A market-driven approach to product family design

International Journal of Production Research

Volumn 47, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 71-104

  Kumar, Deepak ^a   Chen, Wei ^a   Simpson, Timothy W ^b  

^a Northwestern University   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cost model; Demand modelling; Discrete choice analysis; Market segmentation grid; Nested logit; Platform leveraging; Product family design; Product line positioning; Universal motor design

Indexed keywords

COMPETITION; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COSTS; DECISION THEORY; DESIGN; MOTORS; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT; PROJECT MANAGEMENT;

COST MODEL; DEMAND MODELLING; DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; MARKET SEGMENTATION GRID; NESTED LOGIT; PLATFORM LEVERAGING; PRODUCT FAMILY DESIGN; PRODUCT LINE POSITIONING; UNIVERSAL MOTOR DESIGN;

MARKETING;

EID: 56349088326     PISSN: 00207543     EISSN: 1366588X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00207540701393171     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Aboulafia, R., Airbus pulls closer to Boeing. Aerospace America (0740-722 X), 2000, 38, 16-18.
2. Akundi, S.V.K., Simpson, T.W. and Reed, M.P., Multi-objective design optimization for product platform and product family design using genetic algorithms, in Proceedings of the IDETC/ICIE ASME 2005 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering. Long Beach, CA, 24-28 September, 2005, paper no. DETC2005/DAC-84905.
3. Anonymous, Volkswagen campaigns for more distinct brand identities. Prof. Eng., 2002, 15, 13.
4. Ben-Akiva, M.E., Structure of passenger travel demand models. PhD thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 1973.
5. Bremmer, R., Cutting-Edge platforms. Finan. Times Automat. World, September 1999, 30-38.
6. Chapman, S.J., Electric Machinery Fundamentals, 1991 (McGraw-Hill: New York, NY).
7. Chen, K.D. and Hausman, W.H., Technical note: mathematical properties of the optimal product line selection problem using choice-based conjoint analysis. Manage. Sci., 2000, 46, 327-332.
8. Choi, S.C. and Desarbo, W.S., A conjoint-based product designing procedure incorporating price competition. J. Prod. Innovat. Manage., 1994, 11, 451-459.
9. Coleman, T., Branch, M.A. and Grace, A., Optimization Toolbox for Use with MATLAB: User's Guide, Version 2, 1999 (The Math Works, Inc.: Natick', MA).
10. Dai, Z. and Scott, M.J., Product platform design through sensitivity analysis and cluster analysis, in Proceedings of the 2004 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, September, 2004, paper no. DETC2004-57464.
11. Dai, Z. and Scott, M.J., Effective product family design using preference aggregation. J. Mech. Des., 2006, 128, 659-667.
12. De Weck, O.L., Suh, S.S. and Chang, D., Product family and platform portfolio optimization, in Proceedings of the 2003 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Chicago, Illinois, 2-6 September, 2003, paper no. DETC03/DAC-48721.
13. Dobson, G. and Kalish, S., Heuristics for pricing and positioning a product-line using conjoint and cost data. Manage. Sci., 1993, 39, 160-175.
14. Farrell, R.S. and Simpson, T.W., Product platform design to improve commonality in custom products. J. Intell. Manuf, 2003, 14, 541-556.
15. Fellini, R., Kokkolaras, M., Papalambros, P.Y. and Perez-Duarte, A., Platform selection under performance loss constraints in optimal design of product families, in Proceedings of the 2002 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 29 September-2 October, 2002, paper no. DETC02/DAC-34099.
16. Forinash, C.V. and Koppelman, F.S., Application and interpretation of nested logit models of intercity mode choice, in Transportation Research Record No. 1413 Innovations in Travel Behaviour Analysis, Demand Forecasting, and Modeling Networks, 1993, pp. 98-106.
17. Fruchter, G.E., Fligler, A. and Winer, R.S., Optimal product line design: genetic algorithm approach to mitigate cannibalization. J. Optimizat. Theory. App., 2006, 131, 227-244.
18. Garrow, L. and Koppelman, F., Multinomial and nested logit models of airline passengers' no-show and standby behaviour'. J. Reven. Pricing Manage., 2004, 3, 237-253.
19. Green, P.E. and Krieger, A.M., Segmenting markets with conjoint analysis. J. Market., 1991, 55, 20-31.
20. Halman, J.I.M., Hofer, A.P. and Van Vuuren, W., Platform-driven development of product families: linking theory with practice. J. Prod. Innovat. Manage., 2003, 20, 149-162.
21. Kim, H.M., Kumar, D.K.D., Chen, W. and Papalambros, P.Y., Target exploration for disconnected feasible regions in enterprise-driven hierarchical multilevel product design. American Inst. Aeronaut. Astronaut. J., 2006, 44, 67-77.
22. Kim, K. and Chhajed, D., Commonality in product design: cost saving, valuation change and cannibalization. Euro. J. Oper. Res., 2000, 125, 602-621.
23. Kima, K. and Chhajed, D., An experimental investigation of valuation change due to commonality in vertical product line extension. J. Prod. Innovat. Manage., 2001, 18, 219-230.
24. Kumar, D., Kim, H.M. and Chen, W., Multi-level optimization for enterprise driven decision-based product design. In Making Effective Decisions, edited by K. Lewis, W. Chen and L. Schmidt, pp. 203-215, 2006 (ASME Press: New York).
25. Lee, B., Calling patterns and usage of residential toll service under self selecting tariffs. J. Regulat. Eco., 1999, 16, 45-82.
26. Lehnerd, A.P., Revitalizing the manufacture and design of mature global products. In Technology and Global Industry: Companies and Nations in the World Economy, edited by B.R. Guile and H. Brooks, pp. 49-64, 1987 (National Academy Press: Washington, DC).
27. Li, H. and Azarm, S., An approach for product line design selection under uncertainty and competition. J. Mech. Des. (Transactions of the ASME), 2002, 124, 385-392.
28. Lilien, G.L. and Rangaswamy, A., Marketing Engineering: computer-assisted marketing analysis and planning, 2004 (Trafford Publishing: Victoria, BC, Canada).
29. Marion, T.J. and Simpson, T.W., Platform leveraging strategies and market segmentation, in Product Platform and Product Family Design: Methods and Applications, pp. 73-90, 2006 (Springer: New York, NY).
30. Mazanec, J.A., How to detect travel market segments: a clustering approach, J. Trav. Res., 1984, 23, 17-21.
31. McFadden, D., Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour. In Frontiers in Econometrics, edited by P. Zarembka, pp. 105-142, 1974 (Academic Press: New York, NY).
32. McFadden, D., Disaggregate behavioral travel demand's rum side: a 30-year retrospective, in Travel Behavior Research: The Leading Edge, pp. 17-64, 2001 (Pergamon: London).
33. Messac, A., Martinez, M.P. and Simpson, T.W., Effective product family design using physical programming. Eng. Optimizat., 2002a, 34, 245-261.
34. Messac, A., Martinez, M.P. and Simpson, T.W., A penalty function for product family design using physical programming. ASME J. Mech. Des., 2002b, 124, 164-172.
35. Meyer, M.H. and Lehnerd, A.P., The Power of Product Platforms: Building Value and Cost Leadership, 1997 (Free Press: New York).
36. Michalek, J.J., Feinberg, F.M. and Papalambros, P.Y., Linking marketing and engineering product design decisions via analytical target cascading. J. Prod. Innovat. Manage., 2005, 22, 42-62.
37. Michalek, J.J., Ceryan, O., Papalambros, P.Y. and Koren, Y., Balancing marketing and manufacturing objectives in product line design. Trans. ASME: J. Mech. Des., 2006, 128, 1196-1204.
38. Miller, S., VW sows confusion with common pattern for models-Investors worry profits may suffer as lines compete. Wall Street Journal, New York, 25 October, 1999, p. A.25.
39. Miller, S., Volkswagen to overhaul Audi brand-Effort is first step by European car maker to shed conservative image. Wall Street Journal, New York, 16 May, 2002, p. D.8.
40. Moore, W.L., Louviere, J.J. and Verma, R., Using conjoint analysis to help design product platforms. J. Prod. Innovat. Manage., 1999, 16, 27-39.
41. Nair, S.K., Thakur, L.S. and Wen, K.W., Near optimal solutions for product line design and selection: beam search heuristics. Manage. Sci., 1995, 41, 767-785.
42. Nayak, R.U., Chen, W. and Simpson, T.W., A variation-based method for product family design. Eng. Optimizat., 2002, 34, 65-81.
43. Pire, B.J., Mass customization: the new frontier in business competition, 1993 (Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA).
44. Robertson, D. and Ulrich, K., Planning for product platforms. Sloan. Manage. Rev., 1998, 39, 19-31.
45. Simpson, T.W., A Concept exploration method for product family design. Ph.D. Dissertation, G.W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 1998.
46. Simpson, T.W., Maier, J.R. and Mistree, F., Product platform design: method and application. Res. Eng. Des., 2001, 13, 2-22.
47. Simpson, T.W., Product platform design and customization: status and promise. AI EDAM, 2004, 18, 3-20.
48. Simpson, T.W., Methods for optimizing product platforms and product families: overview and classification, in Product Platform and Product Family Design: Methods and Applications, pp. 133-156, 2005 (Springer: New York, NY).
49. Train, K., Qualitative Choice Analysis: Theory, Econometrics, and An Application to Automobile Demand, 1986 (MIT Press: Cambridge, MA).
50. Train, K.E., McFadden, D.L. and Ben-Akiva, M.E., The demand for local telephone service: a fully discrete model of residential calling patterns and service choices. The RAND J. Eco., 1987, 18, 109-123.
51. Train, K.E., Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation, 2003 (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK).
52. Veinott, C.G. and Martin, J.E., Fractional and Subfractional Horsepower Electric Motors: Available Types, Basic Operating Principles, Selection, and Maintenance, 1986 (McGraw-Hill: New York).
53. Vellido, A., Lisboa, P.J.G. and Meehan, K., Segmentation of the on-line shopping market using neural networks. Expert. Syst. Appl., 1999, 17, 303-314.
54. Wassenaar, H.J. and Chen, W., An approach to decision-based design with discrete choice analysis for demand modeling. Trans. ASME: J. Mech. Des., 2003, 125, 490-497.
55. Wassenaar, H.J., Kumar, D. and Chen, W., Discrete choice demand modeling for decision-based design. In Making Effective Design Decisions, edited by K. Lewis, W. Chen and L. Schmidt, 2006 (ASME press: New York).
56. Wedel, M. and Kamakura, W.A., Market Segmentation: Conceptual and Methodological Foundations, 1999 (Kluwer Academic Publishers: Boston, MA).
57. Wilhelm, B., Platform and modular concepts at volkswagen-their effects on the assembly process, in Transforming Auto Assembly, pp. 146-156, 1997 (Springer-Verlag: Berlin).
58. Williams, H., On the formation of travel demand models and econometric evaluation measures. Environ. Plann. A, 1977, 9, 285-344.
59. Zhang, Y. and Jiao, J., An approach to product family positioning based on shared surplus, in Proceedings of the IDETCICIE ASME 2005 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. Long Beach, CA, 24-28 September, 2005.
60. Zufryden, F., A conjoint-measurement-based approach to optimal new product design and market segmentation. In Analytical Approaches to Product and Market Planning, edited by A.D. Shocker, pp. 100-114, 1977 (Marketing Science Institute: Cambridge, MA).