Electronic Research Archive of Blekinge Institute of Technology http://www.bth.se/fou/
This is an author produced version of a conference paper. The paper has been peer-reviewed but may not include the final publisher proof-corrections or pagination of the proceedings.
Citation for the published Conference paper:
Title:
Author:
Conference Name:
Conference Year:
Conference Location:
Access to the published version may require subscription.
Published with permission from:
Sustainability driven product development -some challenges and opportunities for aero industry
Sophie Hallstedt, Anthony Thompson
International Society for Airbreathing Engines, ISABE
2011
Gothenburg, Sweden
ISABE-‐2011
SUSTAINABILITY-‐DRIVEN PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT
-‐ SOME CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE AERO INDUSTRY
Sophie I. Hallstedt Anthony W. Thompson Blekinge Institute of Technology
Karlskrona, Sweden Abstract
Products contribute to global sustainability problems throughout their entire life cycles. The majority of opportunities to influence the sustainability performance of products come when the product is designed – far before it is created or put into use. Within the aeronautics industry, there are specific targets set out by the Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe (ACARE) with one of the high-‐level targets being an “ultra green air transport system.” At Volvo Aero, a leading manufacturer of aero engine components, this has turned into concrete design targets like light weight, noise/emission reduction and high reliability.
Volvo Aero has been used as a case in this research survey to identify some challenges and opportunities of implementing a sustainability perspective in the product innovation process in the aero industry. The overall purpose of this paper is, then, to discuss these challenges and the associated opportunities to include such a sustainability perspective to reach a sustainability-‐driven product innovation process.
Introduction
The results of unsustainable product development are evident worldwide. Products and their usage contribute to global sustainability problems. This has increased the efforts to identify the potential environmental impact from products already during the early phases in the product innovation process, as the manufacturing processes and material use during the product’s life cycle are then decided upon.
The strategic research plan that the Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe (ACARE) has developed, aims to develop and maintain a Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) for
aeronautics in Europe. In the Strategic Research Agenda (SRA)-‐report1 it is stated that there is a need to reduce the environmental impact of aircraft and associating systems during their lifecycle; from operation, maintaining, manufacturing to the disposal phase. Also in the SRA2-‐report2 some targets have been even more emphasized and the “Ultra green air transport system” is one of the high level targets.
At Volvo Aero, that develops, produces and maintains aero engine products, the efforts to reach the strategies of ACARE has turned into concrete targets on product functionality such as light weight, noise reduction, emission reduction and high reliability. New fuels, new design to reduce fuel burn and new flight routes are also important aspects to consider for reduction of the environmental impact from airplanes in operation3. If you also add to this a full life-‐cycle responsibility, not only from an environmental but also from a social perspective, and from material extraction, via production and use, to component scrapping, the complexity increases even more.
There is a challenge in being able to optimize these aspects and at the same time be competitive on the market, possibly also in finding new ways to be competitive using sustainability as a driver.
The competitive condition may be seen as the third dimension in establishing sustainable solutions.
Fuel saving or alternative fuels are the focus of many research studies to improve the sustainability parameters for aviation. Different technologies, for example air-‐to-‐air refuelling4, design solutions such as open-‐rotor5,6, and environmentally friendly propulsion systems7 as well as flight routes8 are proposed. This research study takes a more generic approach, from an industry perspective, and proposes recommendations for how to reach a
sustainability-‐driven product innovation process, using Volvo Aero as a case.
Research approach and research methods
This is mainly a descriptive study with a qualitative research approach. The data was collected through studies of the product development process documents and in-‐depth interviews of seven persons at Volvo Aero with different responsibility areas, i.e. product planning, product development, project management, supplier development and environment, environmental management, , advanced engineering, environmental engineering.
A generic framework, referred to as the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD)9, possible to use when planning in complex systems, constitutes a background methodology for this study. The FSSD consists
of five interdependent but distinct levels that are explored to establish their respective contents and relationships for the particular planning case. The framework encourages a thorough enough understanding of the system (1) to be able to arrive at a robust principled definition of the goals of the planning exercise (2), which is a prerequisite to be able to be strategic (3) when actions (4) and tools for monitoring, coordination and decision-‐making (5) are selected and informed. The framework was developed from logical deduction and is generally also perceived as intuitive when applied in organizational sustainability planning.
The interview questions (see appendix A) were built on Roozenburg & Eekels’ model10 of the product innovation process. According to their model, the product innovation process is divided into a product development part and a realization part. The product development is also divided into a product planning part and so called strict development. The main focus in this article is on the early parts of the product innovation process as sustainability aspects need to be integrated early, considering the fact that decisions taken in the innovation process affect the impact from a product life-‐cycle later on.
Results
1. Different perspectives on sustainability During the interviews, two distinct perceptions of sustainability emerged. The first perspective,
coming from the people working with technical engineering details related to engines, focused largely on fuel burn. It seems that there is a strong belief among this group that the single most impactful thing Volvo Aero can do to improve the sustainability of its products is to reduce fuel burn. The second perspective comes from those working in the areas of environmental management and those in charge of supplier assessments. This group tended to have a much broader perspective on sustainability issues as including both environmental and social concerns.
There is, thus, a lack of a common definition of the term sustainability and what this means to Volvo Aero, even if one of Volvo’s core values; “care for the environment”, is well known and accepted among the employees.
2. Value chain with safety and reliability in focus When discussing the driving forces for sustainability at Volvo Aero, respondents stated that the industry is driven by three main engine producers, that the industry tends to work as a quite tight network, and that it is a conservative industry partly due to the network and largely due to safety and reliability standards. After clarifying these characteristics, there was general consensus that the main driving force within the entire industry is safety and reliability.
There was also a tendency to think that sustainability-‐related responsibility “passes down the chain”; e.g. from airline manufacturer to engine manufacturer, from engine manufacturer to component supplier, and from component supplier to sub-‐supplier. The correlated observation is that those sub-‐suppliers have very little influence over the greater system and attempts at sustainability by the suppliers and sub-‐suppliers equate to the idea of the “tail trying to wag the dog.”
3. Drivers for innovations related to sustainability The three main engine manufacturers (due to pressure from airlines, due to fuel prices) are focused on reducing fuel burn. Airline customers sometimes put pressure on airlines regarding sustainability in general, though it is unclear the extent to which this affects passenger behavior.
Innovations related to sustainability being driven primarily by i) the Government, especially the European Union; goals with frequent reference to ACARE, ii) Airlines; in terms of reducing fuel burn in order to reduce costs, iii) AB Volvo: Volvo Aero is influenced by AB Volvo’s emphasis on
environmental issues as one of Volvo’s core values. This sometimes results in decisions regarding manufacturing processes that are ahead of legislation and customer requirements.
4. Sustainability-‐related decisions come mainly in the concept phase
At Volvo Aero methods for sustainability-‐driven design in the early phases are lacking and as a consequence the ambition is higher than the ability. The products that are developed are often analyzed from sustainable perspectives in phases where changes may be quite costly to introduce, (see Figure 1 in Appendix B). Tools like Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), material lists and guidelines for suppliers are the most frequently used tools and methods within the area of sustainability.
Decisions impacting sustainability are made mainly in the concept phase of the product development process. An EIA is intended to be used to guide decisions in the project, but practically the guidance from an EIA often comes too late to really provide significant guidance in the design and choices in the concept stage of the project. Thus, findings from EIAs from completed projects can often provide valuable input for current and future projects.
5. Sustainability-‐related decisions and guided tools The primary responsibility for sustainability-‐
related decisions during a project lies with the project leader, who works closely with the project steering committee. Decisions are guided, in general, by AB Volvo’s core values. Some sustainability-‐related decisions are made during the product innovation process with regard to suppliers. Volvo Aero’s Global Purchasing Committee takes decisions on whether or not new suppliers are acceptable. AB Volvo’s Key Elements Procedure 5 and Key Elements Procedure 6 are used to guide decisions about suppliers. They are used as guiding documents to help suppliers and potential suppliers to create action plans that demonstrate to Volvo Aero that sustainability improvements are undertaken.
Further with regard to suppliers, and because of the tight and relatively limited network of potential suppliers in the aero engine industry, Volvo Aero has their own Supplier Environmental Assessment (SEA) that they can use when suppliers are not ISO 14001 certified.
During the interviews there were also suggestions for adding competences in the sustainability area in the project groups from the start. Especially, it was considered that the buyers/purchasers should more actively be involved earlier in the innovation process because they are the ones with relationships with the suppliers. These relationships can provide key information and knowledge regarding sustainability impacts from the suppliers (e.g. social aspects like working conditions in the factories, or environmental aspects of their production processes).
6. Product-‐Service System
Volvo Aero has been included in a Product-‐Service System (PSS) approach via the “Power by the Hour” concept. One specific benefit of such an approach might be the chance to get more information about component performance, e.g.
information that is collected during maintenance could be shared back to Volvo Aero in order to increase knowledge about how the component performs over time. Currently, access to that information is a challenge, and engineers feel that having additional access to information could help them to improve component performance.
Interviewees suggested that a PSS approach might lead to shifting customer demands, e.g. more emphasis on reduced life-‐cycle costs instead of lower purchasing price.
Concluding discussions
This paper addresses some main challenges and opportunities for implementing a sustainability perspective in the product development process in the aero industry, and recommendations on how such presumptive gaps could be bridged. Volvo Aero was used as a case as Volvo Aero is perceived to be ahead of the competitors in the field. Volvo Aero participates, for example, in the European programme Clean Sky, which is the major initiative engaging the aeronautical community to meet the ACARE targets. Volvo Aero is also currently investing in developing and validating the next generation of jet engine solutions to meet increasing sustainability demands on the market.
1. Important to have a strategic sustainability plan To have an overview and a strategic sustainability plan that is well communicated at Volvo Aero is important as there is a complexity in many dimensions. Otherwise there is a risk to focus on one issue at a time if it is not part of an overview picture. The current focus at Volvo Aero is to
reduce the emissions and fuel burn; less emissions means less weight means design changes. But the next issue might be scarce material – which also might force new design solutions. To do system analysis on the full product life and simulate sustainability consequences can be useful for understanding how to optimize and decide what the natural stepping stones are, i.e. flexible platforms, to build from.
It is important to have a common view on sustainability in order to be able to efficiently and strategically work towards sustainability11, and in order to ensure that a complete sustainability perspective is used to drive innovation processes rather than only single aspects of sustainability. If the system is explored enough, it may be possible to define in principle what sustainability would entail. The more rigorous this is done, the easier it will be to develop the subsequent levels in a robust framework for strategic planning, Strategic Sustainable Development (SSD). The previously described Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD) has been developed to find a generally applicable principled definition of sustainability12,13. A principled definition as opposed to a scenario allows open-‐ended and non-‐prescriptive co-‐creation towards sustainability that does not miss or give preference to certain sustainability aspects. Basic success principles are needed in all organizations for setting system boundaries, calculation of potentials, step-‐wise strategic approaches, avoidance of un-‐known problems, management of trade-‐offs, cohesive use of tools and effective team work across disciplines and sectors. The FSSD has previously been successfully used and implemented by senior managers in different types of businesses11, 14, 15,16,17,18,19,20, which indicates its value and applicability.
2. Relate cost to sustainability consequences for leap-‐frog innovations
In order to reach a sustainable society sooner it is necessary to make more radical innovations and more leap-‐frog solutions21,22. However, based on the interviews at Volvo Aero it is clear that it is hard to make decisions regarding sustainability issues that means more radical changes because a whole network of companies have to move in the same direction simultaneously. Many are dependent on others, for example
Volvo Aero that develops components that are only a part of the
complete aircraft system. This makes a change towards innovations a slow process. To collaborate with the stakeholders (suppliers, customers, AB Volvo, Air the Swedish Air Force) and the whole value chain (suppliers, customers, end-‐of-‐life stakeholders) is essential and is already natural for Volvo Aero. One good example is the collaboration in the European programme Clean Sky, in which Volvo Aero participates. Clean Sky is the major initiative (1.6 B€) engaging the aeronautical community to meet the ACARE targets6. A slow change is also due to decisions taken in the product development process which will have an impact for maybe 30 years as a product typically is in operation for 40-‐50 years. It is important to be aware of this time delay, and for this reason make decisions based on backcasting from success principles for a sustainable product together with predictions of the sustainability consequences that will present themselves.
(Backcasting means imagining success in the future and then looking back to today to assess the present situation through the lens of this success definition and to explore ways to reach that success23, 24, 25.
At Volvo Aero, innovations, related to sustainability are mainly driven by customers, ACARE or AB Volvo. These types of innovations are possible if they are related to; i) reduced cost, ii) improved image for the customer and Volvo, and/or iii) approaching legislations. It is therefore recommended to explore the estimated costs for sustainability consequences of different solutions over time and include this in the early phases in the product innovation process.
3. Include identified sustainability aspects in the requirement list
From a competitive perspective, a sustainable solution must be satisfied from not only the sociological and ecological perspectives, but also from an economical perspective. Once these three conditions are met, the solutions can be successful from a sustainable perspective. A product’s socio-‐
ecological impacts -‐ positive and negative throughout its life cycle -‐ are largely determined by decisions during early phases of the product innovation process. Previous research has shown that the possibility to influence in the very early phases in the product innovation process is important26, but at the same time methods for sustainability-‐driven design in these phases are lacking in companies27.
A process to identify the sustainability hot spots for the different product components is important in order to take these aspects into account and consider these with the same importance as other aspects in the product development process.
Weight, emissions, noise and hazardous materials have, for example, consequences for the sustainability impact. However, a thorough analysis of which the sustainability criteria are could ensure that no important aspect is neglected. Today, the aspects are identified in the EIA, but this is quite late, even if it takes place in the concept stage. If the identification of these aspects would come in the product requirement list, it would be easier to do something about it.
Other studies have shown that companies using environmental impact assessments in the product development process to assess already developed concepts had relatively little impact on the development of the current product28. The Environmental Impact Assessment is still important if managed in a systematic way to increase the knowledge about the environmental consequences from product components and their related processes in later projects. For example, a database with information regarding certain processes or materials already assessed from a sustainability perspective could guide decisions in future projects.
4. Recommended future work
Sustainability-‐driven product development is here defined as “strategic product-‐service system development towards a well defined sustainability goal”. More specifically, this means to have processes, methods and tools to systematically include sustainability aspects in the daily decisions, both for tactical short-‐ and strategic long term perspectives. In order for Volvo Aero to efficiently move in this direction, the recommendation is to; i) identify the complementary guiding tools that are needed to include a strategic sustainability perspective in the product innovation processes, ii) decide where in the process these support tools are needed, and iii) delegate roles and responsibilities for implementing a strategic sustainability perspective in the product innovation process.
Based on the above and in more detail, the following generic measures are recommended to be able to implement a sustainability-‐driven product innovation process:
• Develop a product strategy, which should be based on a strategic sustainability plan for the company, which should include both a backcasting and forecasting thinking. The product strategy will then guide decisions in the product planning and advanced engineering groups.
• Define the product sustainability criteria in order to include them in the requirement lists and the concept evaluation methodology.
• Develop and regularly update “Templates for Sustainable Product Development”
(TSPDs)29. These TSPDs can be used in the early product innovation phases to guide different solutions of products and services that the company provides. The TSPDs should complement the Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) that are conducted in the concept phase.
• Introduce a systematic way to store data from the EIA to increase the knowledge about the environmental consequences from product components and their related processes in later projects.
• Explore the risk, e.g. as costs, for sustainability consequences of different solutions over time.
• Identify who is responsible for integrating and implementing strategic sustainability in each product innovation project.
The next steps in future research aim to i) identify some generic key elements for how to successfully implement a strategic sustainability perspective in the product innovation process, and ii) clarify how sustainability development targets can be used as drivers in the very early phases of the innovation process. The result will then support the product developers in their daily work during development, evaluation and validation of concepts, technologies and decisions for future products and services.
References
1. ACARE (2002) Strategic Research Agenda-‐ Executive summary. Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe, October 2002.
2. ACARE (2004) Strategic Research Agenda 2-‐ Executive summary. Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe, October 2004.
3. Agarwal, R.K. (2010) Sustainable (Green) Aviation: Challenges and Opportunities. SAE International Journal of Aerospace. Volume 2, Issues 1, pp1-‐20.
4. Nangia, R.K. (2006) Operations and aircraft design towards greener civil aviation using air-‐to-‐air refueling. Aeronautic Journal, Volume 110, Issue 1113, pp: 705-‐721.
5. Warwick and Norris (2011) Open-‐rotor horizon slips to mid-‐2020s. Aviation Week and Space Technology (New York). Volume 174, Issue 4, 24 January 2011.
6. Warwick (2010) Raft of technology demonstrators planned for 2012-‐15. Aviation Week and Space Technology (New York).
Volume 173, Issue 5, 2 August 2010.
7. Jouannet, C. , Lundström, D. , Amadori, K.
,Berry, P. (2010) Design and flight testing of an ECO-‐sport aircraft. Conference proceeding IN: 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition. Article number 2010-‐
1206.
8. Nigel P.S. Dennis (2002) Long-‐term route traffic forecasts and flight schedule pattern for a medium-‐sized European airport. Journal of Air Transport Management 8(2002) pp:313-‐
324.
9. Robèrt, K.-‐H., B. Schmidt-‐Bleek, J. Aloisi de Larderel, G. Basile, J. L. Jansen, R. Kuehr, P.
Price Thomas, M. Suzuki, P. Hawken, and M.
Wackernagel. (2002) Strategic sustainable development -‐ selection, design and synergies of applied tools. Journal of Cleaner Production 10(3): 197-‐214.
10. Roozenburg, N. F. M. and J. Eekels. (1995) Product Design: Fundamentals and Methods.
Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
11. Broman, G., J. Holmberg, and K.-‐H. Robèrt.
(2000) Simplicity Without Reduction:
Thinking Upstream Towards the Sustainable Society. Interfaces 30(3): 13-‐25.
12. Holmberg, J. and K.-‐H. Robèrt. (2000) Backcasting -‐ a framework for strategic planning. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 7(4): 291-‐
308.
13. Ny, H., J. P. MacDonald, G. Broman, R.
Yamamoto, and K.-‐H. Robèrt. (2006) Sustainability constraints as system boundaries: an approach to making life-‐cycle
management strategic. Journal of Industrial Ecology 10(1).
14. Electrolux, (1994) Electrolux Annual Report 1994. Electrolux, Stockholm, Sweden.
15. Robèrt, K.-‐H., et al., (1997) A compass for sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 4, 79–92.
16. Anderson, R.C., (1998) Mid Course Correction – Toward a Sustainable Enterprise: The Interface Model. The Peregrinzilla Press, Atlanta, USA.
17. Nattrass, B.,(1999) The Natural Step:
Corporate Learning and Innovation for Sustainability. The California Institute of Integral Studies, San Francisco, California,.USA.
18. Leadbitter, J.,(2002) PVC and sustainability.
Progress in Polymer Science 27 (10), 2197–
2226.
19. Matsushita, (2002) Environmental Sustainability Report 2002. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., Osaka, Japan.
20. Nattrass, B., Altomare, M., (2002) Dancing with the Tiger. New Society Publishers,.
Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada.
21. Baumgartner, R.J. (2011) Critical perspectives of sustainable development research and practice. Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 19, Issue 8, Pages 783-‐786.
22. Baumgartner, R.J. and Korhonen, J. (2010)
Strategic thinking for sustainable development.
Sustainable Development.
Volume 18, Issue 2, pp.71-‐75.
23. Robinson, J. B. (1990) Future under glass — A recipe for people who hate to predict. Futures 22(9): 820-‐843.
24. Dreborg, K. H. (1996) Essence of backcasting.
Futures 28(9): 813-‐828.
25. Vergragt P.J. and J. Quist (2011) Backcasting for sustainability: Introduction to the special issue. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change. (In Press)
26. McAloone T. (2004) Sustainable Product Development Through a Life-‐Cycle Approach to Product and Service Creation. International Symposium on Environmentally-‐Friendly Product Development, 27-‐28 October Darmstadt, Germany.
27. Hallstedt, S. (2008) A Foundation for Sustainable Product Development, Doctoral Dissertation Series No. 2008:6, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden.
28. Thompson A., Lindahl P., Hallstedt S., Ny H., Broman G. (2011). Decision Support Tools for Sustainability in Product Innovation in a few Swedish Companies. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Research into Design, ICoRD’11. 10-‐12 January, 2011, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India.
29. Ny H., Hallstedt S., Robèrt K.-‐H. and Broman G.
(2008). Introducing templates for sustainable product development through an evaluation case study of televisions at the Matsushita Electric Group. Journal of Industrial Ecology, vol 12, issue 4, 600-‐623.
Appendix A: Interview questions
A. Overarching
• What does sustainability mean for your company?
• Do you think this will change in the coming 20 years?
• What are your driving forces regarding sustainability?
• What are the key market demands?
• How do customers influence the early stages of the innovation process (e.g. product policy, new ideas, as well as product design)?
(driving force)
• What does your product policy say?
• Are there any sustainability components in the product policy?
• Who is responsible for sustainability components in your product policy?
• Is there a full life cycle perspective in the product policy?
B. Processes
• Do your company’s processes (both documented and actual) match the
Roozenburg and Eekel’s diagram. If not, how are they different?
• Where and how are sustainability
considerations currently taken into account in those processes?
• How are design requirements lists set and who is involved in the process?
• How are sustainability aspects included in the requirement list and by whom?
• How do you identify these sustainability requirements?
• How are customer demands incorporated in the requirement list?
• How are requirements in the product requirements list verified and followed up?
• How are material-‐related questions considered during the product innovation process?
C. Decisions
• What sustainability-‐related decisions are taken during the product innovation process?
• Who takes sustainability-‐related decisions?
• What guides those decisions?
• How do they evaluate different options?
D. Tools
• What sustainability-‐related tools are used during product development?
• For what purpose do they use them?
• Who decided those tools should be used?
• Are you using modeling or simulation tools to understand your product life cycle?
• If yes, what aspects of a product’s life cycle are modeled?
• Where in the innovation process are they modeled?
• If your business were shifted to a stronger Product-‐Service System focus, how would needs for modeling / simulation change? Are there new things that would be helpful to have modeled, e.g. user interaction with the product?
• How are sustainability criteria considered in procurement?
E. Suggestions for improvement
• What are the main challenges for taking sustainability aspects into account in your product development?
• Do you have suggestions for how to better implement sustainability perspectives in your product development?
• Where is there currently a need for tools?
Where – if these additional sustainability
considerations are added – would tools be needed?
Appendix B
Formulating goals and strategies
Generating and selecting ideas
(Advanced Engineering)
Production development
Product designing industrialization
Marketing planning
Production Distribution and
sale Use
Product Policy
New Biz Ideas
new concepts
Production Plan
(final) Product
Design
Marketing Plan
Policy
Formation Idea Finding
Product Planning Strict Development
Product Development Innovation
Realization
Modified from Roozenburg and Eekels 1995
Production Planning
”Make it Light”
Reduce fuel burn
Consideration of suppliers via KEP5, KEP6
Environmental Impact Assessment Material
guidance lists
Black/grey lists (production
materials)
Figure 1. Roozenburg and Eekels’ diagram of the product innovation process, with Volvo Aero’s focus area in the sustainability area highlighted and including “Generating and selecting ideas” to “Production”.
