Dealing with the Need for Flexibility and Economies of Scope in Global Production Network Design

  • G. Schuh
  • J. Nöcker
  • R. Varandani
  • J. Schwartze
  • R. Schilling
Conference paper


The structure of production networks is determined by two key objectives. The first objective lies in the generation of economies of scale which propel the concentration of manufacturing in mass production sites in order to persist in the global market. The second objective is the individualization of products driven by decreasing lot sizes, an unpredictable market demand and growing expectations regarding proximity to the consumer which in turn lead to the need for more flexibility within the production network of companies. The dilemma increases when taking into account that product portfolios are often given due to market requirements, and product architecture is another battlefield of complexity. Todays specific challenge of global production network design therefore is the increasing number of relevant markets and planning objects, which need to be integrated into the planning scope.


Production Site Production Network Product Portfolio Target Network Market Requirement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Schwartze, J., 2010, Strategic development of an international production network, IMP-Conference on Erfolgreiche Internationalisierung: Chancen, Grenzen, Strategien, RWTH Aachen University, 7 December 2010.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wübbenhorst, K.L., Wildner, R., 2007, Marktorientierte Unternehmensführung in stagnierenden Märkten, in: Marktorientierte Führung im wirtschaftlichen und gesellschaftlichen Wandel, Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schuh, G. et al., 2008, Decision-Based Organizational Design, 2nd CIRP Conference on Assembly Technologies and Systems (CATS), Toronto, 21–23 September 2008.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schuh, G., et al., 2005, Kooperationsmanagement. Systematische Vorbereitung, gezielter Auf- und Ausbau, entscheidende Erfolgsfaktoren, München: Hanser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abele, E. et al., 2008, Global Production – A Handbook for Strategy and Implementation, Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brecher, C. et al., 2008, Wettbewerbsfaktor Produktionstechnik : Aachener Perspektiven, AWK, Aachener Werkzeugmaschinen-Kolloquium’08, 5–6 June 2008.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kinkel, S., 2004, Erfolgsfaktor Standortplanung, Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goetschalckx, M., Fleischmann, B., 2005, Strategic network planning in: Supply Chain Management and Advanced Planning, Heidelberg: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Argoneto, P. et al., 2008, Production planning in production networks: models for medium and short-term planning, Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lauritzen, M. D. et al., 2005, Optimize your global production base, McKinsey & Company Automotive & Assembly Extranet, October 2005Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kampker, A. et al., 2004, Global Footprint-DesignGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beiersdorf Annual Report 2009.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schilling, R., Schwartze, J., 2010, Using manufacturing focus portfolios to assess product mix complexity in manufacturing footprint design, (EurOMA)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Skinner, W. (1974): “The focused factory”, in: Harvard Business Review, Vol. 52, No. 3, pp. 113–121.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Schuh
    • 1
  • J. Nöcker
    • 1
  • R. Varandani
    • J. Schwartze
      • 1
    • R. Schilling
      • 2
    1. 1.Laboratory for Machine Tools and Production EngineeringRWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany
    2. 2.Beiersdorf AGHamburgGermany

    Personalised recommendations