## 5 Conclusions and Outlook  
The developed method for complexity evaluation is an enabler for comparing different electrode variants. As an example (see Figure 8), six different electrode configurations were compared: three for pouch cells and three for hardcase cells. The electrodes were configured differently with regard to their energy density. First of all, it is evident that pouch and hardcase cells have very similar complexities with regard to the different final energy density configurations. It is also clear that high energy densities at the electrode level indicate the highest complexity, and moderate ones indicate the lowest. However, very low energy densities also indicate a higher complexity than moderate energy densities. Here, a linear progression could have been assumed. However, the targeted consideration of complexity shows that moderate energy densities can be advantageous. This results in the relationship shown in Equation (5). In contrast to other methods, the developed method enables the determination of a concrete key figure to compare complexity. The method can be scaled variably in terms of effort and benefit. This method can be particularly helpful in supporting decision making. Depending on the decision to be made and the point in time of product development, a specific complexity with a correspondingly low, moderate or high levels of detail can be determined with little, moderate or high effort. Figure 8: Comparison of the complexity of different electrode configurations in terms of final energy density. Unlike existing methods, the present approach provides additional adaptability through the universally applicable procedure. Another important advantage is that key figures can be compared independently of products and companies. Advantageous to the present method is the advantage over existing methods in which it can be used to realistically assess the complexity of a product even with limited data. The developed method can be an adapted problem specifically both in terms of width and depth of the method. The method is characterized, in particular, by the fact that it can be applied to many different problems. The effort for adaptation and modification is linear to the benefit after the first implementation. Here, complexity evaluation of the individual characteristics by groups can be conducted by means of a complexity matrix or by means of the concrete characteristic value using the respective equation for the correlation between complexity and characteristic value. Thus, the developed method for the assessment of complexity allows flexible and sustainable use in the company. Here, the key figure for the specific product key figure can serve as a basis for decision making or general support at various points in the company processes and in the product development process. The product and product portfolio can, thus, be optimized along the product's life cycle. Above all, a consideration of specific product complexity indicator in corporate and product strategy within the scope of complexity management is aimed at. For this purpose, the following procedure can serve as a basis for a targeted and efficient implementation of the evaluation method. In addition to the extension of the method to related products or product families, the extension along the life cycle is possible. For example, a correlation between costs and complexity can be determined. There are various approaches with different levels of detail and effort.