Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorDaniel Whiteny.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCraig, David Clarken_US
dc.contributor.otherSystem Design and Management Program.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-02-02T18:48:46Z
dc.date.available2006-02-02T18:48:46Z
dc.date.copyright2001en_US
dc.date.issued2001en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/31106
dc.descriptionThesis (S.M.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, System Design & Management Program, 2001.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (p. 70-71).en_US
dc.description.abstractThe xerographic printing and copying industry has become extremely competitive. Xerox market share has gradually declined since the 1960s as the market share of corporations like Canon, Hewlett Packard and Ricoh has increased. In response to rising competition, various product architecture strategies are heralded as the means to gaining, or regaining, competitive advantage in this environment. Among the most popular of these strategies are platobrm strategy, product families and parts commonality, and outsourcing. The objective of this thesis is not to dispute the value of these strategies in the present context. Obviously, platform strategies and parts reuse enable firms to develop products faster and with less cost by leveraging previous investments. Likewise, in order to remain competitive in this environment, a firm can no longer afford to vertically integrate its products-clearly, firms can no longer afford to do everything themselves. Horizontal integration through outsourcing, or what Xerox calls extended enterprise, is therefore one source of competitive advantage. Platform strategy, parts reuse, and extended enterprise all make good sense but each of these strategies can easily backfire. In this paper we will examine these strategies and see how they relate to central themes in product architecture, such as, architectural modularity. Then we shall see how these strategies can, if not applied carefully, cause more problems than they attempt to resolve. Finally, in light of these problems, revised and more robust versions of these strategies are presented.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby David C. Craig.en_US
dc.format.extent71 p.en_US
dc.format.extent5022021 bytes
dc.format.extent5029376 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582
dc.subjectSystem Design and Management Program.en_US
dc.titlePromises and pitfalls of architectural strategy in the printer industryen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeS.M.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentSystem Design and Management Program.en_US
dc.identifier.oclc50992091en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record