IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i11p2014-d117494.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing Impact of Negative Complexity on Sustainability of Mass Customization

Author

Listed:
  • Vladimir Modrak

    (Faculty of Manufacturing Technologies, Technical University of Kosice, Kosice 042 00, Slovakia)

  • Zuzana Soltysova

    (Faculty of Manufacturing Technologies, Technical University of Kosice, Kosice 042 00, Slovakia)

  • Jan Modrak

    (Faculty of Manufacturing Technologies, Technical University of Kosice, Kosice 042 00, Slovakia)

  • Annamaria Behunova

    (Faculty of Manufacturing Technologies, Technical University of Kosice, Kosice 042 00, Slovakia)

Abstract

In the mass customization environment, product platform development includes several aspects. One relates to the extent to which products are customized. Usually, a high level of product variety brings significant benefits to customers. On the other hand, a high degree of product customization may have a negative environmental impact during production, due to higher material usage. One possible way to reduce the impact is eliminating infeasible configuration options, caused by incompatibilities between optional component types, within a product platform. Such optional components are a source of negative complexity. However, a reduction of optional component types within a product platform can lead to decreasing the extent of the variety of a product to an undesirable level. An effective way of finding this optimal level of reduction is to quantify and analyze the rates between positive and negative complexities, which are related to the numbers of configuration options. The method for this purpose is presented in this paper.

Suggested Citation

  • Vladimir Modrak & Zuzana Soltysova & Jan Modrak & Annamaria Behunova, 2017. "Reducing Impact of Negative Complexity on Sustainability of Mass Customization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-16, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:11:p:2014-:d:117494
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/11/2014/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/11/2014/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Doron Sonsino & Uri Benzion & Galit Mador, 2002. "The Complexity Effects on Choice with Uncertainty — Experimental Evidence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(482), pages 936-965, October.
    2. Heradio, Ruben & Perez-Morago, Hector & Alférez, Mauricio & Fernandez-Amoros, David & Alférez, Germán H., 2016. "Augmenting measure sensitivity to detect essential, dispensable and highly incompatible features in mass customization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(3), pages 1066-1077.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tomohiko Sakao & Tatsunori Hara & Ryo Fukushima, 2020. "Using Product/Service-System Family Design for Efficient Customization with Lean Principles: Model, Method, and Tool," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-25, July.
    2. Sam Solaimani & Alireza Parandian & Nabi Nabiollahi, 2021. "A Holistic View on Sustainability in Additive and Subtractive Manufacturing: A Comparative Empirical Study of Eyewear Production Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-17, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Umar, Tarik, 2022. "Complexity aversion when SeekingAlpha," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2).
    2. Na Liu & Pui-Sze Chow & Hongshan Zhao, 2020. "Challenges and critical successful factors for apparel mass customization operations: recent development and case study," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 291(1), pages 531-563, August.
    3. Kim Kaivanto & Eike Kroll, 2014. "Alternation bias and reduction in St. Petersburg gambles," Working Papers 65600286, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    4. Stefania Sitzia & Daniel John Zizzo, 2010. "Price low and then price high or price high and then price low?," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2010-08, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    5. Quitz'e Valenzuela-Stookey, 2020. "Subjective Complexity Under Uncertainty," Papers 2006.01852, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2022.
    6. Peter Moffatt & Stefania Sitzia & Daniel Zizzo, 2015. "Heterogeneity in preferences towards complexity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 147-170, October.
    7. Florian H. Schneider & Martin Schonger, 2019. "An Experimental Test of the Anscombe–Aumann Monotonicity Axiom," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1667-1677, April.
    8. Stefania Sitzia & Daniel Zizzo, 2011. "Does product complexity matter for competition in experimental retail markets?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 70(1), pages 65-82, January.
    9. Eric Cardella & Carl Kitchens, 2017. "The impact of award uncertainty on settlement negotiations," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(2), pages 333-367, June.
    10. Farjam, Mike, 2019. "On whom would I want to depend; humans or computers?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 219-228.
    11. Ilke Aydogan & Loïc Berger & Vincent Théroude, 2023. "More Ambiguous or More Complex? An Investigation of Individual Preferences under Uncertainty," Working Papers of BETA 2023-10, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    12. Brice Corgnet & Roberto Hernán González, 2023. "On The Appeal Of Complexity," Working Papers 2312, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    13. Ilke AYDOGAN & Loïc BERGER & Valentina BOSETTI, 2023. "Unraveling Ambiguity Aversion," Working Papers 2023-iRisk-01, IESEG School of Management.
    14. David Fernandez-Amoros & Sergio Bra & Ernesto Aranda-Escolástico & Ruben Heradio, 2020. "Using Extended Logical Primitives for Efficient BDD Building," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-17, July.
    15. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-04071242 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Leighton Vaughan Williams & Ming‐Chien Sung & Peter A. F. Fraser‐Mackenzie & John Peirson & Johnnie E. V. Johnson, 2018. "Towards an Understanding of the Origins of the Favourite–Longshot Bias: Evidence from Online Poker Markets, a Real‐money Natural Laboratory," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 85(338), pages 360-382, April.
    17. Choi, Tsan-Ming & Ma, Cheng & Shen, Bin & Sun, Qi, 2019. "Optimal pricing in mass customization supply chains with risk-averse agents and retail competition," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 150-161.
    18. Michael H. Birnbaum & Ulrich Schmidt & Miriam D. Schneider, 2017. "Testing independence conditions in the presence of errors and splitting effects," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 61-85, February.
    19. Chabakauri, Georgy & Rytchkov, Oleg, 2020. "Asset pricing with index investing," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118895, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Ilke AYDOGAN & Loïc BERGER & Vincent THEROUDE, 2023. "More Ambiguous or More Complex? An Investigation of Individual Preferences under Model Uncertainty," Working Papers 2023-iRisk-02, IESEG School of Management.
    21. Jacobsen, Grant D. & Stewart, James I., 2022. "How do consumers respond to price complexity? Experimental evidence from the power sector," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:11:p:2014-:d:117494. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.