To help meet competitive realities operations managers need to know more about the strategic aspects of manufacturing flexibility. This paper takes steps toward meeting that need by critically reviewing the literature and establishing a research agenda for the area. A conceptual model, which places flexibility within a broad context, helps to identify certain assumptions of theoretical studies which need to be challenged. The model also provides a basis for identifying specific flexibility dimensions. The manner in which these dimensions may limit the effectiveness of a manufacturing process, and the problems in operationalizing them are discussed. Focusing next on the neglected area of applied work, concepts are presented for analyzing whether desired amounts of flexibility are being achieved and whether the potential for flexibility built into a manufacturing process is being tapped. Once more, a procedure is outlined for altering a plant's types and amounts of flexibility over time. The research agenda, which grows out of the appraisal of theoretical and applied work, indicates the value in studying generic flexibility strategies, the flexibility dimensions, methods of delivery, ways of evaluating and changing a process's flexibility, and above all measurement problems. The conclusions indicate principles for strategic research, some of which have relevance for the development of mathematical models.manufacturing flexibility, manufacturing strategy, environmental uncertainty, performance measurement, focused factory

Integrated Product Development (IPD) creates overlap and interaction between activities in the new product development process and, because this increases the need to coordinate, compensates through other aspects of the new product development process (e.g., integrated tools), product definitions (e.g., incremental development), organizational context (e.g., reduced task specialization), and teaming (e.g., cross-functional teams). Since IPD has become an important new standard for managing new product development, this paper's general aim is to evaluate the research that has been conducted on it. Our three specific objectives include first critiquing the IPD literature by identifying problems with empirical research and recommending solutions. There are concerns about the overall approach, conceptualizing and operationalizing IPD characteristics, and selecting performance objectives. Second, we conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate relationships between specific IPD characteristics and project performance. We indicate where relationships do or do not exist and identify variables that may moderate these relationships. Third, we offer suggestions for extending IPD research into studies of (a) the hierarchy of teams working on a project, (b) one company managing a portfolio of projects over time, and (c) two or more firms collaborating in a strategic alliance.integrated product development, concurrent engineering, new product development, cross-functional teams, project management, literature review, meta-analysis

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

No abstract

We utilize research on alliance governance structures and on new product development to study how partners working under an existing alliance governance structure will organize a new product development project. Initially, we consider a contractual alliance doing multiple projects and argue that the critical organization decisions for any project are whether one or both partners should be involved, whether the partners should work with little or considerable interaction, and whether decision-making authority should reside in a project manager or be consensual. Based on the answers to these questions, we identify at least four viable project organization options. We next examine the option that would be selected under conditions involving the alliance's newness, whether a cooperative history exists, and the distribution of skills for the project. Under each condition, we compare the costs and benefits of the options with respect to the underlying transaction costs, potential for learning, and the ability to contribute to developing a social relations network. By allowing variations in time-to-market pressures, the tacit knowledge that a partner can obtain from the project, and the partners' need to work closely together on future projects, we can determine the points at which costs and benefits indicate a switch from one organization option to another. Finally, we indicate how to adjust the theory for it to apply to a contractual alliance doing only one project and to an institutional alliance such as a joint venture.