What are the advantages and disadvantages of taking responsibility for a project in co-design

Organizations supplying components to the automotive industry fall into two categories. The first scenario involves the client being responsible for the design, while we are responsible for implementing the production process. The second scenario involves shared responsibility for the project, known as co-design.

Co-design – What Does It Mean?

Being a co-designer means that as an organization, we share responsibility for the project from its development phase. But what exactly does this mean?

Each project has a specific timeframe, defined by appropriate milestones. If, as an organization, we share responsibility for the project, our engineering department collaborates with our client to:

  • Define design requirements
  • Develop a mathematical model (CAD data model), which serves as the basis for creating a 2D drawing
  • Conduct Design FMEA
  • Work on equipment and tooling, especially for complex products. For example, this includes developing laser cutting (bridging) of the dashboard from the side of the crossbeam. The idea is to find a common ground between safety requirements (passenger airbag deployment) and aesthetics (no visible marks on the surface of the dashboard panel).
Collaborative Project Responsibility Sequence
Fig. 1. Collaborative Project Responsibility Sequence.

Advantages of Co-Responsibility for the Project (Co-design)

If our engineering department is responsible for the new launch, it undoubtedly provides great convenience for the production plant. Why? Because it has access to the DFMEA, or more precisely, the severity of the defect from the customer’s point of view.

Thanks to this, when designing the production process (PFMEA), the implementation team knows exactly what impact the lack of detection or failure to detect a potential problem will have on the final customer.

It’s even better when the engineering department is in the same location, which significantly shortens communication.

I take a lifeline: Phone a friend

Additionally, in the event of a 0-km report (from the plant) or from the warranty field, we can relatively quickly estimate the risk resulting from identified:

  • Dimensional nonconformity
  • Negative material test results
  • Lack of subcomponents
  • Or other quality problems.

How? Having photographic documentation or a physical component that has been complained about, we organize a meeting with the engineering department and ask, “What impact will an untightened screw no. 3 have on the final customer?” Or the lack thereof.

Of course, if we have not previously considered this type of defect.

Thanks to this, the engineering person can present with DFMEA the exact impact of this defect on the final customer.

This will allow us to define a further strategy for establishing appropriate actions and communication with the client.

A diagram showing differences in launch phases for co-design status and client responsibility for the project.
Fig. 2. A diagram showing differences in launch phases for co-design status and client responsibility for the project.

On the other hand, if our organization is not responsible for the project and the production plant is preparing to design the production process, then:

  • The client should provide the DFMEA extract to design the Process FMEA.
  • If this is not possible, the organization should rely on the classification of Special Characteristics. Most often, they are divided into Critical (C.S.) and significant characteristics (S.C).

What about the disadvantages of being a co-designer?

With co-design status, in the event of a problem occurring in the warranty field and after root cause analysis, it turns out that the problem is related to the design, the main financial costs will fall on the organization as co-responsible for the project.

The situation is different if the client is responsible for the project. In this scenario, the client will cover the main costs. Of course, the organization will be asked to conduct an appropriate analysis to confirm:

  • Material composition
  • Dimensions
  • Possibly carrying out appropriate tests that were performed during design and process validation (DVP&R).

Some clients also use a strategy that obliges the organization to a certain percentage of cost responsibility even if it is not a co-designer.

Dariusz Kowalczyk