Product line design with component commonality and cost-reduction effort

被引:145
作者
Heese, Hans Sebastian [1 ]
Swaminathan, Jayashankar M.
机构
[1] Indiana Univ, Kelley Sch Business, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA
[2] Univ N Carolina, Kenan Flagler Business Sch, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
关键词
component commonality; marketing-manufacturing interface; product line design;
D O I
10.1287/msom.1060.0103
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
Market pressure for low prices paired with customer demand for high product variety presents a considerable dilemma for many manufacturers. Industry practice and research to date suggest that approaches based on component commonality can substantially lower the costs of proliferated product lines, but at the cost of reducing product differentiation and revenues. We analyze a stylized model of a manufacturer who designs a product line consisting of two products for sale to two market segments with different valuations of quality. The manufacturer determines the component quality levels, the amount of effort to reduce production costs, and whether to use common or different components for the two products. Explicitly considering potential interdependencies between cost-reduction effort and quality decisions, we characterize environments where the optimal product line involving component commonality features products of higher quality and yields higher revenues. Counter to earlier research we show that it can be preferable to make those components common that, relative to their production cost, are attributed a higher importance by customers. Disregarding the interactions between commonality, production cost, quality, and effort decisions can lead manufacturers to offer product lines with excessive differentiation and inefficiently low quality.
引用
收藏
页码:206 / 219
页数:14
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]   Demand heterogeneity and technology evolution: Implications for product and process innovation [J].
Adner, R ;
Levinthal, D .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2001, 47 (05) :611-628
[2]   THE EFFECT OF COMMONALITY ON SAFETY STOCK IN A SIMPLE INVENTORY MODEL [J].
BAKER, KR ;
MAGAZINE, MJ ;
NUTTLE, HLW .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1986, 32 (08) :982-988
[3]   Process and product innovation: Complementarity in a vertically differentiated monopoly with discrete consumer types [J].
Bandyopadhyay, S ;
Acharyya, R .
JAPANESE ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2004, 55 (02) :175-200
[4]   Intensity of competition and the choice between product and process innovation [J].
Bonanno, G ;
Haworth, B .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION, 1998, 16 (04) :495-510
[5]  
BROWN W, 2001, WASHINGTON POST 1125
[6]   FLEXIBILITY AND MARKETING MANUFACTURING COORDINATION [J].
DEGROOTE, X .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION ECONOMICS, 1994, 36 (02) :153-167
[7]   Product differentiation and commonality in design: Balancing revenue and cost drivers [J].
Desai, P ;
Kekre, S ;
Radhakrishnan, S ;
Srinivasan, K .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2001, 47 (01) :37-51
[8]   Quality segmentation in spatial markets: When does cannibalization affect product line design? [J].
Desai, PS .
MARKETING SCIENCE, 2001, 20 (03) :265-283
[9]   Component sharing in the management of product variety: A study of automotive braking systems [J].
Fisher, M ;
Ramdas, K ;
Ulrich, K .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1999, 45 (03) :297-315
[10]  
Garvin D.A., 1988, MANAGING QUALITY