Extended value network modelling and simulation for mass customization implementation

Daaboul, Joanna; Bernard, Alain; Laroche, Florent

doi:10.1007/s10845-010-0493-1

Cited by 19 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Examples include, but are not restricted to, f.e., Land's End (clothing, Piller, 2001;Ulrich et al, 2003;Fiore et al, 2002), Dell (computers, Arora et al, 2008;Kumar and Craig, 2007;Gunasekaran and Ngai, 2005;Helander et al, 2002) or NIBC (bicycles, Sawhney and Prandelli, 2011;Bernhardt et al, 2007;Kotha, 1996). However, numerous studies (Piller and Tseng, 2010;Blecker and Friedrich, 2006;Daaboul et al, 2010;Salvador et al, 2009;Piller, 2007;Da Silveira et al, 2001) have shown that the implementation of mass customization in a traditional environment of mass production is a challenge. Therefore, before undertaking such a project, one of the most critical steps for a company is to assess whether consumers perceive personalization as value added and are, therefore, willing to pay a premium to assure personalized products' profitability for a company.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Customer preferences for customized household furniture

Lihra¹,

Buehlmann²,

Graf³

2012

JFE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tIn the context of market globalization, furniture manufacturers attempt to differentiate their products to attain competitive advantages. Mass customization is one strategy enabling such differentiation. This study measured, through a choice-based conjoint analysis, the value that US American consumers assign to the availability of customization when buying furniture. Roughly 50% of consumers' product choice is driven by price, 20% by product customization, 20% by delivery time, and 10% by the time needed to customize the product. Thus, while there is a customer segment driven by price, there also is a segment, consisting mainly of females, that values product customization.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Customer preferences for customized household furniture

Lihra¹,

Buehlmann²,

Graf³

2012

JFE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to [31], the mass customization paradigm involves a design-sell-make-assemble cycle. Dean et al and Daaboul et al [78][79][80] put this cycle into six fundamental processes, while Latorre-Biel et al [14] establishes a five step sequence for the execution of the mass customization approach, within an Industry 4.0 environment:…”

Section: The Mass Customization Production Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Entropy-Based Formulation for Assessing the Complexity Level of a Mass Customization Industry 4.0 Environment

Martínez-Olvera

2020

Mathematical Problems in Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been stated that Industry 4.0’s goal is, among others, the sustainable success in a market characterized by exigent and informed consumers demanding personalized products and services, where the level of manufacturing complexity increases with level of product customization. Even though different manufacturing complexity measures have been developed, there seems to be a lack of a comprehensive metric that address both the mass customization variety-induced complexity, and the complexity derived from the adoption of the Industry 4.0 paradigm. The main original contribution of this paper is the development of an entropy-based (entropic) formulation to address this last issue. Its validity and usefulness is put to the test via a discrete-event simulation study of a mass customization production system operating within an Industry 4.0 context. Our findings show that the entropic formulation acts as a fairly good trend indicator of the system’s performance parameter increase/decrease, but not as an estimator of the final values. A discussion of the managerial implications of the obtained results is offered at the end of the paper.

show abstract

“…The CODP position influences the customization offer and determines how this offer is being satisfied. It is the main factor in classifying MC systems (Daaboul et al, 2012). It influences the performance of the network via its impact on costs (cost of resources, utilization of resources, cost of materials, inventory cost, production cost, and transportation cost), lead time (set-up time, processing time, order lead time, etc.…”

Section: Codpmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, the value chain concept, which is extended to value network, has become the ''focal point of MC competition'' (Fogliatto et al, 2012). Of the recent works advocating the use of value networks in decision making or in performance evaluation are Daaboul et al (2012), El Fassi et al (2012, Verdecho et al (2012), and Macedo and Camarinha-Matos (2013).…”

Section: Second Why a Value Network Approach?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Differentiation and customer decoupling points: An integrated design approach for mass customization

Daaboul

Cunha

Duigou

et al. 2015

Concurrent Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mass customization draws a twofold benefit: cost reduction, inherited from mass production techniques, and good response to customer requirements, inherited from customization. Two main decisions, relevant to design and manufacturing, are required for the proper implementation of mass customization. First, product features should be split between standard and customizable ones. This will position the product differentiation points. Second, processes should be split between make-to-stock and make-to-order. This will position the customer-order decoupling point. Most often, these two decisions are made separately. In this article, the authors advocate that both decisions should be made simultaneously. They propose an integrated method for design for mass customization. It is based on simultaneously evaluating the impact of these two criteria on enterprise and customer value through the modeling and simulation of value networks. A real case study on Alpina footwear industries is simulated and analyzed. The computational results highlight the joint impact of the two decisions on the overall performance. These two levers should then be considered, simultaneously, when designing the mass customization strategy.

show abstract

Extended value network modelling and simulation for mass customization implementation

Cited by 19 publications

References 22 publications

Customer preferences for customized household furniture

Customer preferences for customized household furniture

An Entropy-Based Formulation for Assessing the Complexity Level of a Mass Customization Industry 4.0 Environment

Differentiation and customer decoupling points: An integrated design approach for mass customization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About