## 3 Results and Discussion
### Stage 2
#### 3.2.3 Product Development, Planning, and Documentation  
The development phase required the longest time due to the number of aspects to evaluate and variations to control. This situation was typical because the more significant resources come in CE's design phase due to its influence on its general cost [15; 44]. From the production point of view, between 60 and 80% of the total production cost is determined in the design phase [1; 15]. [PERSON] et al. [45] pointed out that changes in this stage can affect productivity up to 24% and delivery time up to 44%. Hence, CE prioritizes the development and planning phases of the product to reduce the need for subsequent changes and rationalize its times and resources. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [46] argued that, in economic terms, only the design phase can achieve such high-quality levels. At the start of the development phase, the client objected to the design proposals due to fear of obtaining a lower quality product than had been agreed contractually. Therefore, the team carried out tests to demonstrate that the adjustments did not alter the final product's functionality and met the established specifications. The client was satisfied with the demonstration and the team's attitude, so he approved the prototypes and the inspection criteria by attributes to be used. This fact proved that product innovation and quality only improved if team members' problem-solving efforts are coordinated [40; 47]. Working in a coordinated and collective way allows the time taken to develop and approve prototypes to reduce substantially, as [PERSON] [33] indicated. Working together produced several prototype proposals in a short time that met the client's expectations, as indicated by [PERSON] et al. [48]. Before implementing the CE, the average time was two to three months (40-60 days); in this project, the time dropped to approximately one month (19 business days). If a three-month scenario is considered, reductions in product development time reach 68%, which is very close to the 70% reported by [PERSON] et al. [15]. The strategies implemented to achieve such a reduction were: a) the feedback of information and immediate adjustments based on the client's observations; and b) elaboration of prototypes based on the characteristics of the design, machinery, and specific tools of the production line to avoid adaptations in the production lines. These actions allowed the efficient distribution of resources to develop, evaluate, and validate the designs in the time established by the client. It enabled a more robust process by identifying design issues, potential operator errors, and bottlenecks (for which countermeasures were planned before implementation). As a general consequence, the time required to complete the project in its entirety was reduced. The project's planning allowed the responsibilities and execution times (see Table 2) for the fulfillment of the dates stipulated with the client to be identified. The CPM diagram (see Figure 5) helped visualize the general work dynamics and identify the project's critical path. Additionally, it provided a picture of the risk of the decisions taken [49] and the impact of delays in meeting the objectives. With this, it was possible to develop a system according to the enterprise's capabilities that minimized the expenses for adjustments to a project. The execution of several activities simultaneously did not reduce the number of activities to be carried out, but it did shorten the overall development time. This fact was consistent with that indicated by some authors [16], who agreed that simultaneous work allows multiple aspects of the project to be covered, achieving shorter development cycles. Documentation of the approved product was the most critical part of the project due to the cultural issue of not keeping records. [PERSON] et al. (2019) indicated that the application of CE provides a collaborative environment based on data exchange.