Skip to main content

Assessing the subjective added value of value nets: Which network strategies are really win-win?

  • Conference paper
  • 4770 Accesses

Abstract

As manufacturing companies increasingly focus on their core business, the interest in the utilisation of external services provided by system suppliers and service companies increases. Currently an increasing number of services are purchased from service supply networks. Furthermore, globalisation, complexity of technological innovations and demand for integrated solutions also create need for networking and collaboration. Establishing or improving the performance of the networked service providers, the value net, is a long-term effort, requiring the build up of trust between the partners. The necessary condition of moving from a subcontractor relationship to a strategic network or partnership is the sharing of the view of joint gains in a prospective value net. How do we then evaluate the added value of moving to a new partnership? What network strategies provide the win-win network solution? This paper is a tentative effort in answering these questions based on Decision Analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ojanen V, Lanne M, Reunanen M, Kortelainen H & Kässi T. (2008) New service development: success factors from the viewpoint of fleet asset management of industrial service providers. Fifteenth International Working Seminar on Production Economics, Pre-Prints Volume 1, 369-380.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cimon Y. (2004) Knowledge-related asymmetries in strategic alliances. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(3), 17-30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kaplan RS & Norton DP. (1992) The balanced scorecard - Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, Jan-Feb, 71-79.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kaplan RS & Norton DP. (2001a) Transforming the Balanced Scorecard from Performance measurement to Strategic Management: Part I. Accounting Horizons, 15, 87-104.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Kaplan RS & Norton DP. (2001b) Transforming the Balanced Scorecard from Performance measurement to Strategic Management: Part 2. Accounting Horizons, 15, 147-160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rosqvist T, Laakso K & Reunanen M. (2009) Value-driven maintenance planning for a production plant. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 94, 97-110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kaplan RS & Norton DP. (2004) Strategy maps: Converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Neely A, Bourne M & Kennerley M. (2000) Performance measurement system design: developing and testing a processbased approach. International Journal of Operations & Production Management; 20 (10): 1119-1145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fitzgerald L, Johnston R, Brignall S, Silvestro R & Voss C. (1991). Performance measurement in service business, Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA), London.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Keeney L & Raiffa H. (1993) Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-offs. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Keeney R. (1992) Value-focused thinking – a path to creative decision making. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nunamaker J, Briggs R & Mittleman D. (1996) Lessons from a decade of Group Support Systems Research. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, Jan 3-6, Maui, Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Elfvengren K. (2006) Group Support System for Managing the Front End of Innovation: case applications in business-tobusiness enterprises. Lappeenranta University of Technology, Acta Universitatis Lappeenrantaensis 239, doctoral dissertation Lappeenranta, Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jessup L & Valacich J. (1993) Group Support Systems: New Perspectives. Macmillan Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Weatherall A & Nunamaker J. (1995). Introduction to electronic meetings. Technicalgraphics.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Turban E, Aronson J. & Liang TP. (2004) Decision support systems and intelligent systems, 7th ed. Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag

About this paper

Cite this paper

Rosqvist, T., Ahonen, T., Ojanen, V., Marttinen, A. (2010). Assessing the subjective added value of value nets: Which network strategies are really win-win?. In: Kiritsis, D., Emmanouilidis, C., Koronios, A., Mathew, J. (eds) Engineering Asset Lifecycle Management. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-320-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-320-6_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-85729-321-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-85729-320-6

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics