Views of logistics service providers on modularity in logistics services

Rajahonka, Mervi

doi:10.1080/13675567.2013.767325

Cited by 26 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This results in too little understanding about how interfaces mani- fest themselves in the service sector (Gittell et al 2008;Rajahonka 2013;Soffers et al 2014;Cabigiosu et al 2015), as in-depth empirical papers on interfaces in modular services, testing conceptualisations of interfaces in service modularity, are rare (Soffers et al 2014). Rajahonka (2013) reasons that this may be due to there being fewer industry standards in services than in the manufacturing industry. The remainder of the results section is organised along three themes.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We interpret them as concepts that each fulfil their own specific role in a service offering (Table 2). The definition by Rajahonka (2013) serves as the starting point for this paper and is in line with the following three design principles that underpin the concept of modularity. The first design principle entails that each module should have a specific function, meaning that the module is expected to contribute to the overall service offering.…”

Section: Modularity and Interfacesmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Systematic studies of interfaces in practice, and their relationship to outcomes of modularity, remain scarce (Voss and Hsuan 2009;De Blok et al 2010;Tuunanen, Bask, and MerisaloRantanen 2012;Soffers et al 2014). Available studies mostly focus on interfaces as a means of linking and connecting components or modules, but do not elaborate on how to further specify, define and recognise interfaces (Voss and Hsuan 2009;Vähätalo 2012;Rajahonka 2013;Iman 2016). This results in too little understanding about how interfaces mani- fest themselves in the service sector (Gittell et al 2008;Rajahonka 2013;Soffers et al 2014;Cabigiosu et al 2015), as in-depth empirical papers on interfaces in modular services, testing conceptualisations of interfaces in service modularity, are rare (Soffers et al 2014).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Available studies mostly focus on interfaces as a means of linking and connecting components or modules, but do not elaborate on how to further specify, define and recognise interfaces (Voss and Hsuan 2009;Vähätalo 2012;Rajahonka 2013;Iman 2016). This results in too little understanding about how interfaces mani- fest themselves in the service sector (Gittell et al 2008;Rajahonka 2013;Soffers et al 2014;Cabigiosu et al 2015), as in-depth empirical papers on interfaces in modular services, testing conceptualisations of interfaces in service modularity, are rare (Soffers et al 2014). Rajahonka (2013) reasons that this may be due to there being fewer industry standards in services than in the manufacturing industry.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Iman (2016) argues that this debate stems from the fact that the literature is inconsistent on whether service providers are defined as professionals or organisations. Some papers use the term service provider to refer to organisations (Rajahonka 2013;Cabigiosu et al 2015) whereas others use the term to refer to professionals (De Blok et al 2010;Soffers et al 2014). As a result, it remains unclear how interfaces have been conceptualised in the existing literature.…”

Section: Nature Of Interfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Interfaces in service modularity: a scoping review

Peters

Meijboom

Vries

2018

International Journal of Production Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is intended to provide a scoping review on interfaces in service modularity. There is little detailed understanding of this concept despite its attributed importance. We identified 12 papers, showing that interfaces in service modularity are an area still open to research, especially with regard to interfaces that cross organisational boundaries. We found common themes in the available literature: the nature of interfaces, service fragmentation and predefined interfaces. Further research is needed on interfaces in service modularity, especially for complex services with components that stem from multiple, autonomous organisations. More specifically, there is a need for more studies that explore in detail how interfaces manifest themselves, and how they can be addressed to improve complex service provision. In addition, we argue why healthcare could be an interesting domain in which to conduct those studies. Our paper's contribution comprises a detailed description of interfaces in service modularity, the dissemination of summarised research findings and suggestions for potential future research.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Modularity and Interfacesmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Nature Of Interfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Interfaces in service modularity: a scoping review

Peters

Meijboom

Vries

2018

International Journal of Production Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Productisation: A review and research agenda

Härkönen

Haapasalo

Hänninen

2015

International Journal of Production Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tProductisation relates to the process of analysing a need, defining and combining suitable elements, tangible and/or intangible, into a product-like defined set of deliverables that is standardised, repeatable and comprehendible. This paper clarifies the concept of productisation by surveying the extant literature and reporting the origins, characteristics, benefits and features along with aiming to support future work. The analysed literature is categorised, its content is analysed, and the need for a clear framework is highlighted.The results indicate that productisation has a specific role in addressing the challenges of being able to describe and explain complex, often abstract offerings and producing them, involving activities both to ensure adequate standards and those activities leading to selling the products. A well productised product is easier to buy, sell and market, has stronger features and may enable benefits depending on the product type. Productisation has implications through having a complementary role amongst well established functions and in strengthening the linkage of market needs and engineering-oriented development. The concept requires further development. Potential future research directions are presented.

show abstract

A model to describe logistics service architecture based on product architecture

Strøm,

Münsberg,

Hvam

2024

Proc. Des. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growth in e-commerce has led to increased demand for logistics services. This puts a pressure on third-party logistics (3PL) providers who struggle with increasing operating costs and heightened competition. These providers could potentially exploit the advantages of modularisation, but few studies address the design of modular logistics services. This study explores modular design of logistics services and proposes a model to describe logistics service architecture based on product architecture. A case study shows that warehousing services can be described in three domains.

show abstract

Views of logistics service providers on modularity in logistics services

Cited by 26 publications

References 31 publications

Interfaces in service modularity: a scoping review

Interfaces in service modularity: a scoping review

Productisation: A review and research agenda

A model to describe logistics service architecture based on product architecture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About