An investigation on the impact of product modularity level on supply chain performance metrics: an industrial case study

Abstract

The benefit of integrating product design decisions and supply chain design decisions has been recognized by researchers. Such integration can facilitate better communication between design teams and operations groups. Consequently, potential supply chain risks can be highlighted and addressed before the launch of a new product. Modularization is one of the most critical elements for both product design and supply chain design decisions as it impacts the assembly sequence and hence the selection of component and module suppliers. However, the impact of modularity level on supply chain performance is still unclear, and thus is the focus of this study. The proposed analytical method incorporates both product design and supply chain design functions, and hence, enables simultaneous consideration of these decisions. The supply chain performances of all two-module and three-module design concepts are fully investigated in an effort to explore the impact of modularity level on supply chain performance. Results show that increased modularity is advantageous for the time-based performance of a supply chain network, whereas decreased modularity yields superiority in terms of cost performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1

    Adams, M., (2004). PDMA foundation new product development report of initial findings: Summary of responses from 2004 CPAS, http://www.pdma.org/shoppdmadescription.cfm?pkstoreproduct=25. Accessed 15 Aug 2011.

  2. 2

    Appelqvist P., Lehtonen J. M., Kokkonen J. (2004) Modeling in product and supply chain design: Literature survey and case study. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 15(7): 675–685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Blackhurst J., Wu T., O’Grady P. (2005) PCDM: A decision support modeling methodology for supply chain, product and process design decisions. Journal of Operations Management 23: 325–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Bush A. A., Tiwana A., Rai A. (2010) Complementarities between product design and IT infrastructure flexibility in IT-enabled supply chain. IEEE Transitions on Engineering Management 57(2): 240–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Chiu M.-C., Okudan G. E. (2011) An integrative methodology for product and supply chain design decisions at the product design stage. Journal of Mechanical Design 133(2): 021008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Chiu M.-C., Okudan G. E. (2011) Investigation of the applicability of DfX tools during design concept evolution: A literature review. Journal of Product Development 13(2): 132–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Chopra S., Meindel P. (2006) Supply chain management. Pearson Educational Ltd, New York

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Cutrin F., Schulz P. (1998) Multiple correlations and Bonferroni’s correction. Biological Psychiatry 44(8): 775–777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Dowlatshahi S. (1992) Purchasing’s role in a concurrent engineering environment. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management 28(1): 21–25

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Fine C. H., Golany B., Naseraldin H. (2005) Modeling tradeoffs in three-dimensional concurrent engineering: A goal programming approach. Journal of Operations Management 23(3–4): 389–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Fisher, M. (1997). What is right supply chain for Your product? Harvard Business Review March/April.

  12. 12

    Fixson S. K. (2005) Product architecture assessment: A tool to link product, process, and supply chain design decisions. Journal of Operations Management 23: 345–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Fixson S. K. (2007) Modularity and commonality research: Past developments and future opportunities. Concurrent Engineering Research and Applications 15(2): 85–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Fredriksson P. (2006) Operations and logistics issues in modular assembly processes: Cases from the automotive sector. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 17(2): 168–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Fujita K. (2002) Product variety optimization under modular architecture. Computer-Aided Design 34: 953–965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Gershenson J. K., Prasad G. J., Zhang Y. (2003) Product modularity: Definitions and benefits. Journal of Engineering Design 14(3): 295–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Huang C.-C., Kusiak A. (1998) Modularity in design of product and systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 28(1): 66–78

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Ishii, K., & Yang, T. G. (2003). Modularity: International industry benchmarking and research roadmap. In Proceedings of the 2005 ASME IDETC and CIE conference, Paper No. DETC2003–48132.

  19. 19

    Jiao J., Tseng M. M. (1999) A methodology of developing product family architecture for mass customization. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 10: 3–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Jiao J., Simpson T. W., Siddique Z. (2007) Product family design and platform-based product development: A state-of-the-art review. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 18(1): 5–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Krishnan V., Ulrich K. T. (2001) Product development decisions: A review of the literature. Management Science 47(1): 1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Lambert A. J. D. (2002) Determining optimum disassembly sequences in electronic equipment. Computers & Industrial Engineering 43(3): 553–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Lamothe J., Hadj-Hamou K., Aldanondo M. (2006) An optimization model for selecting a product family and designing its supply chain. European Journal of Operational Research 169: 1030–1047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Lau A. K. W., Yam R. C. M., Tang E. P. Y. (2010) Supply chain integration and product modularity: An empirical study of product performance for selected Hong Kong manufacturing industries. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 30(1): 20–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Lee H. L., Sasser M. M. (1995) Product universality and design for supply chain management. Production Planning and Control 6(3): 270–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Martin, M. V., & Ishii, K. (1996). Design for variety: A methodology for understanding the costs of product proliferation. In Proceedings of the 1996 ASME design engineering technical conferences and computers in engineering conference (pp. 1–9).

  27. 27

    Matrin M. V., Ishii K. (2002) Design for variety: Developing standardized and modularized product platform architectures. Research in Engineering Design 13(4): 213–235

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Mokkola J. H. (2007) Management of product architecture modularity for mass customization: Modeling and theoretical considerations. IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management 54(1): 57–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Muffatto M. (1999) Introducing a platform strategy in product development. International Journal of Production Economics 60(61): 145–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Nepal B., Monplaisir L., Famuyiwa O. (2011) Matching product architecture with supply chain design. European Journal of Operational Research 216(2): 312–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31

    Rampersad H. K. (1995) Integrated and simultaneous design for robotic assembly. Wiley, London

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    Salhieh S. M., Kamrani A. K. (1999) Macro level product development using design for modularity. Robotics and Computer Integrated-Manufacturing 15: 319–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33

    Salvador F., Forza C., Rungtusanatham M. (2002) Modularity, product variety, production volume, and component sourcing: Theorizing beyond generic prescriptions. Journal of Operations Management 20: 549–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34

    Simpson T. W. (2004) Product platform design and customization: Status and promise. Journal of Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 18: 3–20

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35

    Stone R. B., Wood K. L., Crawford R. H. (2000) A heuristic method for identifying modules for product architectures. Design Studies 21: 5–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36

    Su, C. P., Lin, Y. C., & Lee, L. W. (2010). Component commonality in closed-loop manufacturing system. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. doi:10.1007/s10845-010-0485-1.

  37. 37

    Ulku S., Schmidt G. M. (2011) Matching product architecture and supply chain configuration. Production and Operations Management 20(1): 16–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38

    Ulrich K. T., Eppinger S. D. (2004) Product design and development. Irwin McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39

    Voordijk H., Meijboom B., Haan J. (2006) Modularity in supply chains: A multiple case study in the construction industry. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 26(6): 600–618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40

    Yigit A. S., Ulsoy A. G., Allahverdi A. (2002) Optimizing modular product design for reconfigurable manufacturing. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 13(4): 309–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41

    Zhang W. Y., Tor S. Y., Britton G. A. (2006) Managing modularity in product family design with functional modeling. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 30: 579–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ming-Chuan Chiu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chiu, MC., Okudan, G. An investigation on the impact of product modularity level on supply chain performance metrics: an industrial case study. J Intell Manuf 25, 129–145 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-012-0680-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Product design
  • Supply chain design
  • Modularity
  • Supplier selection