice Hall, 2004.
R. Gulati and S. Eppinger, The coupling of product architecture and organizational structure decisions,,working
paper number 3906, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, May. 1996.
D.W. Rook, D.W. Stewart, und P.N. Shamdasani, Focus
Groups: Theory and Practice, Sage Publication, 2006.
R.A. Krueger, Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research, Sage Publications, 2008.
P. Mayring, Introduction into qualitative social science: A
manual for qualitative thinking (in German), Beltz, 2002.
P. Mayring, Qualitative content analyse: Basics and techniques (in German) Beltz, 2008.