Updating a Modular Product: How to Set Time to Market and Component Quality

In the face of shorter product life cycles, designing products with modular component parts can shorten product development time and speed up the introduction of new products in the market. Utilizing stylized models, we examine the reuse/redesign, quality, speed-to-market, and marketing decisions for two consecutive generations of a multicomponent modular product. With modularity that assumes a stable product architecture, each component can be improved by incurring a design cost that is convex increasing in the level of quality. Our study generates the following insights. When development start-up (fixed) cost is negligible, it is profitable to upgrade every component part; otherwise, it is beneficial to reuse some of the existing parts without making any design improvements in order to save on development cost. In an effort to reduce product development time while maximizing profit, we found solid evidence that the productivity level in developing every component part can be a key driver of speed-to-market. Individually, a new product launch time postponement and an R&D budget increase can lead to improvements in component part quality and overall product quality, but our models show that better improvement in quality can be achieved from launch time postponement (budget increase) when product design teams have low (high) product development productivity. Finally, when the marginal cost of producing the new product is equal to that of the old product, it is optimal to remove the old product from the market and sell only the new product.

[1]  Morris A. Cohen,et al.  An Analysis of Several New Product Performance Metrics , 2000, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[2]  Jayashankar M. Swaminathan,et al.  Product Line Design with Component Commonality and Cost-Reduction Effort , 2006, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[3]  Saurabh Gupta,et al.  Special Issue on Design and Development: Appropriateness and Impact of Platform-Based Product Development , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[4]  Ulrich Wilhelm Thonemann,et al.  Optimal Commonality in Component Design , 2000, Oper. Res..

[5]  Paul E. Green,et al.  Conjoint Analysis in Marketing: New Developments with Implications for Research and Practice , 1990 .

[6]  Asoo J. Vakharia,et al.  The operating impact of parts commonality , 1996 .

[7]  S. Rosen,et al.  Monopoly and product quality , 1978 .

[8]  Anirudh Dhebar Durable-Goods Monopolists, Rational Consumers, and Improving Products , 1994 .

[9]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Software Engineering Economics , 1993, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[10]  M. Primo,et al.  An exploratory study of the effects of supplier relationships on new product development outcomes , 2002 .

[11]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Fundamentals of Product Modularity , 1994 .

[12]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Holistic Customer Requirements and the Design-Select Decision , 1999 .

[13]  Teck-Hua Ho,et al.  New product development: the performance and time-to-market tradeoff , 1996 .

[14]  R. Vidal Dynamic optimization: The calculus of variations and optimal control in economics and management: Morton I. KAMIEN and Nancy L. SCHWARTZ Volume 4 in: Dynamic Economics: Theory and Applications, North-Holland, New York, 1981, xi + 331 pages, Dfl.90.00 , 1982 .

[15]  Karthik Ramachandran,et al.  Design Architecture and Introduction Timing for Rapidly Improving Industrial Products , 2008, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[16]  Elie Ofek,et al.  How Much Does the Market Value an Improvement in a Product Attribute , 2002 .

[17]  Paul E. Green,et al.  Segmenting Markets with Conjoint Analysis , 1991 .

[18]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Component Sharing in the Management of Product Variety: a Study of Automotive Braking Systems , 1999 .

[19]  BryantA.,et al.  B. W. Boehm software engineering economics , 1983 .

[20]  Yoji Akao,et al.  Quality Function Deployment : Integrating Customer Requirements into Product Design , 1990 .

[21]  K. W. Lau Antonio,et al.  The impacts of product modularity on competitive capabilities and performance: An empirical study , 2007 .

[22]  Kannan Srinivasan,et al.  Special Issue on Design and Development: Product Differentiation and Commonality in Design: Balancing Revenue and Cost Drivers , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[23]  I. Png,et al.  Market segmentation, cannibalization, and the timing of product introductions , 1992 .

[24]  Weiyu Tsai,et al.  New Product Introduction: Timing, Design, and Pricing , 2004, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[25]  Carliss Y. Baldwin,et al.  Managing in an age of modularity. , 1997, Harvard business review.

[26]  Dilip Chhajed,et al.  Product Design with Multiple Quality-Type Attributes , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[27]  William L. Moore,et al.  Quality and Time-to-Market Trade-offs when There Are Multiple Product Generations , 2001, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[28]  Morris A. Cohen,et al.  An Anatomy of a Decision-Support System for Developing and Launching Line Extensions , 1997 .

[29]  Teck Hua Ho Product design strategy analysis: The marketing-manufacturing interface , 1993 .

[30]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Product Design and Development , 1995 .

[31]  M. Petit Dynamic optimization. The calculus of variations and optimal control in economics and management : by Morton I. Kamien and Nancy L. Schwartz. Second Edition. North-Holland (Advanced Textbooks in Economics), Amsterdam and New York, 1991. Pp. xvii+377. ISBN0-444- 01609-0 , 1994 .