Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Advances in Product Family and Product Platform Design pp 179–198Cite as

Platform Valuation for Product Family Design

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 5847 Accesses

Abstract

The valuation of a product increases flexibility in decision-making for developing new products or redesigning existing products and affects product life cycles. Strategic adaptability is essential in capitalizing on future investment opportunities and responding properly to market trends in a dynamic environment. To identify the valuation of a platform in a product family, we investigate strategic module-based platform design using market-based decision-making. The objective of this chapter is to propose a financial model to evaluate design valuation for a platform based on market mechanisms in an uncertain market environment. Real options analysis is applied to value options related to introducing new modules as a platform in a product family. In the proposed model, we use design quality that is determined by customers’ preferences and performance utilities for products. To demonstrate implementation of the proposed model, we use a case study and numerical analysis involving a family of mobile products.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bollen NPB (1999) Real options and product life cycles. Manag Sci 45(5):670–684

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Brach MA (2003) Real options in practice. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox J, Ross S, Rubinstein M (1979) Option pricing: a simplified approach. J Financ Econ 3(2):229–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronin MJ (2010) Smart products, smarter services: strategies for embedded control. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez MG, Panchal JH, Allen JK, Mistree F (2005) Concise interactions and effective management of shared design spaces – moving beyond strategic collaboration towards co-design. In: Proceedings of ASME international design engineering technical conference & computers and information in engineering conference, 24–25 Sept, Long Beach, CA, Paper No. DETC2005-85381

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN, Sobek DKI (2005) Adapting real options to new product development by modeling the second toyota paradox. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 52(3):175–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamba A, Fusari N (2009) Valuing modularity as a real option. Manag Sci 55(11):1877–1896

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Holtta-Otto K, De Weck O (2007) Degree of modularity in engineering systems and products with technical and business constraints. Concurr Eng Res Appl 15(2):113–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiao J (2012) Product platform flexibility planning by hybrid real options analysis. IIE Trans 44(6):431–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiao J, Lim CM, Kumar A (2006) Real options identification and valuation for the financial analysis of product family design. Proc Inst Mech Eng B: J Eng Manuf 220(6):929–939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johannesson H, Claesson A (2005) Systematic product platform design: a combined function-means and parametric modeling approach. J Eng Des 16(1):25–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson MD, Kirchain RE (2011) The importance of product development cycle time and cost in the development of product families. J Eng Des 22(2):87–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamrad B, Ritchken P (1991) Multinomial approximating models for options with K state variables. Manag Sci 37(12):1640–1652

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kopin V, Wilbur D (2005) Bayesian serial cost sharing. Math Soc Sci 49(2):201–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnan V, Zhu W (2006) Designing a family of development-intensive products. Manag Sci 52(6):813–825

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar D, Chen W, Simpson TW (2009) A market-driven approach to product family design. Int J Prod Res 47(1):71–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longstaff F, Schwartz E (2001) Valuing american options by simulation: simple least-squares approach. Rev Financ Stud 14(1):113–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magrab EB (1997) Integrated product and process design and development: the product realization process. CRC, Boca Raton, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer MH, Lehnerd AP (1997) The power of product platforms: building value and cost leadership. The Free Press, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon SK, Mcadams DA (2009) A design method for developing a universal product family in a dynamic market environment. In: Proceedings of the design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, Aug 30–Sept 2, San Diego, CA. ASME, Paper No.: DETC2009-86784

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon SK, Park J, Simpson TW, Kumara SRT (2008) A dynamic multi-agent system based on a negotiation mechanism for product family design. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 5(2):234–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon SK, Shu J, Simpson TW, Kumara SRT (2011) A module-based service model for mass customization: service family design. IIE Trans 43(3):153–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nokia (2008) http://www.nokiausa.com

  • Ramesh B, Tiwana A, Mohan K (2002) Supporting information product and service families with traceability. Lect Notes Comput Sci 2290:353–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rojas Arciniegas AJ, Kim HM (2012) Incorporating security considerations into optimal product architecture and component sharing decision in product family design. Eng Optim 44(1):55–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiau CN, Michalek JJ (2009) Optimal product design under price competition. J Mech Des 131(7):071003:1–071003:10

    Google Scholar 

  • Shooter SB, Simpson TW, Kumara SRT, Stone RB, Terpenny JP (2005) Toward an information management infrastructure for product family planning and platform customization. Int J Mass Custom 1(1):134–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson TW (2004) Product platform design and customization: status and promise. Artif Intell Eng Des Anal Manuf 18(1):3–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson TW, Maier JRA, Mistree F (2001) Product platform design: method and application. Res Eng Des 13(1):2–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson TW, Siddique Z, Jiao J (2005) Product platform and product family design: methods and applications. Springer, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Smit HTJ, Trigeorgis L (2004) Strategic investment: real options and games. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Thevenot HJ, Alizon F, Simpson TW, Shooter SB (2007) An index-based method to manage the tradeoff between diversity and commonality during product family design. Concurr Eng: Res Appl 15(2):127–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao A, Zeng S, Allen JK, Rosen DW, Mistree F (2002) Collaborating multidisciplinary decision making using game theory and design capability indices. In: Proceedings of the 9th AIAA/ISSMO symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, 4–6 Sept, Atlanta, GA

    Google Scholar 

  • Zacharias NA, Yassine AA (2008) Optimal platform investment for product family design. J Intell Manuf 19(2):131–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Nanynag Technological University, Singapore, 639798, Singapore

    Seung Ki Moon

  2. Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, Penn State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA

    Timothy W. Simpson

  3. Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Penn State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA

    Timothy W. Simpson

Authors
  1. Seung Ki Moon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Timothy W. Simpson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seung Ki Moon .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Mechanical & Nuclear Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA

    Timothy W. Simpson

  2. School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

    Jianxin (Roger) Jiao

  3. School of Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, USA

    Zahed Siddique

  4. Engineering Product Development, Singapore University of Technology and Design, Singapore, Singapore

    Katja Hölttä-Otto

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Moon, S.K., Simpson, T.W. (2014). Platform Valuation for Product Family Design. In: Simpson, T., Jiao, J., Siddique, Z., Hölttä-Otto, K. (eds) Advances in Product Family and Product Platform Design. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7937-6_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7937-6_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-7936-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-7937-6

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation