Search

Many companies adopt concurrent engineering in their product-development projects in order to reduce time to market. Concurrent engineering requires careful management, since the uncertainty of transferred information leads to rework and renders a development process complex. Most of the existing studies on concurrent engineering have analyzed overlapping between two activities. The present study expanded the research scope by modeling the developmental process of the concurrent execution of multiple activities as the result of management decisions, the overlapping ratio, and the information transfer frequency. When multiple activities are overlapped, it is more difficult to model a development process, since the uncertainty of cascaded information has impacts on many activities. The quantitative model developed in the present study provides insights into the uncertainty of information and the product-development process. Based on the generalized process model for multiple-activity overlapping, the optimal decision to minimize project duration was considered. As a solution to the dilemma of the high computational burden of considering all feasible decision sets, this paper proposes a myopic heuristic. The project management heuristic proposed in this paper is intended to assist managers in the decision-making process, as well as reducing the intermediate deadlines in project main plan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates whether and when differences in the credit rating agencies' methodologies result in differences in rating properties. In particular, this study focuses on differences in information processing constraints between a rating agency that utilizes qualitative analysis and direct access to borrowers' management in its rating process (Standard & Poor's) compared to one that does not (Egan Jones Ratings Company) and how these differences affect rating quality. We find that as information uncertainty about borrowers increases, Egan Jones's rating accuracy, informativeness, and timeliness decrease relative to Standard & Poor's. Our findings suggest that Egan Jones's more restricted rating methodology can lead to limitations in information processing and, thus, reductions in Egan Jones's rating quality advantage for borrowers with greater information uncertainty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]