Dilemmas in factory design: paradox and paradigm

  • J. MacGregor Smith


The problems of factory design are notorious for their complexity. It is argued in this paper that factory design problems represent a class of problems for which there are crucial dilemmas and correspondingly deep-seated underlying paradoxes. These paradoxes, however, give rise to novel paradigms which can bring about fresh approaches as well as insights into their solution.


Factory design Dilemmas Paradox Paradigm 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Checkland P (1984) Rethinking a systems approach. In: Tomlnson R, Kiss I (eds) Rethinking the process of operational research and systems analysis, pp 43–65. Pergamon Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cook SA (1971) The complexity of theorem-proving procedures. Proc. of the Third ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp 4–18Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    DeGrace P, Stahl L (1990) Wicked problems, righteous solutions. Yourden Press Computing Series, Upper Saddle River, NJGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dixon JR, Poli C (1995) Engineering design and design for manufacturing. Field Stone, Conway, MAGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ethiraj SK, Levinthal D (2004) Modularity and innovation in complex systems. Management Science 50(2): 159–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Funk, Wagnalis (1968) Standard college dictionary. Harcourt, Brace and World, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Garey MR, Johnson DS (1979) Computers and intractability: a guide to the theory of NP-completeness. Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hillier F, Lieberman G (2001) Introduction to operations research. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hopp W, Spearman M (1996) Factory physics. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Karp RM (1972) Reducibility among combinatorial problems. In: Miller RE, Thatcher JW (eds) Complexity of computer computations. Plenum Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Karp RM (1975) On the computational complexity of combinatorial problems. Networks 5: 45–68zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Krishnamoorthy MS, Deo N (1979) Complexity of minimum-dummy-activities problem in a PERT network. Networks 9: 189–194MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kunz W, Rittel H (1970) Issues as elements of information systems. Institute for Urban and Regional Development, Univeristy of California, Berkeley, Working Paper No. 131Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rittel H (1968) Lecture notes for arch, vol 130. Unpublished, Department of Architecture, University of California, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rittel H (1972a) On the planning crisis: systems analysis of the “first and second generations”. Bedrifts Okonomen 8: 390–396Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rittel H (1972b) Structure and usefulness of planning information systems. Bedrifts Okonomen (8): 398–401Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rittel H, Webber M (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4: 155–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rittel H (1975) On the planning crisis: systems analysis of the first and second generations. Reprinted from: Bedrifts ØKonmen, No. 8, October 1972; Reprint No. 107, Berkeley, Institute of Urban and Regional DevelopmentGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Roberts N (2001) Coping with wicked problems: the case of Afghanistan. Learning from International Public Management Forum, vol 11B, pp 353–375. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Robinson D, et al. (1999) Achange proposal for small-scale renovation and construction projects. Project Team Report. Internal University of Massachusetts Report. Campus Committee for Organization Restructuring, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MAGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shaw GB (1946) The doctors dilemma. Penguin, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Smith J MacGregor, Larson RJ, MacGilvary DF (1976) Trial court facility. National Clearinghouse for Criminal Justice Planning and Architecture, Monograph B5. In: Guidelines for the planning and design of state court programs and facilities. University of Illinois, Champaign, ILGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. MacGregor Smith
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical and Industrial EngineeringUniversity of MassachusettsAmherstUSA

Personalised recommendations