The imperfect hiding : some introductory concepts and preliminary issues on modularity

In this work we present a critical assessment of some problems and open questions on the debated notion of modularity. Modularity is greatly in fashion nowadays, being often proposed as the new approach to complex artefact production that enables to combine fast innovation pace, enhanced product variety and reduced need for co-ordination. In line with recent critical assessments of the managerial literature on modularity, we sustain that modularity is only one among several arrangements to cope with the complexity inherent in most high-technology artefact production, and by no means the best one. We first discuss relations between modularity and the broader (and much older within economics) notion of division of labour. Then we sustain that a modular approach to labour division aimed at eliminating technological interdependencies between components or phases of a complex production process may have, as a by-product, the creation of other types of interdependencies which may subsequently result in inefficiencies of various types. Hence, the choice of a modular design strategy implies the resolution of various tradeoffs. Depending on how such tradeoffs are solved, different organisational arrangements may be created to cope with 'residual' interdependencies. Hence, there is no need to postulate a perfect isomorphism, as some recent literature has proposed, between modularity at the product level and modularity at the organisational level.

[1]  Daniel A. Levinthal The Slow Pace of Rapid Technological Change: Gradualism and Punctuation in Technological Change , 1998 .

[2]  D. L. Parnas,et al.  On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules , 1972, Software Pioneers.

[3]  C. Babbage Economy of Machinery and Manufactures , 1832 .

[4]  S. Brusoni,et al.  Unpacking the Black Box of Modularity: Technologies, Products and Organizations , 2001 .

[5]  D. North Competing Technologies , Increasing Returns , and Lock-In by Historical Events , 1994 .

[6]  N. Gilbert,et al.  Artificial Societies: The Computer Simulation of Social Life , 1995 .

[7]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Looking Forward and Looking Backward: Cognitive and Experiential Search , 2000 .

[8]  Sanford J. Grossman,et al.  The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration , 1986 .

[9]  C. Shapiro,et al.  Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities , 1986, Journal of Political Economy.

[10]  Luigi Marengo,et al.  Division of Labour and Social Coordination Modes : A simple simulation model , 1995 .

[11]  W. Arthur,et al.  INCREASING RETURNS AND LOCK-IN BY HISTORICAL EVENTS , 1989 .

[12]  G. Dosi Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change , 1982 .

[13]  C. Shapiro,et al.  Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility , 1985 .

[14]  Joan C. Woodward Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice , 1966 .

[15]  G. Dosi Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories , 1993 .

[16]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Coordination, Organizational Boundaries and Fads in Business Practices , 1996 .

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

[18]  R. Cooper,et al.  Coordination Games: Technological Complementarities , 1999 .

[19]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of , 1990 .

[20]  R. Langlois Modularity in technology and organization , 2002 .

[21]  Massimo Egidi,et al.  Biases in Organizational Behavior , 2001 .

[22]  R. Myerson Optimal coordination mechanisms in generalized principal–agent problems , 1982 .

[23]  Enrico Zaninotto,et al.  Standards and standardization on the eve of a new century , 1998, STAN.

[24]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Sciences of the Artificial , 1970 .

[25]  Joseph Farrell,et al.  Standardization, Compatibility, and Innovation , 1985 .

[26]  Stuart A. Kauffman,et al.  ORIGINS OF ORDER , 2019, Origins of Order.

[27]  James D. Thompson Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[28]  Joseph Farrell,et al.  Installed base and compatibility : innovation, product preannouncements and predation , 1986 .

[29]  Luigi Marengo,et al.  Decomposability and modularity of economic interactions , 2001 .

[30]  Melissa A. Schilling Toward a General Modular Systems Theory and Its Application to Interfirm Product Modularity , 2000 .

[31]  Scott Schaefer,et al.  Product design partitions with complementary components , 1999 .

[32]  David A. Hounshell,et al.  From the American System to Mass Production 1800–1932: The Development of Manufacturing Technology in the United States by David A. Hounshell (review) , 2023 .

[33]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Landscape Design: Designing for Local Action in Complex Worlds , 1999 .

[34]  R. Langlois,et al.  Networks and innovation in a modular system: Lessons from the microcomputer and stereo component industries , 1992 .

[35]  Koen Frenken,et al.  Interdependencies, Nearly-Decomposability and Adaptation , 1999 .

[36]  Giovanni Dosi,et al.  The structure of problem-solving knowledge and the structure of organisations , 2000 .

[37]  Peter Grindley,et al.  Standards, strategy, and policy : cases and stories , 2000 .

[38]  O. Hart,et al.  Incomplete Contracts and Renegotiation , 1988 .