Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-tbj44 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T14:14:18.915Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Challenges in product variant costing – a case study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

Morten Nørgaard ,
Jakob Meinertz Grønvald ,
Carsten Keinicke Fjord Christensen  and
Niels Henrik Mortensen
Morten Nørgaard*
Affiliation:
Technical University of Denmark, Denmark
Jakob Meinertz Grønvald
Affiliation:
Technical University of Denmark, Denmark
Carsten Keinicke Fjord Christensen
Affiliation:
Technical University of Denmark, Denmark
Niels Henrik Mortensen
Affiliation:
Technical University of Denmark, Denmark
*
mornor@dtu.dk

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This study explores challenges in decision-making for product design due to insufficient cost transparency because of product variety across the value chain. Utilizing a literature review and a case study on a company, it delves into issues such as value chain consideration, product family assessment, linking effects to specific product levels, and converting measured effects. Highlighting the critical need to address these challenges for decision-making. Future research should focus on a comprehensive costing framework, explore effect interdependencies, and expand the value chain analysis.

Keywords

decision makingdesign knowledgevariant managementvariant costing

Information

Type
Engineering Design Practice
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 4: DESIGN 2024 , May 2024 , pp. 3003 - 3012
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2024.

References

Boas, R., Cameron, B.G. and Crawley, E.F. (2013), “Divergence and lifecycle offsets in product families with commonality”, Systems Engineering, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 175–192, https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sys.21223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, B.G., Crawley, E.F., Kwapisz, J. and McNeill, A. (2017), “Management Levers for Product Platforms”, EMJ - Engineering Management Journal, Taylor and Francis Ltd., Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 128–139, https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2017.1323569.Google Scholar
Cameron, B.G., Rhodes, R., Boas, R. and Crawley, E.F. (2010), “Divergence in Platform Commonality: Examination of Potential Cost Implications”, INTERNATIONAL DESIGN CONFERENCE - DESIGN 2010, Dubrovnik-Croatia, pp. 157–162.Google Scholar
Chandrasegaran, S.K., Ramani, K., Sriram, R.D., Horváth, I., Bernard, A., Harik, R.F. and Gao, W. (2013), “The evolution, challenges, and future of knowledge representation in product design systems”, Computer-Aided Design, Elsevier, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 204–228, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.CAD.2012.08.006.Google Scholar
ElMaraghy, H., Schuh, G., Elmaraghy, W., Piller, F., Schönsleben, P., Tseng, M. and Bernard, A. (2013), “Product variety management”, CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 62 No. 2, pp. 629–652, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2013.05.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fadeyi, J.A. and Monplaisir, L. (2022), “Instilling lifecycle costs into modular product development for improved remanufacturing-product service system enterprise”, International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier B.V., Vol. 246, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108404.Google Scholar
Feng, Y., Zhao, Y., Zheng, H., Li, Z. and Tan, J. (2020), “Data-driven product design toward intelligent manufacturing: A review”, International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, SAGE Publications Inc., 1 March, https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1729881420911257.Google Scholar
Fixson, S.K. (2005), “Product architecture assessment: A tool to link product, process, and supply chain design decisions”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 23 No. 3–4, pp. 345–369, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2004.08.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gauss, L., Lacerda, D.P. and Cauchick Miguel, P.A. (2021), “Module-based product family design: systematic literature review and meta-synthesis”, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, 1 January, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10845-020-01572-3.Google Scholar
Greve, E., Fuchs, C., Hamraz, B., Windheim, M., Rennpferdt, C., Schwede, L.N. and Krause, D. (2022), “Knowledge-Based Decision Support for Concept Evaluation Using the Extended Impact Model of Modular Product Families”, Applied Sciences (Switzerland), MDPI, Vol. 12 No. 2, https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app12020547.Google Scholar
Greve, E. and Krause, D. (2019), “Long-term effects of modular product architectures: An empirical follow-up study”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 84, Elsevier B.V., pp. 731–736, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2019.04.274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hackl, J.; and Krause, D. (2017), “Towards an Impact Model of Modular Product Structures”, Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED17), Vol. 3, pp. 151–160.Google Scholar
Hackl, J., Krause, D., Otto, K., Windheim, M., Moon, S.K., Bursac, N. and Lachmayer, R. (2020), “Impact of Modularity Decisions on a Firm's Economic Objectives”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Vol. 142 No. 4, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4044914.Google Scholar
Hansen, C., Lindschou, , Mortensen, N., Henrik, ; and Hvam, L. (2012), “Calculation of Complexity Costs - An Approach for Rationalizing a Product Program”, Proceedings of NordDesign Conference 2012 Aalborg University, Center for Industrial Production.Google Scholar
Hvam, L., Hansen, C.L., Forza, C., Mortensen, N.H. and Haug, A. (2019), “The reduction of product and process complexity based on the quantification of product complexity costs”, International Journal of Production Research, https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1587188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hvam, L., Hansen, C.L., Forza, C., Mortensen, N.H. and Haug, A. (2020), “The reduction of product and process complexity based on the quantification of product complexity costs”, International Journal of Production Research, Taylor and Francis Ltd., Vol. 58 No. 2, pp. 350–366, https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1587188.Google Scholar
Israelsen, P. and Jørgensen, B. (2011), “Decentralizing decision making in modularization strategies: Overcoming barriers from dysfunctional accounting systems”, International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, Vol. 131 No. 2, pp. 453–462, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.IJPE.2010.12.020.Google Scholar
Jiao, J., Simpson, T.W. and Siddique, Z. (2007), “Product family design and platform-based product development: A state-of-the-art review”, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 5–29, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10845-007-0003-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, R.S. and Anderson, S.R. (2004), “Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 82 No. 11, pp. 131–138, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.485443.Google ScholarPubMed
Ehrlenspiel, K., Kiewert, A. and Lindemann, U. (2007), Cost-Efficient Design, Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwapisz, J., Infante, V. and Cameron, B.G. (2019), “Commonality opportunity search in industrial product portfolios”, Int. J. Technology Management, Vol. 81, pp. 258–273, https://dx.doi.org/10.5318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, M. V and Ishii, K. (1997), “Design for Variety: Development of Complexity Indices and Design Charts”, Proceedings of DETC' 97 1997 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, P., Dantan, J.-Y. and Siadat, A. (2007), “Cost Estimation and Conceptual Process Planning”, Digital Enterprise Technology, Springer US, pp. 243–250, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-49864-5_28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, M.H. and Lehnerd, A.P. (1997), The Power of Product Platforms: Building Value and Cost Leadership, The Free Press.Google Scholar
Otto, K., Hölttä-Otto, K., Simpson, T.W., Krause, D., Ripperda, S. and Ki Moon, S. (2016), “Global Views on Modular Design Research: Linking Alternative Methods to Support Modular Product Family Concept Development”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 138 No. 7, p. 071101, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4033654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ripperda, S. and Krause, D. (2017), “Cost effects of modular product family structures: Methods and quantification of impacts to support decision making”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Vol. 139 No. 2, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4035430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffers, M., Rosseel, E., Burggraeve, S., Pelfrene, J., Gadeyne, K. and Petré, F. (2022), “Methodology for Early Design Phase Cost and Performance Trade-Off Analysis of a New Variant in a Product Family”, Proceedings of the Design Society, Vol. 2, Cambridge University Press, pp. 593–602, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/pds.2022.61.Google Scholar
Schwede, L.N., Greve, E., Krause, D., Otto, K., Moon, S.K., Albers, A., Kirchner, E., et al. (2022), “How to Use the Levers of Modularity Properly-Linking Modularization to Economic Targets”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Vol. 144 No. 7, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4054023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigsgaard, K. V., Agergaard, J.K., Bertram, C.A., Mortensen, N.H., Soleymani, I., Khalid, W., Hansen, K.B., et al. (2020), “STRUCTURING and CONTEXTUALIZING HISTORICAL DATA for DECISION MAKING in EARLY DEVELOPMENT”, Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference, Vol. 1, Cambridge University Press, pp. 393–402, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/dsd.2020.113.Google Scholar
Thyssen, J., Israelsen, P. and Jørgensen, B. (2006), “Activity-based costing as a method for assessing the economics of modularization-A case study and beyond”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 103 No. 1, pp. 252–270, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2005.07.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tseng, M.M., Wang, Y. and Jiao, R.J. (2017), “Mass Customization”, CIRP Encyclopedia of Production Engineering, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 1–8, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35950-7_16701-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, S.A. and Perumal, Andrei. (2010), Waging War on Complexity Costs: Reshape Your Cost Structure, Free up Cash Flows, and Boost Productivity by Attacking Process, Product and Organizational Complexity, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Windheim, M., Hackl, J., Gebhardt, N. and Krause, D. (2016), “Assessing Impacts of Modular Product Architectures on The Firm: A Case Study”, International Design Conference, Dubrovnik-Croatia.Google Scholar
Yano, C. and Dobson, G. (1998), “Profit-Optimizing Product Line Design, Selection and Pricing with Manufacturing Cost Consideration”, Product Variety Management, pp. 146–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar