Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:54:44.138Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Development of a Configure-to-Order-Based Process for the Implementation of Modular Product Architectures: A Case Study

Part of: Product Architecture and Modularization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Florian Michael Seiler ,
Erik Greve  and
Dieter Krause

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

As todays’ global market trends lead to an increasing demand for individualised products, manufacturers need to cope with a high degree of internal and external variety, which has a severe impact on complexity and therefore -costs. When implementing modular product architectures, it becomes obvious, that the actual Engineer-to-Order (ETO) processes cannot cope with the requirements of such a product architecture. It is crucial to develop a complying Configure-to-Order (CTO) process in order to make full use of its suppled benefits. As there is no existing approach about how to methodically change an existing ETO process into an adequate CTO process, we intend to fill this gap with this paper by showing an approach for the development of a CTO process for modular product architectures. Furthermore, we show the application and evaluation of this approach in a case study with a special equipment manufacturer (SME), that is already implementing modular architectures.

Keywords

Configure-to-orderOrganizational processesProcess modellingProduct architectureModularisation
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 2971 - 2980
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019

References

Beckmann, G. and Krause, D. (2013), “Process visualisation of product family development methods”, International Conference On Engineering Design 2013, Seoul, Korea.Google Scholar
Ehrlenspiel, K., Kiewert, A., Mörtl, M. and Lindemann, U. (2005), “Kostengünstig Entwickeln und Konstruieren”, Springer, Berlin. https://doi/org/10.1007/978-3-642-41959-1Google Scholar
Erixon, G. (1998), “Modular Function Deployment: A Method for Product Modularisation”, The Royal Insitute of Technology, Department of Manufacturing Systems, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Hackl, J. and Krause, D. (2016), “Effects of modular Product Structures on life phases and economic factors”, Design 2016 - 14th International Design Conference, May 16-19, Cavtat, Dubrovnik, Croatia.Google Scholar
Kilger, C., Stadler, H. and Meyer, H. (2015), “Supply Chain Management and Advanced Planning: Concepts, Models and Case Studies”, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi/org/10.1007/978-3-642-55309-7Google Scholar
Kratchovil, M. and Carson, C. (2005), “Growing Modular: Mass Customization of Complex Products, Services and Software”, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Krause, D. and Gebhardt, N. (2018), “Methodische Entwicklung modularer Produktfamilien: Hohe Produktvielfalt beherrschbar entwickeln”, Springer, Hamburg. https://doi/org/10.1007/978-3-662-53040-5Google Scholar
Oracle (2017), “Oracle configure to order process guide”, Available at: https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E18727_01/doc.121/e13692/T426454T426457.htm (9.10.2017).Google Scholar
Rubin, H. and Rubin, I. (2005), “Qualitative Data: The Art of Hearing Data”, Sage Publications, Illinois.Google Scholar
Salvador, F. (2007), “Towards a product system modularity construct: Literature review and reconceptualization”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 54 No. 2. https://doi/org/10.1109/TEM.2007.893996Google Scholar
Seidenschwarz, W. (2012), “Marktorientiertes Prozessmanagement: Wie Process Mass Customization Kundenorientierung und Prozessstandardisierung integriert”, Vahlen, München. https://doi/org/10.15358/9783800643318Google Scholar
Simpson, T. W., Siddique, Z. and Jiao, R. J. (eds.) (2006), “Product platform and product family design: methods and applications”, Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi/org/10.1007/0-387-29197-0_1Google Scholar
Sutherland, J. and Schwaber, K. (2016), “A Scrum Guide”, Scrum.Org, Chicago.Google Scholar
Verband Deutscher Maschinen- und Anlagenbau. (2014), “Zukunftsperspektive deutscher Maschinenbau”, McKinsey & Company, Frankfurt/Main.Google Scholar
Wagner, K. (2007), “Performance Excellence - Der Praxisleitfadem zum effektiven Prozessmanagement”, Carl Hanser Verlag, München.Google Scholar
Zhang, L., Jiao, J. and Pokharel, S. (2004), “Internet-enabled information management for configure-to-order product fulfilment”, In: Asia Pacific Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 3.Google Scholar