2. SME Requirements and Guidelines for the Design of Smart and Highly Adaptable Manufacturing Systems

The industrial environment has undergone a radical change with the introduction of new technologies and concepts based on the fourth industrial revolution, also known as Industry 4.0 (I4.0) (Sendler 2013), the Fourth Industrial Revolution (Kagermann et al. 2013) or Smart Manufacturing (Kang et al. 2016). The concept of I4.0 is building on the integration of information and communication technologies and advanced industrial technologies in so-called Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) to realize a digital, intelligent, and sustainable factory (Zhou et al. 2015). The basic meaning of I4.0 lies in connecting products, machines, and people with the environment and combining production, information technology, and the internet (Kagermann et al. 2013). Industry, especially in high-wage countries, must introduce these types of smart production strategies to maintain the current competitive advantage in the long-term competing on a global market (Manhart 2017). To remain competitive, lead times, flexibility, and the ability to produce many individual kinds of products in low batch sizes or batch sizes of one, must improve (Spath et al. 2013; Matt and Rauch 2013a). In a mass customization and “design for x” environment, more functionality and customization options have to be provided to the client and more flexibility, transparency, and globalization for the supply chain (Baum 2013). On the other hand, this also leads to a more difficult and complex situation for manufacturing companies. Quickly responding to the expectations and requirements of customers is not easy and requires agile and highly adaptable manufacturing systems (Zawadzki and Żywicki 2016). The introduction of I4.0 in manufacturing companies contributes exactly to tackling these global challenges for strengthening competitiveness of high-wage countries (Kagermann et al. 2013).

Manufacturing companies, and especially SMEs, struggle with the introduction of I4.0 and to gain from its potential to increase productivity on the shop floor (Matt et al. 2014). Very often, they do not know how to face the challenge of I4.0 or how to start introducing and implementing I4.0 concepts (Ganzarain and Errasti 2016). A recent 2017 study (Wuest et al. 2018) conducted with manufacturing SMEs in West Virginia, USA, confirmed the struggle for SMEs to adopt Smart Manufacturing (Mittal et al. 2018). According to their literature review, only a few studies specifically focus on supporting SMEs’ evolutionary path and paradigm shift toward “Smart Manufacturing (SM)” or “Industry 4.0”. SMEs often face complications in such innovative processes due to the continuous development of innovations and technologies. Therefore, further research is needed to provide specific instruments and models for SMEs introducing I4.0 in their companies and production shop floors. In addition, policy makers should propose strategies with the aim of supporting SMEs to invest in these technologies and make them more competitive in the marketplace (Zambon et al. 2019).

The objective of this chapter is to analyze and evaluate the specific needs and requirements of SMEs with the aim of defining guidelines for the design of highly adaptable and smart manufacturing systems for SMEs in a dynamic environment using I4.0. After a brief introduction on I4.0 and its impact for SMEs, Sect. 2.2 summarizes the state of the art in I4.0 and its transfer to SMEs based on a literature review. The following Sect. 2.3 gives an overview of the problem formulation and the system limits of this research. Section 2.4 illustrates the research methodology, which is grounded in Axiomatic Design (AD) theory to transform user needs into functional requirements and finally into design guidelines for highly adaptable manufacturing systems. Section 2.5 describes in detail the analysis of the user needs of SMEs to introduce I4.0 in their factories. The collection of these user needs is based on an explorative study, while the derivation of functional requirements and design parameters is based on AD theory. Results of this main section are a final list of SME requirements as well as constraints to introducing I4.0 in manufacturing and a set of coarse design parameters for their implementation. In Sect. 2.6, there follows a critical discussion of the obtained results and in Sect. 2.7, the conclusion and outlook for further necessary research are presented.

As previously identified in the literature review, there is a need for research and investigations for the implementation of I4.0 technologies and concepts in SME manufacturing. The authors compare these challenges with the introduction of Lean Management in small- and medium-sized enterprises over the past 20 years. While most large companies have introduced or integrated Lean, at least in part, into their corporate strategy, most SMEs have gradually addressed this topic. Carrying out an analysis in Scopus with the keywords “lean” and “SME,” for example, shows research on this topic was carried out from 2001 onwards. There are several papers recommending specific strategies for the introduction of lean (Medbo et al. 2013) and specific lean methods for SMEs (Dombrowski et al. 2010; Matt and Rauch 2013b). As a result, Lean has now been implemented in many SMEs in practice. A similar approach is therefore also expected for SME manufacturing companies introducing I4.0, even as large companies have already addressed this goal.

As with the introduction of Lean, the success rate for introducing I4.0 in SME manufacturing can be increased by developing SME-customized implementation strategies, SME-adapted concepts and technologically feasible solutions. Otherwise, the current efforts for awareness-building of SMEs for I4.0 are at risk of failing to achieve the expected results and benefits. As mentioned in the conclusion of the literature review in Sect. 2.2, we can state that there is still a lack of scientific literature regarding detailed analysis of the needs and requirements of smart SME factories for a better understanding of the necessities and problems involved in the introduction of I4.0 in SME manufacturing. In addition, there are already no clear design guidelines available about how SMEs can implement I4.0 in their manufacturing facilities and processes. Another important question is what kind of limitations or barriers could hinder the successful implementation of I4.0 in manufacturing. Knowing these barriers, SMEs can better define the constraints for I4.0 implementation strategies and actions.

For this reason, we define the aim of our research with the following research questions:

In order to obtain direct input from the beneficiaries of smart manufacturing systems, we selected a primary research approach to collect specific user needs by interviewing SMEs. Another approach to get this information could also be to conduct a survey like in the work of Mittal et al. (2018). Due to the novelty of I4.0, many SMEs have not yet dealt with the topic at all or only to a limited extent, thus a survey might not produce any usable results. Therefore, the approach of an explorative field study (see also Becker et al. 2009; Wölfel et al. 2012) based on SME workshops was chosen, which allowed direct contact to be made with SMEs in order to better understand their real requirements. In the exploratory study, the researchers preferred discussion in smaller workshop groups. Such workshops allow a common exchange of experiences and stimulate discussion among the participants, thus creating a more creative atmosphere.

The workshops themselves were structured as follows. A total of four SME workshops were held in Europe (Italy and Austria), USA (Massachusetts), and Asia (Thailand) to investigate specific requirements for SME (see Fig. 2.1). The implementation of SME workshops in different countries/continents should also help to identify cultural or country-specific differences, thus avoiding local needs having a strong influence on the final design guidelines for the introduction of I4.0 in SMEs. A limit of 10–12 participating companies (owner, general manager, operations manager) facilitated a productive interaction in the workshops. The workshops had a standardized structure starting with an initial introduction and overview of I4.0, then presenting some practical applications and best practice examples in SMEs. This should help raise awareness that I4.0 will be an important topic for SMEs in the future and prove that even smaller companies can implement I4.0. Afterward, the participants were asked to express their needs and requirements for introducing I4.0 concepts in their companies and share their experiences with the other participants. They were then asked about the main barriers and limitations for the implementation of I4.0. The inputs were collected in the form of sticky-notes on pinboards and categorized by topic. Before starting the evaluation of the collected inputs, several company visits were carried out at participating SMEs to gain a better practical understanding of the requirements and barriers on site.

For the evaluation of the collected inputs from the SME workshops, the research team applied Axiomatic Design (AD) theory (see also Fig. 2.2). AD is a method used for the systematic design of complex systems (Suh 2001). In AD so-called Customer Needs (CNs) are translated into Functional Requirements (FRs) because not all customer “wishes” can be considered as functional. In addition, some of the CNs are translated into Constraints (Cs) as some of them limit design space. Once the needs and requirements have been determined, the next step starts with a decomposition and mapping process selecting appropriate solutions or Design Parameters (DPs) for individually fulfilling each FR. So-called Process Variables (PVs) are then the real process parameters in the phase of realization of the DPs. Chapter 6 gives a detailed overview about the AD methodology used in this chapter and explains the application of AD for the design of complex products, processes, and systems.

Although people in the workshop were asked about their needs and requirements for introducing I4.0, the experience of the authors showed that, often, people do not express their thoughts in the form of solution-neutral CNs or FRs, but rather in the form of physical solutions in the sense of DPs or PVs. Thus, the research team categorized the inputs from the SME workshops into Cs, CNs, FRs, DPs, and PVs. Cs are collected and build a final list of constraints that must be considered when realizing a smart manufacturing system in SMEs. The other inputs had to be further processed and interpreted to create a final list of solution-neutral FRs as a basis for the later definition of DPs. CNs were translated into FRs by analyzing the expressed needs and deriving the functional requirements by which the needs can be fulfilled. FRs were added directly to the final list of FRs. DPs and PVs needed to be further processed to create “true FRs.” Users had most difficulties expressing solution-neutral CNs or FRs, proposing partial physical solutions, rather than basic needs. According to Girgenti et al. (2016), such a mixing of CNs and FRs with DPs or PVs can introduce personal bias, forestall creative thinking, and further complicate and constrain the design process. Therefore, we applied a Reverse Engineering (RE) approach, which starts from DPs/PVs from the SME workshops to derive solution-neutral FRs and CNs. This idea of using reverse engineering to solve this problem is based on previous research (Girgenti et al. 2016; Sadeghi et al. 2013). More details on the application of the RE approach is shown in Sect. 2.5. To build the final list of FRs, a consolidation of the identified FRs was needed as many of the inputs deal with the same requirement and could be merged together. In the last step, the final list of FRs was used as input for the top-down decomposition and mapping process in AD to derive coarse design guidelines for the design of smart manufacturing systems for SMEs.

The derivation procedure described previously in this chapter and the results summarized in Tables 2.6 and 2.7 give a good overall list of needs and constraints for SMEs to introduce I4.0. In the following, we try to use all these inputs to describe a picture of a smart SME manufacturing firm using the concepts of I4.0.

The needs discussed by the SME workshop participants desire a rapidly evolving manufacturing facility, where machines are easy to set up, and quick to adhere to the steps of ever-changing product configurations. These processes track themselves such that the personnel running the facility can concentrate on progressive improvement and upgrades to the system rather than acting as firefighters keeping the production working from day to day. Furthermore, these processes nondestructively inspect themselves. This would give operators the ability to be the first line of defense in quality control by giving them the tools to understand what the implications of process variations are, to lower their workload and increase the efficiency of the firm. Such an SME facility is also highly digitized with the ability for workplace user interfaces to be connected vertically and laterally within the organization. This allows for the destruction of silo syndrome through meaningful connectivity both within and without the organization and interoperability between single machines or processes. This allows the SME to better communicate within itself to ensure the manufacturing floor is always pushing the edge of productivity and adaptability. In addition, there is also the possibility for SMEs to achieve higher efficiency in higher-level supply chain management by connecting the company with suppliers and customers. The management in such a smart SME manufacturing firm has real-time numbers on the outputs of different machines, problems on the shop floor, potential upcoming costs, through predictive maintenance, or tracking the manufacturing environment and resources needed to ensure that all the needs of the floor workers are met, enabling increases in profitability. Furthermore, the leaders of these firms have access to experts, thought leaders as well as cognitive assistance systems that can give guidance on decisions which would otherwise have lasting costs. These leaders also engender an empowered workforce which is highly encouraged to bring possible improvements of the process to the fore, even when everything is working as expected.

These needs were not found to change much from culture to culture, or sector to sector, which lead us to believe that SMEs worldwide and from different sectors face similar challenges and problems. The lists in Tables 2.6 and 2.7 are general needs and constraints for most small- and medium-sized companies. The authors believe that these final list of FRs and Cs do give a good initial list of subjects to be pursued for implementation in SMEs throughout the world, due to the repetition of similar needs across these multinational workshops.

Possible limitations of this research include that the derived requirements and constraints using the reverse engineering approach are subject to the interpretation of the authors, as well as the initial company leaders, who communicated these needs. The authors attempted to hedge against this by taking notes on the intent behind the inputs, as well as diversifying the backgrounds, and geographical locations, of the participants of the workshops and by intensive discussions with SMEs during the phase of evaluation of the workshop results. It is believed by the authors that this did mitigate possible misinterpretations of needs, as well as incomplete needs for SMEs for implementing I4.0.

A current limitation of the presented decomposition of FRs into DPs is the fact that the design guidelines derived describe coarse design parameters. Manufacturing engineers receive a good basis for the appropriate design of their manufacturing system, but they do not yet find a very detailed, so-called “leaf-level” of design guidelines in order to be supported in the very detailed levels for machine design or the design of single processes. This would need a much more detailed investigation regarding the low-level decomposition of FRs and DPs defined in this work.

In this chapter, a comprehensive list of SME specific requirements and limitations regarding the introduction and implementation of I4.0 was proposed using an explorative field study as well as Axiomatic Design theory. These lists are based on multinational workshops, which brought together leaders from manufacturing organizations from a variety of manufacturing spaces. To better organize the inputs of these workshops, they were broken down according to the subject matter of the session being discussed, then broken down further by “Clusters.” These clusters allowed for an efficient manner for categorizing and further refining the requirements and constraints.

Upon initial processing of the content from the international workshops, the authors found that almost 35% of the input given was not solution-neutral. With the use of AD, this is a requirement to ensure the best solution is reached. The authors thus concluded that the inputs would need refinement to derive the “true FRs” behind the input from the workshops. The FR derivation technique, which was discussed, is a good methodology to derive solution-neutral requirements from these organizational leaders. These requirements and constraints show the basis for further research on the subject matter, giving a starting point for researchers to begin investigating, developing, and delivering tools for SMEs to fully realize the advantages which I4.0 is believed to offer them.

The decomposition and mapping process was used to derive coarse design guidelines for manufacturing system designers implementing I4.0 in SMEs. Together with the list of requirements and constraints, these guidelines form the main result of this research and a useful tool set for practitioners to design manufacturing systems for SMEs that are not only flexible and reconfigurable, but also smart and innovative as described in the picture in the previous section.

Further research will be needed now to investigate lower-level design guidelines and to develop techniques, methods, tools, and techniques as well as organizational solutions for SMEs to satisfy the functional requirements and to apply the defined coarse design guidelines. It is believed that this will deliver a suite of instruments for SMEs to take full advantage of I4.0 such that they do not lose their competitive advantage to large enterprises.