Efficiency and Innovativeness as Determinants of Design Architecture Choices

This study analyzes why firms use both internal and external design, and attempts to understand the determinants of design architecture choices. It is based on the design literature that analyzes the compared benefits of internal, external, and combined design, and it mobilizes the concept of vertical architecture that designates at the level of the firm the configurations of transactional choices along the firm's value chain. The research methodology follows an exploratory multiple case study of fashion triads (manufacturer, designer, and retailer) theoretically sampled according to the design position (internal, external, or combination) relative to the manufacturer and retailer. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews and archival documents. The 31 triad cases were clustered into five industry architectures (IAs). The IAs are characterized as follows. Designer-led architecture, in which the three players are independent, offers an advantage in terms of branding and creativity. Manufacturer-led architecture, in which design is internal to the manufacturer, is recognized in terms of cost-effectiveness and speed of development process. Retailer-led architecture, in which design is internal to retail, offers advantages in terms of speed of development process and fit with market needs. Finally, the two hybrid architectures—licensing designer and designer retailer cobranding—with a combination of internal and external design are recognized in terms of cobranding and innovation. Through this process, the authors identify three determinants of design architecture choices (efficiency, level of fashion innovativeness, and innovation type) that can be grouped into two main opposing determinants: efficiency and innovativeness. Internal design offers greater efficiency, whereas external design provides increased innovativeness. Efficiency and innovation act in tension, there is no IA that offers both high efficiency and high innovativeness, there is a trade-off effect. But the tension between efficiency and innovativeness can be reconciled by combining internal and external design. Unlike prior literature, this research analyzes vertical choices with regard to choosing among a menu of IAs instead of transactions, and focuses on a distinctly creative activity. External design also offers an “ingredient brand” that end customers may recognize. The authors propose additional research for the generalization of these results.

[1]  Robert Kreuzbauer,et al.  Embodied Cognition and New Product Design: Changing Product Form to Influence Brand Categorization , 2005 .

[2]  M. Beverland Managing the Design Innovation–Brand Marketing Interface: Resolving the Tension between Artistic Creation and Commercial Imperatives* , 2005 .

[3]  S. Zahra,et al.  Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension , 2002 .

[4]  M. Jacobides,et al.  The Dynamic Limits of Specialization: Vertical Integration Reconsidered , 2005 .

[5]  Michael S. McCarthy,et al.  Improving competitive position using branded ingredients , 1999 .

[6]  R. Verganti Innovating through design , 2006 .

[7]  R. Verganti Design, Meanings, and Radical Innovation: A Metamodel and a Research Agenda* , 2008 .

[8]  Celine Abecassis-Moedas,et al.  Integrating design and retail in the clothing value chain , 2006 .

[9]  Rachel Cooper,et al.  Managing design in the extended enterprise , 2003 .

[10]  Robin Roy,et al.  Competitive by design , 1988 .

[11]  P. Lawrence,et al.  Marketing Meets Design: Core Necessities for Successful New Product Development , 2005 .

[12]  Andrew B. Hargadon,et al.  Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. , 1997 .

[13]  Design Trades and Inter-firm Relationships in the Nord-Pas de Calais Textile Industry , 2002 .

[14]  Sihem Ben Mahmoud-Jouini,et al.  Absorptive Capacity and Source-Recipient Complementarity in Designing new Products: an Empirically Derived Framework , 2008 .

[15]  Rachel Cooper,et al.  Characterizing the Role of Design in New Product Development: An Empirically Derived Taxonomy* , 2005 .

[16]  Joaquín Alegre,et al.  Linking design management skills and design function organization: An empirical study of Spanish and Italian ceramic tile producers , 2007 .

[17]  Paola Cillo,et al.  Convergent designs in fine fashion: An evolutionary model for stylistic innovation , 2006 .

[18]  K. R. Harrigan Formulating Vertical Integration Strategies , 1984 .

[19]  Stephan Billinger,et al.  Special Issue: Organizational Design: Designing the Boundaries of the Firm: From "Make, Buy, or Ally" to the Dynamic Benefits of Vertical Architecture , 2006, Organ. Sci..

[20]  S. Kurokawa Make-or-buy decisions in R&D: small technology based firms in the United States and Japan , 1997 .

[21]  Anne Parmigiani,et al.  Why Do Firms Both Make and Buy? An Investigation of Concurrent Sourcing , 2007 .

[22]  M. Jacobides,et al.  Benefiting from Innovation: Value Creation, Value Appropriation and the Role of Industry Architectures , 2006 .

[23]  David Twigg,et al.  Managing product development within a design chain , 1998 .

[24]  Vivien Walsh,et al.  Design, innovation and the boundaries of the firm , 1996 .

[25]  Kenneth Munsch,et al.  Outsourcing Design and Innovation , 2004 .

[26]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[27]  K. Eisenhardt Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[28]  Marie-Laure Djelic,et al.  The Telecom Industry as Cultural Industry? The Transposition of Fashion Logics into the Field of Mobile Telephony , 2005 .

[29]  Violina P. Rindova,et al.  Symbolic value creation , 2008 .

[30]  Nitin Nohria,et al.  Motivación de los empleados: un poderoso modelo nuevo , 2008 .

[31]  Roberto Verganti,et al.  Collaborative Strategies in Design-intensive Industries: Knowledge Diversity and Innovation , 2010 .

[32]  Davide Ravasi,et al.  Managing design and designers for strategic renewal , 2005 .

[33]  Ricardo Chiva,et al.  Investment in Design and Firm Performance: The Mediating Role of Design Management* , 2009 .

[34]  S. Svejenova,et al.  Cooking up change in haute cuisine: Ferran Adrià as an institutional entrepreneur , 2007 .

[35]  J. Hagel,et al.  Unbundling the corporation. , 1999, Harvard business review.

[36]  Robert W. Veryzer The Roles of Marketing and Industrial Design in Discontinuous New Product Development , 2005 .

[37]  Antoaneta P. Petkova,et al.  When Is a New Thing a Good Thing? Technological Change, Product Form Design, and Perceptions of Value for Product Innovations , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[38]  Margaret Bruce,et al.  Dangerous Liaisons: An Application of Supply Chain Modelling for Studying Innovation within the UK Clothing Industry , 1999 .

[39]  A. Arora,et al.  COMPLEMENTARITY AND EXTERNAL LINKAGES: THE STRATEGIES OF THE LARGE FIRMS IN BIOTECHNOLOGY* , 1990 .

[40]  R. Veugelers,et al.  COMPLEMENTARITY BETWEEN TECHNOLOGY MAKE AND BUY IN INNOVATION STRATEGIES : EVIDENCE FROM BELGIAN MANUFACTURING FIRMS , 1998 .

[41]  M. Jacobides Industry Change Through Vertical Dis-Integration: How and Why Markets Emerged in Mortgage Banking , 2004 .