How to Manage IPD Development Risks Through TR Technical Reviews

Original

In the field of product R&D, the IPD (Integrated Product Development) process serves as a mature management framework that systematizes and standardizes product development. TR (Technical Review), a crucial technical control checkpoint within the IPD process, acts as a "security guard." Through systematic examination of technical solutions, design outputs, and verification results, TR ensures the product's technical path remains compliant, performance meets targets, and manufacturability stays controlled. This helps prevent rework, cost overruns, or launch delays caused by technical issues at the root level, thereby safeguarding the entire IPD development process.

1. The Key Role of TR Reviews in IPD

The IPD process spans five main stages: Concept, Plan, Develop, Verify, and Launch. At each stage, both DCP (Decision Checkpoint) and TR reviews are established, forming a "dual control mechanism" for product development. DCP focuses on business decisions, determining whether to continue allocating resources to the project. In contrast, TR reviews concentrate on technical decisions, assessing the feasibility of the product technology and whether it meets requirements.

TR reviews are conducted throughout the entire IPD development lifecycle, and their role is irreplaceable. On one hand, they help development teams identify technical risks early, resolving issues at an initial stage before they escalate. For example, during the concept phase, a TR review can detect infeasible technical concepts early, preventing significant resource investment in the wrong direction. On the other hand, TR reviews ensure that designs align with requirement specifications and industry standards, thereby guaranteeing the quality of technical outputs. Moreover, lessons learned during the review process can be documented as valuable organizational assets, enhancing future product development and elevating overall R&D capability.

2. Core Focus Areas of TR Reviews at Each Stage

To precisely manage technical risks throughout the IPD development stages, the IPD framework divides TR reviews into six key checkpoints (TR1 to TR6). Each checkpoint corresponds to a specific IPD phase with clearly defined timing, core focus areas, and expected outputs.

TR1 (Product Package Requirements and Concept Review)

This review occurs during the Concept phase, after the concept proposal is formed and before the CDCP review. It focuses on assessing product requirement alignment, technical concept feasibility, and conducting preliminary risk evaluation. The outputs include the TR1 Product Package Requirements and Concept Review Report, the Product Requirements Confirmation Form, and the Preliminary Risk List. This review ensures the product concept closely matches market needs while providing initial technical feasibility assessment, laying the foundation for subsequent development.

TR2 (Requirements Decomposition and Specification Review)

Conducted in the Plan phase after the project plan is drafted and before the PDCP review, TR2 focuses on requirements decomposition completeness, Technical Specification (SRS) rationality, and R&D resource alignment. Outputs include the TR2 Requirements Decomposition and Specification Review Report, the Requirements Decomposition Document, and the Technical Specification (SRS). This step translates overall requirements into actionable technical specifications while ensuring R&D resources match project needs, preventing development delays caused by unclear requirements or insufficient resources.

TR3 (Overall Solution Review)

Also performed in the Plan phase before detailed design begins, TR3 primarily examines the overall technical solution completeness, consistency between the Design Specification (SDS) and the overall solution, key component selection suitability, and preliminary assessments of Design for Manufacturability (DFM) and Design for Repairability (DFR). Outputs include the TR3 Overall Solution Review Report, the Overall Technical Solution Document, and the DFM/DFR Checklist. This review ensures the overall technical solution's scientific validity and feasibility while addressing manufacturability and repairability early to reduce subsequent production and maintenance risks.

TR4 (Module/System Review)

TR4 is conducted in the Development phase after detailed design completion and before prototype build. It focuses on detailed module design compliance, system integration plan feasibility, design simulation results, and Bill of Materials (BOM) completeness and compliance. Outputs include the TR4 Module/System Design Review Report, the System Integration Plan Document, and the BOM Review Form. This review ensures module designs meet specifications, the system integration plan is feasible, and the BOM is accurate and complete, providing reliable basis for prototype build.

TR5 (Prototype Review)

TR5 takes place in the Development phase after prototype build and before testing begins. It focuses on verifying prototype-design output consistency, preliminary core function validation results, test plan refinement, and test resource readiness. Outputs include the TR5 Prototype Review Report, the Preliminary Prototype Function Verification Report, and the Test Execution Plan. This review helps identify prototype-design deviations promptly, ensures core prototype functions meet requirements, and finalizes test plans and resource preparation to guarantee smooth subsequent testing.

TR6 (Pilot Production Review)

TR6 is performed in the Verification phase after testing completion and before release preparation. It primarily analyzes pilot production test results, evaluates issue resolution effectiveness, and assesses mass production feasibility. Outputs include the TR6 Pilot Production Feasibility Review Report, the Test Result Analysis Report, and the Issue Resolution Plan. This review ensures problems identified during pilot production are effectively resolved, technically preparing the product for mass market release.

3. TR Review Implementation Process

To ensure TR reviews effectively manage IPD development risks, organizations must follow a standardized implementation process. This process consists of three main stages: pre-review preparation, review meeting execution, and post-review follow-up.

Pre-Review Preparation

First, material preparation is essential. The technical lead must submit the "review package" 3-5 working days in advance. This package includes core deliverables (such as design proposals, simulation reports, and test data), a self-assessment report (covering identified issues and proposed corrective actions), and a review checklist. Second, the review chair must confirm the attendance of key participants. If any required attendees are unavailable, replacements should be arranged beforehand to prevent the review from becoming a mere formality. For complex projects, organizing an internal pre-review within the R&D team can help resolve basic issues before the formal TR review, significantly improving review efficiency.

Using ZenTao as an example, during the pre-review preparation phase, its project management software helps teams efficiently manage review materials. Team members can upload and share various review documents within the platform, enabling centralized management and easy access. Meanwhile, the software's notification function reminds technical leads to submit the "review package" promptly, avoiding delays. The review chair can also check participant availability through the software and quickly arrange substitutes, ensuring orderly progress of preparation work.

Review Meeting Execution

The meeting begins with the moderator outlining the agenda, review objectives, and evaluation criteria, ensuring all participants understand the key focus areas. The technical lead then presents the review content. Following the presentation, the review team conducts a confirmation vote. During the meeting, it is crucial to avoid "discussions without decisions." If contentious issues arise, responsible persons and resolution deadlines must be assigned immediately, with dedicated personnel tracking them afterward to ensure smooth progress without bottlenecks.

ZenTao's meeting management functionality plays a significant role in this phase. The moderator can publish meeting notices in advance via ZenTao, clearly stating the agenda and participant responsibilities. During the meeting, attendees can record key points and disputed issues in real time within the software, with the system automatically linking them to responsible persons and resolution deadlines to ensure timely follow-up. For voting sessions, online voting through ZenTao quickly gathers and tallies results, enhancing meeting efficiency.

Post-Review Follow-up: Ensuring Issue Closure

Within 24 hours after the meeting, the review report must be issued. This report should clearly list identified issues, responsible persons, resolution deadlines, and verification methods, providing a basis for subsequent corrective actions. The technical lead must execute the action plan according to schedule. If deadlines are missed, the issue must be escalated to the IPD project team for resolution. After action plan completion, the technical lead submits verification materials, and the review team conducts sample re-inspection to ensure issues are fully resolved, achieving closed-loop management.

ZenTao's task management and tracking functions provide robust support for post-review follow-up. After the review report is issued, the system can automatically convert the issue list into tasks assigned to responsible persons, with reminder alerts set for resolution deadlines. Responsible persons update the action plan progress in real time within ZenTao, making it visible to both the review team and IPD project team. After completion, responsible persons upload verification materials, and the review team conducts sample re-inspection through ZenTao, with feedback promptly recorded in the system. This ensures every issue is properly resolved, truly achieving closed-loop problem management.

As a key method for IPD development risk control, the value of TR reviews lies not only in identifying issues but, more importantly, in preemptively avoiding risks. When implementing TR reviews, companies must avoid emphasizing process over actual effectiveness and should flexibly adjust review checkpoints and content based on product characteristics. ZenTao, as a professional project management tool, provides comprehensive support for the standardized implementation of TR reviews. It helps companies achieve their product R&D goals of technical compliance, quality control, and cost optimization through TR reviews, driving continuous improvement of the IPD development process and securing a competitive advantage in the market.