IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v44y1998i3p352-369.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Importance of Design Through Product Archaeology

Author

Listed:
  • Karl T. Ulrich

    (The Wharton School, 1317 Steinberg Hall-Dietrich Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104)

  • Scott Pearson

    (MPM Corporation, 16 Forge Park, Franklin, Massachusetts 02038)

Abstract

This paper assesses the importance of design in determining product costs by measuring the variation in design performance among a set of competing design efforts. This assessment is completed for a set of functionally similar products in a single product category: automatic drip coffee makers. The approach of this study is to measure the manufacturing content---the attributes of the design that drive cost---through analysis of the physical products themselves, and to estimate how variation in manufacturing content relates to variation in cost in a hypothetical manufacturing setting. We call this approach product archaeology. For the domain of coffee makers, we find significant variation in manufacturing content. This variation in manufacturing content corresponds to a range of estimated manufacturing costs, for a hypothetical manufacturing system, of approximately 50 percent of the average manufacturing cost of the products. We also find that differences in capabilities among product development efforts are the most plausible explanation for the differences in manufacturing content.

Suggested Citation

  • Karl T. Ulrich & Scott Pearson, 1998. "Assessing the Importance of Design Through Product Archaeology," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(3), pages 352-369, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:44:y:1998:i:3:p:352-369
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.44.3.352
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.44.3.352
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.44.3.352?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sanderson, Susan & Uzumeri, Mustafa, 1995. "Managing product families: The case of the Sony Walkman," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 761-782, September.
    2. Karl Ulrich & David Sartorius & Scott Pearson & Mark Jakiela, 1993. "Including the Value of Time in Design-for-Manufacturing Decision Making," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 429-447, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. V. Krishnan & Karl T. Ulrich, 2001. "Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, January.
    2. Lan Luo & P. K. Kannan & Brian T. Ratchford, 2007. "New Product Development Under Channel Acceptance," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 149-163, 03-04.
    3. Glen M. Schmidt & Evan L. Porteus, 2000. "Sustaining Technology Leadership Can Require Both Cost Competence and Innovative Competence," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 1-18, March.
    4. Fay, Scott & Mitra, Deb & Wang, Qiong, 2009. "Ask or infer? Strategic implications of alternative learning approaches in customization," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 136-152.
    5. Akhilesh Bajaj & Sunder Kekre & Kannan Srinivasan, 2004. "Managing NPD: Cost and Schedule Performance in Design and Manufacturing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(4), pages 527-536, April.
    6. Yen Hsu, 2017. "Organizational Innovation, Design And Npd Performance: The Role Of Co-Creation Strategy," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(04), pages 1-19, May.
    7. Calonius, Mathias, 2002. "Findings about Design and the Economy," Discussion Papers 785, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    8. Marshall Fisher, 2007. "Strengthening the Empirical Base of Operations Management," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 368-382, December.
    9. Sanja Rocco & Aleksandra Pisnik, 2016. "Focusing on Customer: Relationships between Design and Market Orientation," International Journal of Innovation and Economic Development, Inovatus Services Ltd., vol. 2(4), pages 7-16, October.
    10. Philip Auerswald, 2010. "Entry and Schumpeterian profits," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 553-582, August.
    11. Dahan, Ely & Srinivasan, V. Seenu, 2005. "The Impact of Unit Cost Reductions on Gross Profit: Increasing or Decreasing Returns?," Research Papers 1905, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    12. Sandro Montresor & Antonio Vezzani, 2017. "Design, innovation and performance in European firms," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2017-01, Joint Research Centre.
    13. Glen M. Schmidt & Evan L. Porteus, 2000. "The Impact of an Integrated Marketing and Manufacturing Innovation," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 2(4), pages 317-336, April.
    14. Jürgen Mihm, 2010. "Incentives in New Product Development Projects and the Role of Target Costing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(8), pages 1324-1344, August.
    15. Philip Auerswald, 2008. "Entrepreneurship in the Theory of the Firm," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 111-126, February.
    16. Don Taylor, G. & Love, Doug M. & Weaver, Miles W. & Stone, James, 2008. "Determining inventory service support levels in multi-national companies," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 1-11, November.
    17. Ely Dahan & Haim Mendelson, 2001. "An Extreme-Value Model of Concept Testing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 102-116, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. V. Krishnan & Karl T. Ulrich, 2001. "Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, January.
    2. Marshall Fisher & Kamalini Ramdas & Karl Ulrich, 1999. "Component Sharing in the Management of Product Variety: A Study of Automotive Braking Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(3), pages 297-315, March.
    3. Peter E. Harland & Zakir Uddin & Sven Laudien, 2020. "Product platforms as a lever of competitive advantage on a company-wide level: a resource management perspective," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 137-158, February.
    4. Wallace J. Hopp & Xiaowei Xu, 2005. "Product Line Selection and Pricing with Modularity in Design," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 172-187, August.
    5. Funk, Jeffery, 2009. "Components, systems and discontinuities: The case of magnetic recording and playback equipment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1192-1202, September.
    6. Alan MacCormack & John Rusnak & Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2006. "Exploring the Structure of Complex Software Designs: An Empirical Study of Open Source and Proprietary Code," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1015-1030, July.
    7. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    8. Crass, Dirk & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Do trademarks diminish the substitutability of products in innovative knowledge-intensive services?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. MacCormack, Alan & Baldwin, Carliss & Rusnak, John, 2012. "Exploring the duality between product and organizational architectures: A test of the “mirroring” hypothesis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1309-1324.
    10. Jose F.B. Gieskes & Ilse Langenberg, 2001. "Learning and improvement in product innovation processes: Enabling behaviors," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(2), pages 134-144.
    11. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    12. Anantaram Balakrishnan & Joseph Geunes, 2000. "Requirements Planning with Substitutions: Exploiting Bill-of-Materials Flexibility in Production Planning," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 166-185, January.
    13. Day, Jamison M. & Venkataramanan, M.A., 2006. "Profitability in product line pricing and composition with manufacturing commonalities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(3), pages 1782-1797, December.
    14. Ryan Boas & Bruce G. Cameron & Edward F. Crawley, 2013. "Divergence and lifecycle offsets in product families with commonality," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 175-192, June.
    15. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2009. "The design paradox: the contribution of in-house and external design activities on product market performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-068, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Kenza Qaoumi & Pascal Masson & Benoit Weil & Aytunç Ün, 2018. "Testing evolutionary theory of household consumption behavior in the case of novelty - a product characteristics approach," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 437-460, April.
    17. Olga Kokshagina & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil & Patrick Cogez, 2012. "Risk Management strategies in a highly uncertain environment: undesrtanding the role of common unknown," Post-Print hal-00734100, HAL.
    18. Köhler, Lutz, 2002. "Organisation der Produktinnovation in Medienunternehmen: Eine Analyse des Forschungsstandes zur Ablauforganisation der Innovation von Online-Produkten," Working Papers 2/2002, University of Munich, Munich School of Management, Institute for Information Systems and New Media.
    19. Akhilesh Bajaj & Sunder Kekre & Kannan Srinivasan, 2004. "Managing NPD: Cost and Schedule Performance in Design and Manufacturing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(4), pages 527-536, April.
    20. Liu, Heng & Özer, Özalp, 2009. "Managing a product family under stochastic technological changes," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 567-580, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:44:y:1998:i:3:p:352-369. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.