Challenges for increasing component commonality in platforms

Many companies have adopted a platform strategy to handle the trade-off between variety and standardized components in their work of developing products. Previous research has shown that a platform strategy can achieve a lot of benefits, such as shortened development cycles, reduced needs for testing, and economy of scale in producing larger numbers of reduced sets of components. However, the literature is limited in describing challenges related to platform implementation. This paper reports on a study performed within a multinational firm in the automotive industry, which is pursuing a higher commonality among its platforms. Our findings include descriptions of eight challenges to an implementation of a platform strategy. One such challenge is that a high commonality does not only risk brand distortion when marketing the product; it may also cause brand distortion on the component level in after- sales. Another challenge is that for commonality, development does not always start from scratch; a project manager pursuing increased commonality might need to involve other projects, but the commonalization might affect components already in production and after- sales. Thus, there is need for methods to make cost-benefit analyses covering the life-cycle on the component level of the platforms in development, production, and after-sales.

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

[2]  James M. Utterback,et al.  The product family and the dynamics of core capability , 1992 .

[3]  S. Sanderson,et al.  A framework for model and product family competition , 1995 .

[4]  K. Ulrich,et al.  Planning for Product Platforms , 1998 .

[5]  Maximilian Pasche,et al.  Platforms and their effects on new product development projects , 2010 .

[6]  M. Mcgrath Product Strategy for High Technology Companies , 2000 .

[7]  Ron Sanchez,et al.  Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organization design , 1996 .

[8]  Johannes I.M. Halman,et al.  Platform driven development of product families: Linking theory with practice , 2001 .

[9]  Michael Burda,et al.  Revolutionizing product development , 1993 .

[10]  M. Meyer,et al.  Revitalize Your Product Lines Through Continuous Platform Renewal , 1997 .

[11]  Mohanbir Sawhney,et al.  Leveraged high-variety strategies: From portfolio thinking to platform thinking , 1998 .

[12]  Moreno Muffatto,et al.  Introducing a platform strategy in product development , 1999 .

[13]  Charlotte F. Knudtzen,et al.  Brand Management: Research, Theory and Practice , 2009 .

[14]  Jeffrey K. Pinto The Elements of Project Success , 2007 .

[15]  Christer Karlsson,et al.  Multibranded Platform Development: A Corporate Strategy with Multimanagerial Challenges , 2007 .

[16]  Moreno Muffatto,et al.  Product architecture and platforms: a conceptual framework , 2002, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[17]  Eva Labro,et al.  The Cost Effects of Component Commonality: A Literature Review Through a Management-Accounting Lens , 2004, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[18]  Hans-Jörg Bullinger,et al.  Innovative production structures -- Precondition for a customer-orientated production management , 1995 .

[19]  James M. Utterback,et al.  Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation: How Companies Can Seize Opportunities in the Face of Technological Change , 1994 .

[20]  Yuen-Hsien Tseng,et al.  Theory in Practice , 2002 .

[21]  Marc H. Meyer,et al.  The power of product platforms : building value and cost leadership , 1997 .

[22]  J. Bartunek,et al.  Insider/outsider team research , 1996 .

[23]  Christer Karlsson,et al.  Inter-Firm Product Platform Development In The Automotive Industry , 2005 .