# Conceptual Reference Model for the Product Development Process Oriented by Design for Six Sigma

Marta Gomes Francisco, Osiris Canciglieri Junior, Ângelo Sant'anna

► To cite this version:

Marta Gomes Francisco, Osiris Canciglieri Junior, Ângelo Sant'anna. Conceptual Reference Model for the Product Development Process Oriented by Design for Six Sigma. 17th IFIP International Conference on Product Lifecycle Management (PLM), Jul 2020, Rapperswil, Switzerland. pp.347-356, 10.1007/978-3-030-62807-9_28. hal-03753143

HAL Id: hal-03753143

https://inria.hal.science/hal-03753143v1

Submitted on 17 Aug 2022

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 - Attribution - International License
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

ifip

International Federation for Information Processing

This document is the original author manuscript of a paper submitted to an IFIP
conference proceedings or other IFIP publication by Springer Nature. As such, there
may be some differences in the official published version of the paper. Such
differences, if any, are usually due to reformatting during preparation for publication or
minor corrections made by the author(s) during final proofreading of the publication
manuscript.
# Conceptual Reference Model for the Product Development Process Oriented by Design for Six Sigma

Marta Gomes Francisco¹ [0000-0002-5413-6865], Osiris Canciglieri Junior² [0000-0002-8503-9275], Ângelo Márcio Oliveira Sant'Anna³ [0000-0001-8332-8877]

¹Industrial and Systems Engineering Graduate Program - Polytechnic School - Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná (PPGEPS/PUCPR), Curitiba, Parana, Brazil and Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Paraná (IFPR), Campo Largo, Paraná, Brazil -
marta.francisco@ifpr.edu.br

²Industrial and Systems Engineering Graduate Program (PPGEPS) - Polytechnic School - Pontifical Catholic University of Parana (PUCPR); Imaculada Conceição Street, 1155, Prado Velho; CEP 80215-901 - * osiris.canciglieri@pucpr.br

³Federal University of Bahia(UFBA), Salvador, Bahia, Brazil -
angelo.santanna@ufba.br

**Abstract:** Changes in the world market and consumer expectations have changed the way organizations develop new products. Meeting these challenges means doing better from early stages of design, avoiding possible failures and adjustments at a late stage in the development process. Design For Six Sigma (DFSS) has been successfully applied in the product development process (PDP), with the purpose of ensuring convergence to customer specifications, ensuring reliability in product development, reducing or eliminating operational vulnerabilities and increasing product robustness with use of appropriate techniques and tools. This study showed that there is no systematic DFSS structure integrated with a reference model for the product development process that encompasses the entire process, from observing the consumer's need to discontinuing the product in the market. This paper proposes a conceptual model for the product development process oriented to DFSS, based on a systematic study of existing DFSS methods with the integration of a PDP reference model. The research strategy of this study sought to understand the phases of the existing DFSS methods, as well as to identify the factors that determine or contribute to the application of these methods in the product development process. The investigation of the theme showed a lack of standardization of a DFSS method integrated with a reference model for the product development process, which allowed the identification of 11 activities from each phase of the DFSS methods, which were aligned with the 14 activities proposed by the reference model for the MOP & D product development process. This study led to a consensus in the construction of an integrated conceptual model oriented to DFSS concepts with a friendly characteristic for application in the product development process of durable goods.

**Keywords:** Design For Six Sigma methods, Reference models for product development, PDP, DFSS, Product development and manufacturing process.
# 1 Introduction

The product development process transforms data and technical possibilities into a market opportunity and information, allowing the design of new products. The transformation of this market opportunity encompasses the quality of the product and process as well as competitive factors such as cost, development time, product, reliability and flexibility (Clark and Fujimoto, 1991; Slack et al., 2002).

Developing new products is a systematic process that integrates different processes and people in an organization with the aim of identifying the needs of users and transforming them into valuable information for the design of a product capable of meeting market expectations. Thus, developing new products for commercial purposes is an important and necessary task for organizations, but they involve several steps, from the identification of the opportunity to the discontinuity of the product in the market, these steps being crucial for the success of the product (Pugh, 1991; Rozenfeld et al., 2006).

To assist organizations in the product development process, several approaches to reference models are presented in the literature in order to assist organizations and professionals. PDP models can present specific approaches with a proposal for a creative process or sustainability, as well as product project management approaching engineering and design. Some reference models are well known in the literature such as Löbach's Model (2001), Baxter's Model (2011), El Marghani Model (2011), Ulrich and Eppinger Model (2012), Vezzoli Model, Kohtala and Srinivasan (2014), Platcheck et al. (2008), Asimow's Model (1968), Cooper's Model: Stage-Gate (1993), Pahl & Beitz Model (1996), Unified Model (Rozenfeld et al., 2006), Cascade Model (Coley Consulting, 2010), Model V (Coley Consulting, 2002), among others (Fernandes, 2017; Pereira, 2014; Sá, 2017).

Incorporated in several product development strategies, we highlight Design For Six Sigma, with an approach that involves the use of engineering and statistical tools that are applied appropriately in each phase of product development. DFSS aims to integrate the principles of the six sigma concepts into product development, focusing on the robustness of the product design and process for the best functioning of the product under different conditions of use, identifying errors and problems likely to occur during the project and then outlining mechanisms of prevention.

Creveling et al. (2003) cite that Design For Six Sigma is guided by an integrated set of tools that are implemented in the phases of a product development process, providing qualitative results summarized in managerial performance indicators of the critical parameters of the product in question, related to a set of requirements obtained based on the customer's voice, in order to achieve 6 sigma standards in the product. DFSS encompasses many tools and best practices that can be selectively employed during the phases of a product development process in order to reduce cost, time and increase quality. In the literature there are several DFSS methods applied in order to develop new products, as well as to improve an existing product. However, DFSS methods do not cover the entire product development process, that is, from initialization to discontinuity of the product on the market.
In order to incorporate all the concepts that permeate the Design For Six Sigma methods applied to product development to a reference model for the integrated product development process, the authors had as a basic premise: How to integrate a product development reference model with the concepts of DFSS methods that is friendly and that meets the dynamics of organizations and consumer expectations?

This study aimed to build a reference model for the integrated product development
process oriented to Design For Six Sigma, with the purpose of contemplating all the
activities proposed by a reference model as well as the activities and concepts of Design
For Six Sigma. The product development model oriented to Design For Six Sigma
described, focuses on an integrative approach of the activities that make up the DFSS
methods presented in the literature. The characterization of the 11 activities of each
phase of the DFSS methods allowed a constructive convergence of the concepts of the
DFSS methodology with the integration to a reference model for the product
development process (Francisco et al., 2019). Thus, the reference model presented in
this study aims to systematize the product development process since the product's
initialization and discontinuity with synergy of the Design For Six Sigma concepts and
a PDP reference model. The model presented, includes the phases and activities
inherent to the manufactured product development process with its particularities
within the product's life cycle in the market. This model allows an integration among
the teams of different areas and roles of the organization, with activities being
performed in parallel to provide a reduction in time and cost as well as improved
product and process quality.

## 2 Design for Six Sigma and reference model for the product development process

Developing new products is always a challenge for organizations, as it is linked to their survival in the competitive market. Constant technological changes and a more observant and discerning consumer develop strategies capable of understanding and identifying potential for business expansion, which are in line with consumer expectations, lower manufacturing cost and quality, are important factors for the development process of product. Design For Six Sigma is an approach with great potential as a product development strategy, as it presents a phased structure that guides in the product development process, as well as the implementation of tools and techniques. DFSS can be defined as a global strategy of continuous improvement, leading organizations to concentrate efforts on systematic projects aiming at 6σ performance and allowing the products developed to be in line with consumer specifications (Awad and Shanshal, 2017; Jenab and Moslehpour, 2018).

Werkema (2005) mentions that Design for Six Sigma can be defined as a systematic
methodological approach, characterized by the joint use of statistical and engineering
methods. When properly applied, it allows the company to launch the right product on
the market, in the shortest time and with minimal cost. Creveling et al. (2003)
emphasize that DFSS is a prevention methodology, in which it seeks to do the right
activity at the right time during the product development process, assists in the process
of invention, development, optimization, incorporation of new technologies in the product and product verification before launching on the market.

The literature cites several DFSS methods that are applied in the product development process, some of which are better known and frequently applied by organizations, such as: Define, Measure, Analyze, Design and Verify (DMADV); Identify, Design, Optimize and Validate (IDOV); Define, Measure, Analyze, Design, Optimize and Verify (DMADOV); Define, Design, Optimize, Validate(DDOV); Identify, Characterize, Optimize, Validate (ICOV); Define, Measure, Explore, Develop, Implement (DMEDI); Define, Customer, Concept, Design, Implement (DCCDI); Invention and Innovation, Develop, Optimize, Verify(I²DOV); Identify, Define, Develop, Optimize, Verify & Validate(IDDOV); Concept development, Design development, Optimization, Verifyi, Certification (CDOV) and Define, Characterize, Optimize, Verify (DCOV), among others (Sokovic et al., 2010; Ericsoon et al., 2009 and Shahin, 2008). According to the authors Watson and DeYong (2010) the strength of DFSS is not in its independent performance, but comes from the integration of methods and concepts that were developed independently in a system of thought and work that results in product designs that serve customers better and generate attractive profits.

In this study, the authors observed in the theoretical line of investigation 11 activities that are performed by the different phases of the different DFSS methods. In this study, the authors observed in the theoretical line of investigation 11 activities that are performed by the different phases of the different DFSS methods. In this way, the authors were able to identify the similarities and gaps in the activities of the different phases of the existing methods (Francisco et al., 2019). Figure 1 seeks to summarize the 11 activities and gaps observed in the DFSS methods.

From the analysis of the activities of the DFSS methods, the authors sought to integrate these activities with a reference model for the Product Development Process. Thus, the reference model for the product development process applied in this integration of concepts was the model idealized by Pereira (2014), known as MOP&D. The MOP&D reference model was conceived through a careful analysis of the different approaches to development process models that are present in the literature. The MOP&D reference model presented in Figure 2, contains in its structure 3 macrophases: Pre-development, Development and Post-development. These macrophases are broken down into six phases: Initiation, Planning, Design, Implementation, Production and Maintenance, being summarized in 14 different stages. Thus, the authors incorporated the 14 activities proposed by the reference model for the MOP&D product development process (Pereira, 2014; Pereira et al., 2014; Pereira and Canciglieri, 2014), with the 11 activities observed through the theoretical line of investigation of the DFSS methods.
<table><caption>Fig. 1. Activities of DFSS methods.</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>DFSS METHODS</th><th>STEPS</th><th>DMADIC</th><th>DMADOV</th><th>DDOV</th><th>ICOV</th><th>DMEDI</th><th>DCCDI</th><th>ITDOV</th><th>PIDOV</th><th>IDDOV</th><th>DIDES</th><th>CDOV</th><th>DCOV</th><th>IDEAS</th><th>DMADY</th><th>IDOV</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="11">ACTIVITIES / OBJECTIVES OF THE PHASES OF THE DFSS METHODS</td><td>Define/identify/ plan the product design, the goals and constraints</td><td>1</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Generate new ideas-creating something new- Define innovation project</td><td>2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>✓</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Improve existing product</td><td>3</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Identify/ measure the consumers necessities and translate them in functional requirements of the product</td><td>4</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Conceptual idea of the product, selection and choice</td><td>5</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Project/development/execution of the product</td><td>6</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Design / development of process concepts</td><td>7</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>✓</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Optimize product and process design</td><td>8</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>✓</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Evaluation of the product in the production process in meeting the defined specifications</td><td>9</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Evaluation of process performance to identify best practices and correction of errors in production</td><td>10</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Maintain product control in the process to meet defined specifications</td><td>11</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

Based on the study of the 11 activities of the DFSS methods and the 14 activities of the reference model for the MOP & D product development process, the authors proposed the integration of these activities by identifying the existing gaps, as shown in Figure 3, in order to allow alignment of the concepts and the design of a conceptual reference model PDP oriented to DFSS.

<table><caption>Fig. 2. Reference models for Process Development Product</caption><thead><tr><th>Macro-phases</th><th>Phases</th><th>Stages</th><th>The MOP&amp;D Model (Pereira, 2014)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="3">Pre-Development</td><td>Initialization</td><td>1</td><td>Statement of Demand</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Planning</td><td>2</td><td>Scope Definition</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Project Planning</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="11">Development</td><td rowspan="5">Design</td><td>4</td><td>Study of Principles</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Conceptual Design</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Preliminary Design</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>Detailed Design</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>Refinement of the Design</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Implementation</td><td>9</td><td>Manufacturing Process Design</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>Manufacturing and Finishing Product</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>Marketing Planning</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Pos-Development</td><td>Production</td><td>12</td><td>Product Launch</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Maintenance</td><td>13</td><td>Review Post Launch</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>Discontinue Product</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>**Fig. 3.** Activities of the DFSS methods contemplated in the reference model MOP&D</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">INTEGRATION OF THE ACTIVITIES/OBJECTIVES OF THE DFSS METHODS IN THE ACTIVITIES OF THE MOP&amp;D MODEL (PEREIRA, 2014)</th><th rowspan="2"></th><th colspan="14">DFSS METHODS</th></tr><tr><th>DMADIC</th><th>DMADOV</th><th>DDOV</th><th>ICOV</th><th>DMEDI</th><th>DCCDI</th><th>TDOV</th><th>PIDOV</th><th>IDDOV</th><th>DIDES</th><th>CDOV</th><th>DCOV</th><th>IDAS</th><th>DMADY</th><th>IDOV</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Statement of Demand</td><td>1</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td></tr><tr><td>Scope Definition</td><td>2</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td></tr><tr><td>Product Planning</td><td>3</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Study of Principles</td><td>4</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Conceptual Design</td><td>5</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>✓</td><td></td><td></td><td>✓</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Preliminary Design</td><td>6</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Detailed Design</td><td>7</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td></tr><tr><td>Refinement of the Design</td><td>8</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>✓</td></tr><tr><td>Manufacturing Process Design</td><td>9</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>✓</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Manufacturing and Finishing Product</td><td>10</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Marketing Planning</td><td>11</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Product Launch</td><td>12</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Review Post Launch</td><td>13</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Discontinue Product</td><td>14</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

## 3 Results

Following with the analysis of the 11 activities of the phases and gaps observed in the DFSS methods by the authors Francisco et al, 2019, a constructive correlation of these activities was sought with the 14 activities presented in the reference model MOP&D idealized by Pereira (2014). That said, it was possible to outline the construction of a conceptual model for the product development process oriented to DFSS. In the DFSS-PDP conceptual model, the 3 macrophases of the product development process are being contemplated - Pre-development, Development and Post-development, and each macrophase is fragmented into 5 phases - Planning, Design, Implementation, Industrialization and Monitoring. The phases of the DFSS-PDP model are broken down into 8 stages, in which the activities relevant to each phase of the model will be performed, as well as the implementation of engineering tools and techniques. Therefore, the DFSS-PDP model emphasizes the deficiencies analyzed in the DFSS methods and incorporates with the integrated product development model MOP&D (Pereira, 2014), idealizing a conceptual model for the process of developing a feasible product for application in the durable goods industry that can allow the organization a better performance of the quality of the product and process, promoting cost reduction and preventing failures during the manufacturing process.

Figure 4 summarizes the conceptual model DFSS-PDP conceived by merging the studies of the DFSS methods and the reference model MOP&D. A questionnaire to assess the structure of the proposed reference model, including the proposed phases, activities, tools and engineering techniques, summarized in Figure 5, was directed to five specialists in the area of durable goods product development, working in national and multinational companies of different industrial segments. In the model evaluation
questionnaire, the Likert Scale was applied with a variation from 1 to 5, with the following qualitative representation: Does not meet the expectation; meet the expectation a bit; partially meet the expectation; meet the expectation almost fully and meet the expectation fully was applied to analyze the degree of importance observed by the specialists. Through Cronbach's alpha reliability analysis, it was possible to guarantee the consistency of the questionnaire for the model, in which it was validated with an alpha value of 0,78. The result obtained was shown to be promising, since the coefficient value is above 0.70.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 4.** Conceptual model for the product development process oriented to the Design For Six Sigma.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 5. Engineering tools and techniques suggested for the proposed model.</figcaption></figure>

## 4 Final Discussion

The present study revealed that the application of Design For Six Sigma and its various methods allows to ensure reliability and convergence to product specifications during the development process. However, DFSS methods do not systematize a product development process from initialization up to product discontinuity PDP reference models seeks to systematize and address the entire product life cycle. Thus, the authors identified the key activities performed by the DFSS methods, summarized in 11 activities, which were incorporated into the 14 key activities of the reference model for the MOP&D product development processes. Therefore, the authors integrated these activities, based on a constructive and theoretical research relationship, led to the alignment of a conceptual reference model for the DFSS-oriented product development process. The model proposed by the authors, aims to ensure greater reliability and robustness to the product development process with reduction / elimination of operational weaknesses through the application of appropriate techniques and tools in all phases of the product development process, from initialization up to discontinuity of the product on the market. The proposal of the PDP-DFSS conceptual model is to provide a dynamic and friendly product development system capable of contemplating the expectations of the organization and the consumer in the product development process in less time, competitive price and cost reduction.

The PDP-DFSS conceptual model was evaluated by experienced professionals in the product development area, who, through a questionnaire, evaluated the structure of the conceptual model with the proposed phases, activities, tools and engineering techniques. In the analysis of the questionnaire's consistency, Cronbach's alpha coefficient was applied, presenting a value of 0,78. Therefore, the reliability of the results obtained was verified, ensuring greater robustness and relevance to the research. The object of exploration of future research, includes the application of the conceptual model PDP-DFSS in the development of a product.
# 5 Acknowledgements

The researchers would like to thank the Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná (PUCPR) - Polytechnic School – Industrial and Systems Engineering Graduate Program (PPGEPS) and National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) for the funding and structure of this research.

# References

1. Asimow M.; Introdução ao projeto de engenharia. 1.ed. Edited by Jou. São Paulo (1968).

2. Awad, M.I. and Shanshal, Y. A.: Utilizing Kaizen process and DFSS methodology for new product development. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management (34), 378–394 (2017).

3. Baxter, M.: Projeto de produto: guia prático para o design de novos produtos. 3. ed. Blucher. São Paulo (2011).

4. Clark, K.B. and Fujimoto, T.: Product Development Performance: Strategy, Organization, and Management in the World Auto Industry, 1ª ed., Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1991).

5. Coley Consulting. From waterfall to v-model, http://www.coleyconsulting.co.uk/from-waterfall-to-v-model.htm, last accessed 2020/02/25.

6. Coley Consulting. Waterfall model, http://www.coleyconsulting.co.uk/from-waterfall-to-v-model.htm, last accessed 2020/02/25.

7. Cooper, R.G.: Winning at new products: Accelerating the process from idea to launch. 1a.ed. Basic Book. Wesley, USA (1993).

8. Creveling, C. M., Slutsky, J., Antis, D. and Slutsky, J. L.: Design for Six Sigma in Technology and Product Development. 1st ed. Prentice Hall PTR. New Jersey, USA (2003).

9. El Marghani, V.G.R.: Design Process Model at the Operational Level (doctorate Thesis). Aeronautics Institute of Technology. São José dos Campos (2010).

10. Ericsson, E., Närman, P., Lilliesköld, J., and Sörqvist, L.: DFSS–evolution or revolution? A study of critical effects related to successful implementation of DFSS (2009).

11. Fernandes, P.T.: Reference model for sustainability oriented design process (doctorate Thesis). Industrial and Systems Engineering Graduate Program - PPGEPS at Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná (2017).

12. Francisco, M.G., Junior, O.C. and Sant'Anna, Â.M.O.: Design For Six Sigma Integrated Product Development Reference Model Through Systematic Review, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma (2019).

13. Jenab, K., Wu, C. and Moslehpour, S.: Design for six sigma: A review, Management Science Letters (8), 1–18 (2018).

14. Löbach, B.: Desenho Industrial: base para configuração dos produtos industriais. 1. ed. Edgar Blücher. São Paulo, BR (2001).

15. Pahl, G.; Beitz, W.: Engineering Design: a systematic approach. 1a. ed. Springer Verlag. Berlin (1996).

16. Pereira, J. A.: Integrated product development model oriented to P&D project of the Brazilian electric sector (doctorate Thesis). Industrial and Systems Engineering Graduate Program - PPGEPS at Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná (2014).
17. Pereira, J.A; Canciglieri Jr., O. "Product Development Model Oriented for the R&D Projects of the Brazilian Electricity Sector". Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 518 (2014) pp 366-373.

18. Pereira, J. A., Canciglieri Junior, O., Lazzaretti, A. E., Souza, P. M., "Application of Integrated Product Development Model Oriented to R&D Projects of the Brazilian Electricity Sector". Advanced Materials Research Vol. 945-949 (2014) pp 401-409.

19. Platchek, E.R. et al.: Methodology of ecodesign for the development of more sustainable electro-electronic equipments. Journal of Cleaner Production (16), 75-86 (2008).

20. Pugh, S.: Total Design: Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering, 1. ed. Harlow: Addison-Wesley (1991).

21. Rozenfeld, H., Forcellini, F. A., Amaral, D. C., Toledo, J. C., Silva, S. L., Alliprandini, D. H., Scalice, R.K.: Product Development Management: A reference for Process Improvement. 1st ed. Saraiva. São Paulo, SP, Brazil (2006).

22. Sá, R.F.: Conceptual method for the application of biomimetics as support tool for the development process of sustainable products – BIOS (Masters dissertation). Industrial and Systems Engineering Graduate Program - PPGEPS at Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná (2017).

23. Shahin, A.: Design for six sigma (DFSS): Lessons learned from world-class companies, International Journal of Six Sigma and Competitive Advantage (4), 48-59 (2008).

24. Slack, N., Chambers, S., Johnston, R.: Administração da Produção. 2ª ed. Edited by atlas, São Paulo (2002).

25. Sokovic, M., Pavletic, D. and Pipan, K. K.: Quality Improvement Methodologies – PDCA Cycle, Radar Matrix, DMAIC and DFSS, Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering (43), 476-483 (2010).

26. Ulrich, K.T.; Eppinger, S.D.: Product design and development. 5 ed. McGrawHill. Boston (2012).

27. Vezzoli, C.; Kohtala, C., Srinivasan, A. Product-Service System Design for Sustainability. 1.ed. Greenleaf Publishing Limited. Sheffield, UK (2014).

28. Watson, G. H. and DeYong, C.F.: Design for Six Sigma: caveat emptor. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma (1), 66-84 (2010).

29. Werkema, Cristina.: Design For Six Sigma. 1ª ed. Edited by Werkema, Nova Lima (2005).