Abstract
This paper develops a framework for measuring the “fit” between product and organizational architectures. The ability to measure “fit” in an objective and systematic way is a necessary precursor to understanding the nature of the hidden costs associated with design support tools that are becoming commonplace enablers of complex system design. Specifically, these tools are enabled by significant upfront decomposition – the problem is a priori broken up into a set of loosely coupled tasks that can be worked in parallel, with interactions across tasks routinized and often encoded in computational tools. When this imposed structure fits the problem well, it can drastically speed up design cycles and enable intraorganizational collaboration, by hiding extraneous information and freeing up experts’ time to focus on the hardest parts. However, even minor mismatches between the organizational decomposition (people and tasks) and product decomposition (the problem being solved) can cause designers to miss important trades and make poor choices. The proposed measurement framework builds on existing measures from the organizational design literature and systems engineering literature. Our contribution lies in unifying the level of analysis of the two disciplines and developing a novel strategy for tracking the interaction among the product and organizational system. The utility of this approach for observing influences in real systems is demonstrated with a “toy” case study example based on space system development at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
Zoe Szajnfarber and Erica Gralla contributed equally to this work.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Ethiraj S, Levinthal D (2004) Modularity and innovation in complex systems. Manag Sci 50(2):159–173
Henderson RM, Clark KB (1990) Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Adm Sci Q 35(1):9–30
MacCormack A, Baldwin C, Rusnak J (2012) Exploring the duality between product and organizational architectures: a test of the ‘mirroring’ hypothesis. Res Policy 41(8):1309–1324
Thompson JD (1967) Organizations in action: social science bases of administrative theory. McGraw-Hill, New York
Williamson OE (1991) Comparative economic organization: the analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Adm Sci Q 36(2):269–296
Simon HA (1962) The architecture of complexity. Proc Am Philos Soc 106(6):468–482
Nadler D, Tushman M (1997) Competing by design: the power of organizational architecture. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Baldwin C, Clark K (2000) Design rules, volume 1: the power of Modularity. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Morelli MD, Eppinger SD, Gulati RK (1995) Predicting technical communication in product development organizations. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 42(3):215–222
Ulrich KT, Eppinger SD (1995) Product design and development. McGraw-Hill
Tushman ML, Nadler DA (1978) Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design. Acad Manag Rev 3(3):613–624
Colfer LJ, Baldwin CY (2016) The mirroring hypothesis: theory, evidence and exceptions
Szajnfarber Z, Vrolijk A, Crusan J (2014) Exploring the interaction between open innovation methods and system complexity. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Engineering Systems Symposium
Parnas DL (1972) On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules. Commun ACM 15(12):1053–1058
Prencipe A (1997) Technological competencies and product’s evolutionary dynamics: a case study from the aero-engine industry. Res Policy 25(8):1261–1276
Galbraith J (1977) Organization design: an information processing view. Interfaces 4(3):28–36
Schilling (2000) Toward a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity. Acad Manag Rev 25(2):313–334
Steward DV (1981) The design structure system: a method for managing the design of complex systems. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 28(3):71–74
Eppinger SD, Browning TR (2012) Design structure matrix methods and applications. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Suh ES, Furst MR, Mihalyov KJ, de Weck O (2009) Technology infusion for complex systems: A framework and case study. Sys Eng 13(2)
Sherwood B, McCleese D (2013) JPL innovation foundry. Acta Astronaut 89:236–247
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation Grant CMMI-1563408.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Szajnfarber, Z., Gralla, E. (2018). A Framework for Measuring the “Fit” Between Product and Organizational Architectures. In: Madni, A., Boehm, B., Ghanem, R., Erwin, D., Wheaton, M. (eds) Disciplinary Convergence in Systems Engineering Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62217-0_34
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62217-0_34
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-62216-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-62217-0
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)