An integration model for generating and selecting product configuration plans

Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

In the developed market, time-to-market and market shares require companies to provide products that satisfy customer requirements in a timely manner, and the variety in product configurations has been analyzed thoroughly. Against this background, this study addresses an integration model for generating feasible configuration plans based on market transaction data and for selecting the optimal configuration plan(s) based on customer requirements. Transaction data can be used for clustering products to analyze the characteristics of segmented markets and yield the probabilities of configuration plans; along with the constraint conditions, feasible configuration plans can be generated, as well as market strategies for different segmented markets. In addition, a probabilistic classifier, the Naïve Bayes Classifier, is applied to map the customer requirements to the configuration plan with the highest probability. The classifier is suitable for handling imprecise and uncertain information, such as product requirements expressed by customers. A case study of a mouse device is illustrated, and the results indicate the integration model can achieve a good performance in terms of time advantages in project design.

Keywords

Product configuration Product design Customer requirements Product clustering Market strategy 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Funding was provided by National Natural Science Foundation of China (71571023).

References

  1. Agard, B., & Kusiak, A. (2007). Data-mining-based methodology for the design of product families. International Journal of Production Research, 42(15), 2955–2969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews, R. L., Brusco, M. J., & Currim, I. S. (2010). Amalgamation of partitions from multiple segmentation bases: A comparison of non-model-based and model-based methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 201(2), 608–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bijmolt, T. H., Paas, L. J., & Vermunt, J. K. (2004). Country and consumer segmentation: Multi-level latent class analysis of financial product ownership. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(4), 323–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bruseberg, A., & Mcdonagh-Philp, D. (2002). Focus groups to support the industrial/product designer: a review based on current literature and designers’ feedback. Applied Ergonomics, 33(1), 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carnevalli, J. A., & Miguel, P. C. (2008). Review, analysis and classification of the literature on QFD-types of research, difficulties and benefits. International Journal of Production Economics, 114(2), 737–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carulli, M., Bordegoni, M., & Cugini, U. (2013). An approach for capturing the voice of the customer based on virtual prototyping. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 24(5), 887–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen, S., Wang, Y., & Tseng, M. M. (2009). Mass customisation as a collaborative engineering effort. International Journal of Collaborative Engineering, 1(1–2), 152–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen, Y., Fung, R. Y. K., & Tang, J. (2005). Fuzzy expected value modelling approach for determining target values of engineering characteristics in QFD. International Journal of Production Research, 43(17), 3583–3604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dahlin, J., Halbherr, V., Kurz, P., Nelles, M., & Herbes, C. (2016). Marketing Green Fertilizers: Insights into Consumer Preferences. Sustainability, 8(11), 1169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De Oña, J., López, G., Mujalli, R., & Calvo, F. J. (2013). Analysis of traffic accidents on rural highways using latent class clustering and Bayesian networks. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 51, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Domingos, P., & Pazzani, M. (1998). On the optimality of the simple Bayesian classifier under zero-one loss. Machine Learning, 29(2–3), 103–130.Google Scholar
  12. Dziak, J. J., Coffman, D. L., Lanza, S. T., & Li, R. (2012). Sensitivity and specificity of information criteria (report no. #12-119). University Park, PA: The Methodology Center, The Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
  13. Gattorna, J. (2010). Dynamic supply chains: Delivering value through people (2nd ed.). Harlow, FT: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  14. Gershenson, J. K., Prasad, G. J., & Zhang, Y. (2003). Product modularity: Definitions and benefits. Journal of Engineering Design, 14(3), 295–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goswami, M., & Tiwari, M. K. (2015). Product feature and functionality driven integrated framework for product commercialization in presence of qualitative consumer reviews. International Journal of Production Research, 53(16), 4769–4788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Green, P. E., & Srinivasan, V. (1990). Conjoint analysis in marketing: New developments with implications for research and practice. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Green, P. E., Krieger, A. M., & Wind, Y. (2001). Thirty years of conjoint analysis: Reflections and prospects. Interfaces, 31(3), 94–99.Google Scholar
  18. Greenbaum, T. (2000). Moderating focus groups. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  19. Harding, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis from start to finish. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Hjort, K., Lantz, B., Ericsson, D., & Gattorna, J. (2013). Customer segmentation based on buying and returning behaviour. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 43(10), 852–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hsieh, M. H., Tsai, K. H., & Hultink, E. J. (2006). The relationships between resource configurations and launch strategies in taiwan’s ic design industry: An exploratory study. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(3), 259–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jenkins, O. C., & Matarić, M. J. (2002). Deriving action and behavior primitives from human motion data. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (Vol. 3, pp. 2551–2556).Google Scholar
  23. Jeon, G., & Leep, H. R. (2006). Forming part families by using genetic algorithm and designing machine cells under demand changes. Computers and Operations Research, 33(1), 263–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jiao, J., & Zhang, Y. (2005). Product portfolio identification based on association rule mining. Computer-Aided Design, 37(2), 149–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jiao, J., Zhang, Y., & Wang, Y. (2007). A generic genetic algorithm for product family design. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 18(2), 233–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jin, J., Liu, Y., Ji, P., & Liu, H. (2016). Understanding big consumer opinion data for market-driven product design. International Journal of Production Research, 54(10), 3019–3041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jolliffe, I. T. (2002). Principal component analysis. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Kahraman, C., Ertay, T., & Büyüközkan, G. (2006). A fuzzy optimization model for QFD planning process using analytic network approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 171(2), 390–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kangale, A., Kumar, S. K., Naeem, M. A., Williams, M., & Tiwari, M. K. (2016). Mining consumer reviews to generate ratings of different product attributes while producing feature-based review-summary. International Journal of Systems Science, 47(13), 3272–3286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Keogh, E., & Mueen, A. (2011). Curse of dimensionality. In C. Sammut & G. I. Webb (Eds.), Encyclopedia of machine learning (pp. 257–258). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  32. Kotler, P. T., & Armstrong, G. (2015). Principles of marketing (16th ed.). New York: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  33. Kristianto, Y., Helo, P., & Jiao, R. J. (2013). Mass customization design of engineer-to-order products using Benders’ decomposition and bi-level stochastic programming. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 24(5), 961–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kusiak, A., Smith, M. R., & Song, Z. (2007). Planning product configurations based on sales data. IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews, 37(4), 602–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kwong, C. K., Chen, Y., Bai, H., & Chan, D. S. K. (2007). A methodology of determining aggregated importance of engineering characteristics in QFD. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 53(4), 667–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lee, A. H. I., & Lin, C. Y. (2011). An integrated fuzzy QFD framework for new product development. Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, 23(1), 26–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lei, N., & Moon, S. K. (2015). A decision support system for market-driven product positioning and design. Decision Support Systems, 69, 82–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Li, H., & Azarm, S. (2002). An approach for product line design selection under uncertainty and competition. Journal of Mechanical Design, 124(3), 385–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lim, I. S., Ciechomski, P. D. H., Sarni, S., & Thalmann, D. (2003). Planar arrangement of high-dimensional biomedical data sets by isomap coordinates. In Proceedings of the IEEE symposium on computer-based medical systems (Vol. 16, pp. 50–55).Google Scholar
  40. Lin, K. Y., Chien, C. F., & Kerh, R. (2016). Unison framework of data-driven innovation for extracting user experience of product design of wearable devices. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 99, 487–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lockshin, L., & Cohen, E. (2011). Using product and retail choice attributes for cross-national segmentation. European Journal of Marketing, 45(7–8), 1236–1252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lu, W., & Petiot, J. F. (2014). Affective design of products using an audio-based protocol: Application to eyeglass frame. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 44(3), 383–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McLachlan, G. J., & Peel, D. (2000). Finite mixture models. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Moon, S. K., & McAdams, D. A. (2012). A market-based design strategy for a universal product family. Journal of Mechanical Design, 134(11), 111007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nath, P. D., Das, S. K., Islam, F. N., Tahmid, K., Shanto, R. A., & Rahman, R. M. (2017). Classification of product rating using data mining techniques. In D. Król, N. T. Nguyen, & K. Shirai (Eds.), Advanced topics in intelligent information and database systems (pp. 27–36). Basel: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(4), 535–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Özgür, A., Özgür, L., & Güngör, T. (2005). Text categorization with class-based and corpus-based keyword selection. In P. Yolum, T. Güngör, F. Gürgen, & C. Özturan (Eds.), Computer and information sciences-ISCIS 2005 (pp. 606–615). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pullman, M. E., Moore, W. L., & Wardell, D. G. (2002). A comparison of quality function deployment and conjoint analysis in new product design. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(5), 354–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ringnér, M. (2008). What is principle component analysis? Nature Biotechnology, 26(3), 303–304.Google Scholar
  50. Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2009). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  51. Sabin, D., & Weigel, R. (1998). Product configuration frameworks: A survey. IEEE Intelligent Systems and Their Applications, 13(4), 42–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Scavarda, L. F., Reichhart, A., Hamacher, S., & Holweg, M. (2010). Managing product variety in emerging markets. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 30(2), 205–224(20).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schwartz, B., & Kliban, K. (2005). The paradox of choice: Why more is less. New York: ECCO.Google Scholar
  54. Shao, X. Y., Wang, Z. H., Li, P. G., & Feng, C. X. J. (2006). Integrating data mining and rough set for customer group-based discovery of product configuration rules. International Journal of Production Research, 44(14), 2789–2811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. van der Maaten, L. J. P., Postma, E. O., & van den Herik, H. J. (2009). Dimensionality reduction: A comparative review (report no. TiCC-TR 2009-005). Tilburg: Tilburg Centre for Creative Computing, Tilburg University.Google Scholar
  56. Vermunt, J. K., & Magidson, J. (2002). Latent class cluster analysis. In J. A. Hagenaars & A.-L. McCutcheon (Eds.), Applied latent class analysis (pp. 89–106). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wang, Y., & Tseng, M. M. (2011). Integrating comprehensive customer requirements into product design. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology, 60(1), 175–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wang, Y., & Tseng, M. M. (2015). A Naïve Bayes approach to map customer requirements to product variants. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 26(3), 501–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wasserman, G. S. (1993). On how to prioritize design requirements during the QFD process. IIE Transactions, 25(3), 59–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Weng, S. S., & Liu, M. J. (2004). Feature-based recommendations for one-to-one marketing. Expert Systems with Applications, 26(4), 493–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wielinga, B., & Schreiber, G. (1997). Configuration-design problem solving. IEEE Expert: Intelligent Systems and Their Applications, 12(2), 49–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chongqing UniversityChongqingChina

Personalised recommendations