Abstract

The standardization literature offers many possible classifications of standards.

Keywords

Basic Standard Matching Problem Classic Standard Open System Interconnection Functional Standard 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 2.
    This even applies to the most complete standards classification available, offered by Baynard (1982), which offers a standard fingerprint covering nine different aspects. Other examples are the classifications presented by Bonino & Spring (1991), Cargill (1990), Coles (1949, pp. 115–117), David (1995a, pp. 211–217), and Le Lourd (1992, p.14).Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    When this was written, the author did not know that Kleinemeyer (1997, pp. 56–57) used the same example.Google Scholar
  3. 4.
    Gaillard (1933, p. 33) provides a rather complete list of possible entities.>Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    This also applies to the International Classification of Standards (ICS) (ISO, 1993), used by FSOs in their standards catalogues. ICS, moreover, concerns fields of activity rather than just entities; consequently, ICS mixes entities with the human use of them. Owing to these two factors, most standards have to be placed in two or more ICS categories.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    Richtlinie 2222 Konstruktionsmethodik [Guideline 2222 Design Engineering Methodology] of the Verein Deutscher Ingenieure [Association of German Engineers] (1982 & 1996).Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    For instance, Kampmann, 1993, p. 47. For classic standards, Kampmann used the term basic standards. Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    Descriptive standards to a large extent coincide with the basic standards defined in EN 45020 (CEN/CENELEC, 1993, clause 5.1). The definition there, however, is not accurate enough. David (1987, p. 215) uses the term reference standards. Writing about standards in information and communication technology, he obviously had the Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) standards in mind. The OSI reference model is an internationally recognized design template for information technology. A set of international OSI standards has been developed, of which ISO 7498–1 (ISO/IEC 1994a) describes the basic reference model and the others provide requirements, to facilitate computer systems working together.Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    For instance, SI: Système Internationale d’unités [International System of Units].Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    For instance, the international standard ISO 7372 Trade data interchange — Trade Data Elements Directory (ISO, 1993c).Google Scholar
  10. 11.
    Ergonomic standardization, for instance, includes standards describing man’s characteristics and abilities, such as dimensions of the human body. These data are used in other standards (Schultetus, 1997).Google Scholar
  11. 12.
    The Agreement on Government Procurement (coming out of the Uruguay Round along with the World Trade Organization) advocates performance standards rather than standards that describe solutions (Schwamm, 1997, pp. 17–18). Companies and other stakeholders in standardization in general share this policy (for instance, the French NSO AFNOR (Le Lourd, 1992, p. 14)), but most developing countries prefer descriptive standards with a large number of technical details (Hesser & Inklaar, 1997a, p. 38). The percentage of performance standards is growing, at the expense of standards that prescribe certain solutions.Google Scholar
  12. 13.
    EMC = electromagnetic compatibility. These standards concern electrical disturbances.Google Scholar
  13. 14.
    Basic standards concerning people include data to be used for ergonomic requiring standards. Height requirements for pilots are an example of a requiring compatibility standard for people.Google Scholar
  14. 15.
    For instance, it is one of the three dimensions in the most often cited standards classification, the one developed by Verman (1973).Google Scholar
  15. 16.
    EAN (International Article Numbering Association) barcodes, for instance, were initially developed for the retail sector to be placed on consumer products, but have found their way to business-to business logistics too.Google Scholar
  16. 17.
    Example: American (national) ASTM standards are used in Europe; German DIN standards in the USA.Google Scholar
  17. 18.
    Example: the A and B series of paper sizes are laid down in international standards. In the North-American region, however, different sizes are used.Google Scholar
  18. 19.
    The Windows versions can be regarded as company standards of Microsoft. Google Scholar
  19. 20.
    For instance, a Scandinavian standard that provided a classification for technical aids for disabled persons got world-wide spread because of its adoption as international standard (ISO, 1992b).Google Scholar
  20. 21.
    English version in Hesser & Inklaar, 1997, pp. 39–45.>Google Scholar
  21. 22.
    According to Bouma (1989b), standardization is directed at matching the life cycles of entities having different speeds of change: infrastructure, which is rather stable in time, components, which are subject to rapid changes, and man in relation to these entities, who, in general, prefers a certain amount of stability (see Subsection 8.3.3).Google Scholar
  22. 23.
    Application of standardization in marketing is described by De Vries (1998b).Google Scholar
  23. 24.
    Source: Stokes (Ed.), 1986, p. 306 (cited by Stuurman, 1995, p. 27).Google Scholar
  24. 25.
    Bonino and Spring (1991, p. 102) describe this for the Information Technology Industry.Google Scholar
  25. 26.
    The term ‘product life cycle’ is also often used to indicate a product’s introduction, growth, maturity and decline stage. Seen from a company’s point of view, standardization can play different roles in different stages. An initial impetus to this is provided by Pries (1995, pp. 11–13).Google Scholar
  26. 27.
    This distinction is lacking in the standardization literature.Google Scholar
  27. 28.
    Standards implementations, of course, may remain while a standard has been replaced. Because of these implementations it may be necessary for a company to keep the old standards in stock, see Subsection 4.4.2.Google Scholar
  28. 29.
    Source: personal letter, 1995. Mr. C. Galinski is involved in the International Information Centre for Terminology (Infoterm) in Vienna and is chairman of ISO/TC 37 Terminology (principles and coordination). Google Scholar
  29. 30.
    In the European New Approach, for instance, voluntary standards are related to European Directives and, in practice, almost obligatory (see Subsection 2.2.5). Example: company A may use standard ISO 9001 on quality assurance as a benchmark in its quality management policy. Company B may be forced by its customers to meet the requirements set in this standard.>Google Scholar
  30. 31.
    Example: company A may use standard ISO 9001 on quality assurance as a benchmark in its quality management policy. Company B may be forced by its customers to meet the requirements set in this standard.Google Scholar
  31. 32.
    Governmental NSOs and voluntary standardization are not contradictory, as is demonstrated by, for instance, the Japanese Industrial Standards Committee (JISC), the National Standards Authority of Ireland (NSAI), and the Standards Council of Canada (SCC).Google Scholar
  32. 33.
    The dimensions of this typology are: 1) activity rhythm (seasonal fluctuations in production); 2) product complexity; 3) characterization of the added value; 4) production techniques; 5) production speed; 6) market and customer characteristics.Google Scholar
  33. 34.
    In practice, this classification resembles Simons’ classification mentioned in Subsection 9.2.3: compatibility standards are often business/marketing standards; interference standards are often regulatory standards; and general quality standards are often operational standards.Google Scholar
  34. 35.
    Standards and patents both describe a mostly technical solution. A standard, however, is intended to be used by all parties for which it is meant, whereas a patent is only used by the patent-holder and, via licenses, by third parties chosen by him, who usually have to pay for this use. Standards and patents have in common that they provide information to prevent reinventing the wheel.Google Scholar
  35. 36.
    Annex A Reference to patented items in ISO/IEC Directives Part 2 (ISO/IEC, 1992b, p. 17).Google Scholar
  36. 37.
    In ISO, IEC, CEN and CENELEC practice referring to patents in standards does not cause problems. Licences are offered on reasonable terms. In ETSI, however, problems have arisen. Especially in the field of telecommunication there often is a need to combine standards and patents (Simons & De Vries, 1997, p. 24–25). More information on standards and intellectual property rights is provided by, among others, Farrell (1989), Stuurman (1997, Chapter 8), and Weiss & Spring (1992).Google Scholar
  37. 38.
    These are ambiguously indicated in many current standards. Often the application field is missing. The Standards Engineering Society (SES, 1995, p. 7) advises distinguishing between scope, purpose, and application. ‘Application’ can be related to the above-mentioned intrinsic and extrinsic functions of standardization; ‘purpose’ to the subjective functions.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henk J. de Vries
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Rotterdam School of ManagementErasmus University RotterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Nederlands Normalisatie InstituutDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations