Comparing and consolidating the results from the three case studies, additional insights on the effects of the developed MCM approach as well as accompanying efforts and benefits are gained. Main findings are briefly discussed hereafter, full results are structured according to the MCM requirements and provided in table 7.1. The quantitative evaluation data is averaged over the three cases for the initial effort, continuous effort, continuous benefit, and the company’s value.3
Despite the different approaches applied by the companies for MCM (see section 4.2), the utilization of the developed holistic MCM approach is considered beneficial for MCM as well as for the overall company. This comprises not only the MC model and the MCM process, but also the involvement of stakeholders and consideration of interfaces to other departments.
MCM provides a pendant to ECM, contributing to a company’s agility and strengthening the manufacturing perspective for the management of changes. The MC model provides a standardized, detailed description for any MC, which creates a valuable basis for MC and cross-MC analyses, evaluation, prioritization, and coordination.
Compared to processes currently applied, especially the precise models of content and archi-tecture of the MCM process supply extensive process know-how and aid the transparency and simplicity of the MCM approach. At the same time, the documented process becomes a more realistic representation of and applicable guidance for the MCM activities actually conducted – while also providing a basis for potential process audits.
Regarding the dependencies of activities, especially the potential benefit of iterations has barely been acknowledged by the practitioners. This might be due to an association of rework or delays, but indeed reflects the very nature of any change process (cf. section 2.4.3) and allows for a more realistic process description. In contrast, the identification and highlighting of critical activities of the MCM process to increase process know-how and awareness of employees is considered both highly beneficial and lowering continuous efforts for MCM. However, the
3 For example, the evaluation results for the continuous benefit of one aspect are A:1, B:1, C:0 the result would be 1; for A:2, B:0, C:1 it would be 1; for A:0, B:2, C:2 it would be 2, for A:-1, B:-1, C:-1 it would be -1, etc.
identification of those activities is based on DSM analyses (e.g., activity, criticality), which require knowledge about the process dependencies – i.e., for example, iterations. Other dependencies like feedback loops and parallelizations tend to be beneficial and require only few additional efforts.
For all three companies, the process adaptation approach represents a highly beneficial aspect of the developed MCM. It improves both the suitability of the MCM process for specific MCs and the selection and involvement of stakeholders. All companies agree on a high initial effort required to implement the developed approach, but also on lowered continuous efforts and a high benefit.
For the proactive and retrospective aspects incorporated into the MCM concept, all three case studies acknowledge a continuous benefit and high contribution to the company’s value.
Also, all agree on only medium to no initial, and partly even lowered continuous efforts.
Regarding proactivity, the main effects comprise a strengthened capability of employees for adaptations and improvements through MCs, an increased risk and impact awareness, and a decrease of unexpected change impacts and hence the overall workload for MCM.
Regarding retrospectivity, especially an improved accessibility, re-usability, and consistency of experiences and documentation arises as a contribution to the knowledge management for MCM. Furthermore, the controlling and evaluation of MCs as well as the overall MCM is supported by the retrospective activities.
In the reactive phase, especially the cause and impact analysis for solution concepts is con-sidered beneficial, but also causing initial and continuous efforts. This is in contrast to the early change evaluation during the proactive phase and might be due to the allocation further downstream within the MCM process. The introduction of a dedicated stage for implementa-tion planning to the MCM process further adds to a reducimplementa-tion of unexpected change impacts, accompanied by medium benefits at almost no additional efforts.
Overall, the continuous benefit and the contribution of the MCM approach to the company’s value are most often evaluated as medium or high, while initial efforts are non-negligible for the introduction of selected aspects (e.g., the defined process architecture or the adaptation approach). For the continuous efforts both increases and decreases are expected by the practitioners. The figures presented in table 7.1 provide a detailed and valuable estimation of expected effects of the developed MCM approach in industrial practice – and hence on their influence on MC-related costs, which are discussed in the subsequent section 7.4.
Table 7.1: Application and evaluation of MCM in industrial practice: findings and results
Requirement:Systemic perspective (Holistic view)
Initial
– Holistic MCM approach as pendant to ECMcontributes to agility and fosters themanufacturing perspective for changes
2 0 1 1
– Extensive, attribute-based MC model (A,B) or supplementation of MC-relevant attributes (C) toprioritize and coordinate MCs
1 0 1 1
– Consideration of proactive, reactive, and retrospective MCM with a precise definition of process content and architecture
2 -1 1 1
Requirement:Stakeholder involvement & interfaces (Holistic view) – Early identification and involvement of stakeholdersdecrease
(un-expected) MC impact(A,B); continuous involvement toleverage know-how of disciplines
1 1 2 2
Requirement:Enterprise-independent applicability (Applicability) – Simplification of thecross-company comparisonof MCM and
thealignment with suppliers’ and customers MCM
1 0 1 1
Requirement:Transparency & simplicity (Applicability)
– Supply ofprecise process knowledgeto employees, creation of user-specific views, and basis for improvement of MCM
2 0 2 2
– Supply of additional MC knowledge to employees, basis for cross-MC analysis and evaluation, andprocess adaptation
1 0 1 1
Requirement:Clear roles & responsibilities (Applicability) – Increase thelevel of organizationfor MCM and therelevance of
MCsby introducing dedicated roles (A,B); moredetailed, trans-parent assignmentof responsibilities
1 0 1 1
Requirement:Defined process structure (Process orientation) – Enhance process content and architecture to achieve a more
realistic, representative processguiding daily work, and to avoid rework, failures, missing alignments, etc.
2 0 1 1
– Achieve a more realistic, representative process with relevant iterations, actual practices, and necessary information flows
1 0 0 0
– Achieve a more realistic, representative, andstable processwith relevant feedback loops, approvals, and terminations
0 0 1 1
– Parallelized activities to decrease the process duration from MC identification to closure and consider actual practices
0 0 1 1
Requirement:Coordination & information flow (Process orient.)
– Synchronization points foster thealignment and knowledge of stakeholders about MCs, leverage a cross-MC coordination (e.g., combination of MCs), and support aprogress control
1 1 1 1
– Defined roles to support acentralized, cross-MC coordination (A,B) as well as analignment and controllingof activities
0 0 1 1
– Identify and suggestcritical activitiesto increaseprocess aware-ness and knowledgeof employees (e.g., regarding high workload, time planning, or engagement of stakeholders / teamwork)
1 -1 2 1
Requirement:Process adaptation (Process orientation)
– Process tailoringincreases itssuitability for specific MCs and reduces the process durationandrequired capacities
2 -1 2 1
– Role selectionimproves theMC-specific selection and involve-ment of rolesduring the MCM process
2 -1 2 1
Requirement:Change identification (Proactivity)
– Strengthens the capability as well as risk and impact aware-nessof employees regarding MCs, fosters theidentification and notification of MCsby all employees
1 1 1 2
Requirement:Early change evaluation (Proactivity)
– Early change analysis decreases likeliness of unexpected change impactsand potentially the overall workload for an MC
1 -1 1 1
– Cross-MC evaluation and coordinationleverages the potential of, e.g.,clustering and prioritizingMCs continuously (A,B)
0 0 1 1
Requirement:Cause & impact analysis (Problem solving & analytic capabilities) – Detailed MC analysisfor the solution concept(s) decreases
like-liness of unexpected change impacts and change propagation and increases risk and impact awareness of employees for MCs
1 1 1 1
– Similar to current practice;cost analysisalso documented as part of the MCM process (C)
0 0 0 0
Requirement:Solution finding & implementation (Problem solving & analytic capab.) – Solution findingis similar to current practice (A,B); development
ofdetailed solution concept(s)createssolution alternativesand fosters, e.g., quality, originality, and sustainability of the MC
0 0 0 0
Initial
– Detailed change planning and implementationis similar to cur-rent practice;implementation planningas part of the MCM pro-cess decreaseslikeliness for unexpected change impacts
0 0 1 1
Requirement:Archiving & tracing of information (Knowledge management) – Uniform, process-based MC documentation increases
accessi-bility, usaaccessi-bility, continuity, and transparencyof available MC documentation; support the utilization and application of KPIs
1 0 1 1
Requirement:Control of success & lessons learned (Knowledge management) – MC-review and / orlessons learnedenable the utilization of
expe-riences and knowledge from MCs for future, similar MCs
1 1 2 2
– Clean upof the MC documentation improves itsquality, density of information, and re-usabilityfor future MCs
0 1 2 1
Requirement:Efficient processing (MCM efficiency)
– Depends on the implementation of the MCM approach in the company and is supported by the process adaptationapproach and the provision of selectedmethods and tools
not applicable here (see section 7.4 for information on costs) Initial effort: no 0 / 1 / 2 high benef.: benefit cont.: continuous c.: company Cont. effort: significant decrease -2 / -1 / 0 / 1 / 2 significant increase
Cont. benefit, Value of c.: significant decrease -2 / -1 / 0 / 1 / 2 significant increase