Advertisement

Attacking the Critical Parts in Product Development

Marin Platform - Building Flexible Structural Elements for Boats
  • Bjørnar Henriksen
  • Carl Christian Røstad
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 414)

Abstract

The product cycle is changing, where time legs are shorter, high volume- and cash cow-phases fading. Rapid product introduction and customization are keywords, and often associated with modularization. The objective is to create a flexible product design, not requiring changes in the overall product design every time a new variant is introduced. This has been a feasible strategy for manufacturers of small boats in high-cost countries where an incremental development process is well suited for modularization. However, also more radical innovations are needed, not only change modules and product configurations but also have to develop new product platforms. We then have to deal with the critical, resource demanding processes. This conceptual paper describes how boat builders take modularization to a higher lever by attacking the critical parts in product development, i.e. the structural elements of boats.

Keywords

Innovation modularization product development leisureboat 

References

  1. 1.
    O’Sullivan, D., Rolstadås, A., Filos, E.: Global education in manufacturing strategy. Journal of Intelligent manufacturing 22(5), 663–674 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Davis, S.: Future Perfect. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1987)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Du, X., Tseng, M.M.: Characterizing CustomerValue for Product Customization. In: Proceedings of the 1999 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, Las Vegas (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ulrich, K.T., Eppinger, S.D.: Product Design and Development. McGraw-Hill, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Duray, R., Ward, P.T., Milligan, G.W., Berry, W.L.: Approaches to mass customization: configurations and empirical validation. Journal of Operations Management 18, 605–625 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D.C., Nelson, R.R.: The Oxford handbook of innovation. University Press, London (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Christensen, C.M.: The innovator’s dilemma. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eagar, R., van Oene, F., Boulton, C., Roos, D., and Dekeyser, C.: The future of innovation management: The next 10 years. Prism 1. Arthur D. Little (2011), http://www.adlittle.com/prism-articles.html?&no_cache=1&view=379
  9. 9.
    Hart, S.J.: New product development. In: Baker, J.M., Hart, S.J. (eds.) The Marketing Book, 6th edn. Elsevier, UK (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ericsson, A., Erixon, G.: Controlling Design Variants: Modular Product Platforms. ASME Press, NY (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Duray, R.: Mass Customizers use of inventory, planning techniques and channel management. Production Planning & Control 15(4), 412–421 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ericsson, A., Erixon, G.: Controlling Design Variants: Modular Product Platforms. ASME Press, NY (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sanchez, R.: Using modularity to manage the interactions of technical and industrial design. Design Management Journal 2, 8 (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stone, R.B.: A heuristic method for identifying modules for product architectures. A heuristic method for identifying modules for product architectures. Design Studies 21, 5–31 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jo, H.H., Parsaei, H.R., Sullivan, W.G.: Principles of concurrent engineering. In: Concurrent Engineering: Contemporary Issues and Modern Design Tools, pp. 3–23. Chapman and Hall, New York (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dahmus, J.B., Gonzales-Zugasti, J.P., Otto, K.N.: Modular product architecture. Design Studies 22(5), 409–425 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sanchez, R., Mahoney, J.T.: Modularity, Flexibility, and Knowledge Management in Product and Organization Design. IEEE Engineering Management Review. Reprint from Strategic Management 17 (1996); special issue December. John Wiley & Sons LimitedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Henriksen, B., Røstad, C.C.: Evaluating and Prioritizing Projects – Setting Targets. The Business Effect Evaluation Methodology BEEM. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business 3(2), 275–291 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bjørnar Henriksen
    • 1
  • Carl Christian Røstad
    • 1
  1. 1.SINTEF Technology and SocietyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations