This paper presents a method based on multiattribute utility theory (MAUT) that facilitates the selection of a product line. The method helps select the subset of products to manufacture based on criteria at the: (1) product level (e.g., manufacturing cost, profit); and (2) product family level (e.g., commonality, component reuse, variety, market coverage). An example involving a family of staplers is used to demonstrate the method and to provide a well-documented engineering application of MAUT in product family design.

1.
Olewnik
,
A.
, and
Lewis
,
K.
, 2006, “
A Decision Support Framework for Flexible System Design
,”
J. Eng. Design
0954-4828,
17
(
1
), pp.
75
97
.
2.
Dai
,
Z.
, and
Scott
,
M. J.
, 2006, “
Effective Product Family Design Using Preference Aggregation
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
1050-0472,
128
(
4
), pp.
659
667
.
3.
Fellini
,
R.
,
Kokkolaras
,
M.
,
Papalambros
,
P.
, and
Perez-Duarte
,
A.
, 2005, “
Platform Selection Under Performance Loss Constraints in Optimal Design of Product Families
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
1050-0472,
127
(
4
), pp.
524
535
.
4.
Keeney
,
R. L.
, and
Raiffa
,
H.
, 1993,
Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs
,
Cambridge University Press
, Cambridge, UK.
5.
Keefer
,
D. L.
, and
Kirkwood
,
C. W.
, 1978, “
A Multiobjective Decision Analysis: Budget Planning for Product Engineering
,”
Oper. Res. Q.
0030-3623,
29
(
5
), pp.
435
442
.
6.
Gurnani
,
A. P.
, and
Lewis
,
K.
, 2005, “
Robust Multiattribute Decision Making Under Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Design
,”
Eng. Optimiz.
0305-215X,
37
(
8
), pp.
813
830
.
7.
Soelberg
,
P. O.
, 1967, “
Unprogrammed Decision Making
,”
Industrial Management Review
,
8
(
1
), pp.
19
29
.
8.
Seepersad
,
C. C.
,
Mistree
,
F.
, and
Allen
,
J. K.
, 2002,
Proceedings of the 2002 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, Advances in Design Automation
, Montreal, Canada, ASME Paper No. DETC2002/DAC-34096.
9.
Thevenot
,
H. J.
, 2006, “
A Method For Product Family Redesign Based on Component Commonality Analysis
,” Ph.D., The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
10.
Thevenot
,
H. J.
, and
Simpson
,
T. W.
, 2006, “
A Comprehensive Metric for Evaluating Component Commonality in a Product Family
,”
Proceedings ASME 2006 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference
,
Philadelphia
, PA, ASME, Paper No. DETC2006-DAC99268.
11.
Thevenot
,
H. J.
, and
Simpson
,
T. W.
, 2006, “
Commonality Indices for Product Family Design: A Detailed Comparison
,”
J. Eng. Design
0954-4828,
17
(
2
), pp.
99
119
.
12.
Kota
,
S.
,
Sethuraman
,
K.
, and
Miller
,
R.
, 2000,
A Metric for Evaluating Design Commonality in Product Families
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
1050-0472,
122
(
4
), pp.
403
410
.
13.
Kirkwood
,
C. W.
, 1997,
Strategic Decision Making: Multiobjective Decision Analysis with Spreadsheets
,
Wadsworth Publishing Company
,
Belmont
, CA.
14.
Pratt
,
J. W.
, 1964, “
Risk Aversion in the Small and in the Large
,”
Econometrica
0012-9682,
32
, pp.
122
136
.
15.
Porter
,
M. E.
, 1985,
Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance
,
The Free Press
, New York, NY.
16.
Desai
,
P.
,
Kekre
,
S.
,
Radhakrishnan
,
S.
, and
Srinivasan
,
K.
, 2001, “
Product Differentiation and Commonality in Design: Balancing Revenue and Cost Drivers
,”
Manage. Sci.
0025-1909,
47
(
1
), pp.
37
51
.
You do not currently have access to this content.