£. RUDOLF, M. ROSZAK: EFFICIENCY OF THE PRODUCT-DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AS A FACTOR DETERMINING ...
429–431
EFFICIENCY OF THE PRODUCT-DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AS A
FACTOR DETERMINING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
IMPLEMENTATION FOR SUBSEQUENT PROJECT PHASES ACC
APQP
U^INKOVITOST RAZVOJA PROCESA IZDELAVE KOT FAKTOR,
KI DOLO^UJE USPE[NOST IZVEDBE KASNEJ[IH PROJEKTNIH
FAZ PLANIRANJA KAKOVOSTI NAPREDNIH IZDELKOV (PKNI)
£ukasz Rudolf
*
, Marek Roszak
Silesian University of Technology, School of Doctors, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Department of Engineering Materials and
Biomaterials, Stanis³awa Konarskiego 18A St., 44-100 Gliwice
Prejem rokopisa – received: 2023-12-29; sprejem za objavo – accepted for publication: 2024-04-24
doi:10.17222/mit.2023.1085
This study presents a tool integrating PDCA Deming cycle and Design for Six Sigma principles to aid component development
(especially dedicated for innovative projects). Designed for universal use across APQP (Advanced Product Quality Planning)
phases, the tool guides through five key stages: Identify, Define, Design, Optimize, and Validate. Each stage involves specific
actions and approvals, ensuring thorough development and risk assessment. Notably, the tool accommodates changing product
requirements and validation challenges, allowing for adjustments without project delays. Its adaptability within the APQP
framework is crucial for complex product development. The implementation at Tenneco demonstrates its effectiveness in struc-
turing and overseeing development processes and improving project outcomes. Future analyses will delve into its impact and
guide further research.
Keywords: product development, PDAC, quality planning tools, change management
Avtorja predstavljata {tudijo orodja za tako imenovano celovito na~rtovanje z Demingovim krogom »Planiraj-Naredi-
Kontroliraj-Ukrepaj« (PDCA; angl.: Plan-Do-Check-Act) in oblikovanjem s {estimi sigma temelji (DSSP; angl..: Dsign for Six
Sigma principles) kot pomo~ pri razvoju novih komponent ({e posebej namenjenih za inovativne projekte). Orodje je oblikovano
za univerzalno uporabo preko faz kvalitetnega planiranja naprednih izdelkov (APQP; Advanced Product Quality Planning) in
orodij ki vodijo skozi pet klju~nih stopenj ali faz: »Identificiraj, Definiraj, Oblikuj, Optimiziraj, Potrdi« (angl.: Identify, Define,
Design, Optimize, and Validate). V vsako fazo so vklju~ena specifi~na dejanja oziroma akcije in presoje, ki zagotavljajo
natan~en razvoj in oceno tveganja. Pomembno je, da je orodje prilagojeno eventualnim zahtevam po spremembi izdelka in
izzivom njegove legalizacije, ne da bi pri tem pri{lo do zamud pri realizaciji projekta. Njegova prilagodljivost v okviru faz
kvalitetnega planiranja naprednih izdelkov je odlo~ilna za razvoj kompliciranih izdelkov.Uporaba pri~ujo~ega orodja v firmi
Tenneco je pokazala njegovo u~inkovitost v strukturiranju in nadzoru razvojnih procesov ter izbolj{anje rezultatov projekta.
Prihodnje analize pa bodo pokazale njegov vpliv in vodilo za nadaljnje raziskave.
Klju~ne besede: razvoj izdelka, metoda »planiraj-naredi-kontroliraj-ukrepa«j (PNKU), orodja za kvalitetno planiranje,
sprememba upravljanja
1 INTRODUCTION
Due to the high market demands for cars, manufac-
turers associated with the automotive industry are ex-
pected to minimize the time needed for product develop-
ment and production, in parallel with the high
expectations for reliability. In many cases, the correct
implementation of the APQP methodology requires sup-
port with additional planning tools aimed at increasing
the efficiency of implementing subsequent phases of the
APQP; this is particularly important in the case of new,
innovative, complex products.
1–3
The result of the research conducted at Tenneco Au-
tomotive Eastern Europe for the department responsible
for the development of a product, such as an electroni-
cally controlled shock absorber, is an original tool that
systematizes actions and tasks that need to be taken to
correctly define requirements, design, optimize and vali-
date a new product. The fundamental goal was to design
a universal planning tool regardless of the component or
assembly being developed or modified. It was also essen-
tial to use the designed tool irrespective of the phase of
the APQP in which the project is located.
2 EXPERIMENTAL PART
As part of the conducted research, a tool was created
to support the development of a new component, assem-
bly, or introducing changes to an existing one. The devel-
oped tool is based on the concepts of the PDCA Deming
cycle (Plan-Do-Check-Act) and Design for Six Sigma. A
key priority during the design of the new tool was to en-
able its universal and easy application, regardless of the
Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 58 (2024) 3, 429–431 429
UDK 330.341.1 ISSN 1580-2949
Original scientific article/Izvirni znanstveni ~lanek MTAEC9, 58(3)429(2024)
*Corresponding author's e-mail:
lukasz.rudolf@polsl.pl (£ukasz Rudolf)

type of component being developed and the phase of
APQP in which the project is currently located.
4.5
3 RESULTS
The proprietary tool (presented in a simplified ver-
sion in Figure 1) divides developing or modifying a
component or assembly into 5 phases (Identity, Define,
Design, Optimize, and Validate). Transition to the next
phase requires completion and approval of specific ac-
tions from the previous phase. The individual phases are
characterized below:
1. IDENTIFY: A favourable decision to initiate the
development process of a new component or introduce
changes to an existing one.
2. DEFINE: Completing, analysing, and, where re-
quired, quantifying the requirements for the new product.
In this phase, the level of risk associated with developing
£. RUDOLF, M. ROSZAK: EFFICIENCY OF THE PRODUCT-DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AS A FACTOR DETERMINING ...
430 Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 58 (2024) 3, 429–431
Figure 1: Structured process for product development (own elaboration)
Figure 2: Risk-Assessment tool, part of the product development process. Assessing potential development risks with four questions (own elabo-
ration)

a given part is also determined. The original Risk As-
sessment tool is presented in Figure 2.
3. DESIGN: In a multifunctional team, develop a list
of possible solutions and select the optimal one for the
developed requirements.
4. OPTIMIZE: Clarifying technical details with the
selected contractor.
5. VALIDATE: Component validation by the planned
and approved plan.
Using the new tool is particularly important when the
product requirements change, or validation results are
not acceptable; this requires changes to the product with-
out affecting the accepted project schedule. The pro-
posed solution aims to eliminate the possibility of omit-
ting significant requirements and actions, which could
negatively affect the project’s further implementation
(timeliness and profitability).
6.7
4 DISCUSSION
Besides structuring the product-development process,
the proprietary solutions presented above allow its use in
any phase of APQP, if necessary. This is important for
products where development often goes beyond the stan-
dard framework provided in the model approach, acc. to
APQP. The tool is implemented and currently being
tested. A detailed analysis of the results will constitute a
separate study that will continue the solutions presented
in this article.
5 CONCLUSIONS
The product-development process, implemented at
Tenneco as an additional tool supporting the already-im-
plemented APQP process, changes the effectiveness of
the project’s implementation (effectiveness of imple-
menting subsequent phases acc. to APQP) by systematiz-
ing the type and sequence of activities related to the de-
velopment or modification of the component.
Additionally, it is possible to monitor the level of risk as-
sociated with individual product elements that are devel-
oped in a systematized way and/or modified during the
APQP process.
Acknowledgment
The study was created as a part of the doctoral stud-
ies at the Joint Doctoral School covered by the program
of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education "Imple-
mentation doctorate".
6 REFERENCES
1
T. V. Tokmakova, V. I. Vysotskaya, E. N. Tokmakova, Improving
Product Quality by APQP and PPAP. Russ. Engin. Res. 42 (2022)
286–287, doi:10.3103/S1068798X2203025X
2
Automotive Industry Action Group Association. Advanced Product
Quality Planning and Control Plan (APQP), Reference Manual.
2nd Edition. AIAG (2008)
3
£. Rudolf, M. T. Roszak, Tools of product quality planning in the
production part approval process. Archives of Materials Science and
Engineering 118 (2022) 2: 67–74 doi:10.5604/01.3001.0016.2591
4
A. C. Dzulinski, A. Braghini Junior, D. M. G. Chiroli. Design for Six
Sigma: A Review of the Definitions, Objectives, Activities, and
Tools, Engineering Management Journal, 35 (2023) 2, 161–180,
doi:10.1080/10429247.2022.2041964
5
V. Nguyen, N. Nguyen, B. Schumacher, T. Tran, Practical Applica-
tion of Plan–Do–Check–Act Cycle for Quality Improvement of Sus-
tainable Packaging: A Case Study. Applied Sciences 10 (2020) 6332.
doi:10.3390/app10186332
6
J. A. Doshi, D. Desai, Overview of Automotive Core Tools: Applica-
tions and Benefits. Journal of The Institution of Engineers India Ser.
C98( 2017) 515–526, doi:10.1007/s40032-016-0288-z
7
E. A. Cudney, T. K. Agustiady, Design for six sigma: a practical ap-
proach through innovation. CRC Press, New York (2016), 349
£. RUDOLF, M. ROSZAK: EFFICIENCY OF THE PRODUCT-DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AS A FACTOR DETERMINING ...
Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 58 (2024) 3, 429–431 431