MATEC Web of Conferences 223, 01004 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201822301004 ICAD 2018 Application of Axiomatic Design for Agile Product Development Erik Puik1,*, and Darek Ceglarek2 1HU University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, Padualaan 99, 3584 CH Utrecht, the Netherlands 2International Digital Laboratory, WMG, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK Abstract. Agile, and iterative, development methods for new product development are gaining in popularity under product engineers; where it initially was just applied for software development, now larger adoption takes place for product development in general. The design rules of agile development are somewhat conflicting with the guidelines of Axiomatic Design. In this paper, it is investigated why this is the case, what can be done about it, and how can the strengths of agile development be combined with Axiomatic Design to optimise methods for product design. It is shown that the methods are indeed advising on different and conflicting strategies, however, by attenuating the agile design rules in the early stage of design, and doing the same for AD in the later stage of design, best of both worlds can be combined. 1 Introduction embedded in virtually all agile methodologies. It is typically topic (i) that is causing the problems when New product development (NPD) is getting more agile development methods are used. As such, Scrum- complex by the year due to the increased means for sprints focus more on detailed issues than the ‘design of global communication, mainly supported by the internet. the whole’. Agile development methods have a tendency More development groups are globally active, which to move attention from ‘the whole’ to smaller, more increases competition in research and development. specific problems that stand between the now and the Speed is an essence when executing NPD due to this next demonstrable prototype. This is where Axiomatic competition. Products that are introduced to the market Design (AD) is expected to contribute. With its too late will miss substantial turnover [1]. Developers Independence and Information Axioms, it focuses on apply methods for ‘Systems Engineering’ in the respectively ‘Doing the right things’ and ‘Doing these development process, being able to oversee elements of things right’ [8]. Mainly the first proposition may be the design process in the context of the whole system [2] considered a valuable addition to most agile (the term ‘Engineering Design’ is also applied in the development methods, maintaining focus on the ‘big US). Traditional system engineering models are applied picture’. Questions that arise are: in NPD to describe the process in a linear way, such as • Can typical errors in the agile development process the ‘Waterfall-Model’, ‘PRINCE2’, or the ‘V-Model’. be described in the context of AD; Since the change of the century, the shortcomings of • What are the consequences on the Axioms if these these models have grown to serious obstacles due to the errors occur; increasing NPD-dynamics of modern days [3]. Agile and • How can AD be applied to prevent these errors from iterative methods, ‘Scrum’ being the most valued of happening. many variants, have proven the ability to handle the dynamics, however, this tends to come at the cost of The paper is organised as follows. Section 2 explains the rigidity in NPD [4]-[6]. E. g. for the scum methodology, background of linear and agile methods. Section 3 this lack of rigidity is mainly caused by client explains the methodology of investigation, and Section 4 involvement and lack of visibility over the project inventories possible errors in the (agile) development outside the iterative ‘sprints’. To address rigidity in process. Finally, Section 5 discusses the findings and NPD, there are basically two ways to be applied [7]: draws conclusions. (i) Organise the design, and all its elements, by the application of knowledge (as detailed understan- 2 Background ding of the design is enabled by knowledge); (ii) Test preliminary designs as soon as possible to In this background section, traditional linear models are enforce appearance of errors and address them inventoried. These linear models have been preceding accordingly (letting physics speak). the agile models that recently gained in popularity. The Since testing is a central theme in the application of agile most-applied agile method being the Scrum- product development methods, topic (ii) is well- methodology. * Corresponding author: [email protected] © The Authors, published by EDP Sciences. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). MATEC Web of Conferences 223, 01004 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201822301004 ICAD 2018 2.1 The Waterfall Model development methods for iterative development. Agile software development methodologies focus upon Widely applied models in industry are the ‘Waterfall- incremental design and hence a cyclic approach. The aim Model’ and the ‘V-Model’. Royce, who was the first to with these methods is to: (i) make the development report the Waterfall-Model [9] criticised the model in the process more responsive in changing environments, (ii) same article blaming the lack of (old school) process pursue functioning software over extensive iterations and testing. The Waterfall-Model also forms documentation, (iii) centre individuals and their the basis for the process-model of the ‘PRINCE’ method interactions rather than tools and processes, and (iv) that was introduced in 1989 (PRojects IN Controlled value customer collaboration over customer contract Environments). PRINCE’2’, was a continued negotiation. development to enable broader application than PRINCE Of great influence are the ‘Spiral Model of that was mainly intended for ICT developments. Software Development’ by Boehm [22], the ‘Engineering Design Process’ by Ertas & Jones [23], 2.2 The V-Model HP’s ‘Product Development Process’, the ‘Scrum development method’ [24], and IBM’s ‘Rational Unified The V-Model, also based on the Waterfall-Model, was Process’ [25]. All these methods were initially developed originally introduced by Boehm [10] and simultaneously to streamline software developments but later-on found developed further in Germany and the US in the second their ways for broader application. half of the eighties [11], [12]. In the 1991 proceedings Scrum may be considered the most valued form for the National Council on Systems Engineering within the family of agile development methodologies. (NCOSE); now INCOSE as of 1995, the V-Model was Scrum uses incremental development procedures with an adopted in the US for modelling of mainly software objective to get working software into the hands of the systems. Like all basic Waterfall-Models and PRINCE2, stakeholders as quickly as possible. As such, Scrum puts the V-Model suffers from the problem of ‘missing business value functions into stakeholder possession iterations’ [3], [9]. This is not as much a problem to early on in the software development life cycle. The accountants and project managers as it is for developers more traditional process-oriented development methods and testers. The most damaging aspect might be the cannot provide this agile capability; stakeholders effect that the V-Model effectively discourages user typically would not have access to any software involvement in evaluating the design before arriving at produced until far later in the process. This agile the formal testing stages. By then it is too late to make performance is provided in a straightforward procedure significant changes to the design. It must be mentioned that enhances focus and communication in an iterative that the need for sufficient iterations was emphasised process. Scrum starts with the business case just as one when Rook introduced the V-Model, but since the model would do with process-oriented development. From this does not specifically visualise it, unilateral application of point, it diverges from linear development methods. The the model has become the standard for most industrial customer requirements are inventoried and refined in applicants. Nevertheless, the V-Model, and in somewhat close cooperation with stakeholders and the project lesser extent the Waterfall-Model, today are popular group. The remaining requirements or ‘User Stories’ are systems engineering methods in industry since they meet kept in a list known as the ‘Backlog’. Cycles or ‘Sprints’ needs for management. Though the V-model was are initiated from the backlog to address the customer presented over 30 years ago, discussion is still active and requirements with the objective to produce operating many variations of the model are still being developed solutions. The solutions should be fully functional, [13]-[16]. tested, and documented with the ability to be shipped as a finished product, though with limited functionality. 2.3 Agile Methods for Product Development Sprints may last from one week to a month and their progression is kept in a ‘Burn Down Chart’ to feed its Shewhart described in 1939 the ‘Plan-Do-Check-Act status back to the team. A structure of usually brief cycle of continuous improvement’ based on the meetings takes care of extra information exchange principles of empiricism as induced by Bacon in his 17th within the project team and leads to joint decisions that century work ‘Novum Organum’ [17], [18]. The initial are supported by the customer as he regularly Plan-Do-Check-Act was advertised more broadly by participates meetings. Deming who replaced the stage ‘Check’ by ‘Study’ to Scrum and related agile methods also suffer from emphasise that the analysis in this stage was to prevail drawbacks compared to the traditional methods. It may over inspection [19]. The method was optimised in the fail at the following aspects: (i) a drawback according to sixties by respectively Asimow and Mesarovic as the Highsmith & Cockburn is the fact that an external client ‘Iconic model of the Design Process’ [20], [21]. The has to be actively involved in the project [4].