Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Transdisciplinary Perspectives on Complex Systems pp 271–303Cite as

Early Phase Estimation of Variety Induced Complexity Cost Effects: A Study on Industrial Cases in Germany

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

Offering a broad external market variety at competitive prices is one of the main challenges in the global competition among mechanical engineering branches. Reducing variety and thus variety induced complexity cost has evolved to become one of the crucial global success factors. The aim of this study is to get insights on variety induced complexity cost effects and to elaborate on how these effects can be influenced by modular product development. Firstly, general causes and effects of variety are described portraying their trans-disciplinary nature. Next, the state of the art in reducing variety by modular product development is explained. Hypotheses on cost effects of variety induced complexity are introduced; and industrial cases from Germany are evaluated in order to support the hypotheses. During these empirical case studies, an integrated approach for developing modular product families by including various corporate disciplines is applied. This trans-disciplinary procedure aims to reduce variety over the whole product life by modularization. The results obtained and their potential effects on complexity cost are presented and discussed. Based on the analysis of these cases, an approach for Early Phase Estimation of Complexity Cost (EPECC) is developed. This approach helps assess trans-disciplinary complexity cost effects of different modular concept alternatives in early design phases. Furthermore, the effect of branch specific lot sizes on complexity cost is illustrated. Factors related to the successful use of these effects in branches and segments with high and low lot sizes are shared from industrial and consultancy practices. This contribution is authored by a team of academicians, consultants, and industrial executives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Verband Deutscher Maschinen- und Anlagenbau e.V., & McKinsey & Company (Eds.). (2014). The future of German mechanical engineering. Frankfurt, Germany: Verband Deutscher Maschinen- und Anlagenbau e.V

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ripperda, S., & Krause, D. (2013). Komplexitätskosteneffekte modularer Produktfamilien. In D. Krause, K. Paetzhold, S. Wartzack (Eds.), Design for X. Beiträge zum 24. DfX-Symposium Oktober 2013, 24. Hamburg: Aufl. TuTech Innovation.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brosch, M., & Krause, D. (2011). Complexity from the perspective of the design for supply chain requirements (pp. 102–116). Hamburg, Germany: TuTech Verlag

    Google Scholar 

  4. Eppinger, S. D., & Browning, T. R. (2012). Design structure matrix methods and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Pine, B. J. (1993). Mass customization. The new frontier in business competition. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Salvador, F. (2007). Toward a product system modularity construct: Literature review and reconceptualization. IEEE Transaction on Engineering in Management, 54, 219–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Robertson, D., & Ulrich, K. (1998). Planning for product platforms. Sloan Management Review, 39(4), 19–31.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Simpson, T. W. (Ed.). (2013). Advances in product family and product platform design. Methods & applications. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jiao, J., & Tseng, M. (2000). Understanding product family for mass customization by developing commonality indices. Journal of Engineering Design, 11(3), 225–243. doi:10.1080/095448200750021003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Du, X., Jiao, J., & Tseng, M. M. (2001). Architecture of product family: Fundamentals and methodology. Concurrent Engineering, 9(4), 309–325. doi:10.1177/1063293X0100900407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Haug, A., Hvam, L., & Mortensen, N. H. (2013). Reducing variety in product solution spaces of engineer-to-order companies: The case of Novenco A/S. IJPD, 18(6), 531. doi:10.1504/IJPD.2013.058556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Simpson, T. W., Bobuk, A., Slingerland, L. A., et al. (2012). From user requirements to commonality specifications: an integrated approach to product family design. Research Engineering Design, 23(2), 141–153. doi:10.1007/s00163-011-0119-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. de Weck, O. L., Suh, E. S., & Chang, D. (2003). Product family and platform portfolio optimization (pp. 175–185).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hölttä-Otto, K. (2005). Modular product platform design. Helsinki: Helsinki University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Erixon, G. (1998). Modular function deployment. A method for product modularisation. Stockholm: The Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Manufacturing Systems, Assembly Systems Division.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Krause, D., Beckmann, G., Eilmus, S., et al. (2013). Integrated development of modular product families: A methods toolkit. In T. W. Simpson (Ed.), Advances in product family and product platform design. Methods & applications (pp. 245–269). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Thonemann, U. W., & Brandeau, M. L. (2000). Optimal commonality in component design. Operations Research, 48(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ehrlenspiel, K., Kiewert, A., Lindemann, U., et al. (2007). Cost-efficient design. Heidelberg, New York: Springer, ASME Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Schuh, G. (1989). Gestaltung und Bewertung von Produktvarianten. Ein Beitrag zur systematischen Planung von Serienprodukten. Technische Hochschule Dissertation—Aachen, Als Ms. gedr. Berichte aus der Produktionstechnik, Vol. 177. Düsseldorf: VDI-Verl.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Park, J., & Simpson, T. W. (2006). An activity-based costing method to support product family design. In T. W. Simpson, Z. Siddique, & J. Jiao (Eds.), Product platform and product family design. Methods and applications. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Pfeiffer, W. (1992). Variantenkostenrechnung. In W. Männel (Ed.), Handbuch Kostenrechnung (pp. 861–877). Wiesbaden, Germany: Gabler-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Tu, Y. L., Xie, S. Q., & Fung, R. (2007). Product development cost estimation in mass customization. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 54(1), 29–40. doi:10.1109/TEM.2006.889065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ripperda, S., & Krause, D. (2014). Costs in modularization approaches: A co-citation analysis. In 13th International Design Conference—Design 2014, pp. 965–974.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Fujita, K., Akagi, S., Yoneda, T., et al. (1998). Simultaneous optimization of product family sharing system structure and configuration. In: Proceedings of DETC’98 Design Engineering Technical Conferences. Atlanta, Georgia, USA: ASME.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sedlmeier, L., Möller, K., Schultze, W., et al. (2013). Kostenwirkung der Modularisierung (KosMo): Entwicklung eines Prognose- und Entscheidungsmodells für Markt- und Kosteneffekte von Modularisierungskonzepten. In: Schriftenreihe Forschungshefte der FVA, Nr. 1081. Frankfurt, Germany: Forschungsvereinigung Antriebstechnik e.V.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Eilmus, S., & Krause, D. (2013). Product life-oriented development of component commonality and variety. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2013 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition (IMECE2013), San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kipp, T. (2012). Methodische Unterstützung der variantengerechten Produktgestaltung (Hamburger Schriftenreihe Produktentwicklung und Konstruktionstechnik 1st ed., Vol. 4). Hamburg: TuTech Verl.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Blees, C., Kipp, T., Beckmann, G., et al. (2010). Development of modular product families: Integration of design for variety and modularization. In: A. Dagman & R. Söderberg (Eds.), NordDesign 2010. Proceedings of the 8th biannual conference NordDesign 2010. Product and Production Development (pp. 159–170). Göteborg: Chalmers University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Eilmus, S., Ripperda, S., & Krause, D. (2013, August, 19–22). Towards the development of commonal product programs. In Proceedings of iced13. 19th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED13), Design for Harmonies (Vol. 4, pp. 209–218). Seoul: Design Society.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Wildemann, H. (2000). Komplexitätsmanagement. Vertrieb, Produkte, Beschaffung, F & E, Produktion und Administration (TCW-Report Nr. 20). München: Verl. TCW Transfer-Centrum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Odego GmbH, Hamburg, Germany

    Sandra Eilmus & Thomas Gumpinger

  2. Knorr-Bremse Systeme für Schienenfahrzeuge GmbH, München, Germany

    Thomas Kipp

  3. Institute for Product Development and Mechanical Engineering Design (PKT), Hamburg University of Technology, Hamburg, Germany

    Olga Sankowski & Dieter Krause

Authors
  1. Sandra Eilmus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Gumpinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Kipp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Olga Sankowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Dieter Krause
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sandra Eilmus .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Kahlen Global Professional Solutions , Gronau, Germany

    Franz-Josef Kahlen

  2. Department of Organizational Leadership School of Education and Human Services, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA

    Shannon Flumerfelt

  3. Department of Production and Systems School of Engineering, University of Minho, Guimarães, Portugal

    Anabela Alves

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Eilmus, S., Gumpinger, T., Kipp, T., Sankowski, O., Krause, D. (2017). Early Phase Estimation of Variety Induced Complexity Cost Effects: A Study on Industrial Cases in Germany. In: Kahlen, J., Flumerfelt, S., Alves, A. (eds) Transdisciplinary Perspectives on Complex Systems. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38756-7_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation