IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/toh/dssraa/80.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Modularity Design Rules for Architecture Development: Theory, Implementation, and Evidence from Development of the Renault-Nissan Alliance "Common Module Family" Architecture

Author

Listed:
  • Ron Sanchez
  • Tomoatsu Shibata

Abstract

In this paper we propose a set of rules for developing modular architectures. We first consider the well-known concept of "Design Rules" advanced by Baldwin and Clark (2000). We then propose a broader conceptualization called "Modularity Design Rules" that is derived from later studies of the strategic, managerial, and organizational processes that must also be undertaken to implement successful modular development projects. We elaborate the critical role that the proposed Modularity Design Rules play in strategically grounding, organizing, and managing modular architecture development processes. We also identify key roles that top management must fulfill in supporting implementation of the proposed rules. We then provide evidence in support of the proposed Modularity Design Rules through a case study of the Renault-Nissan Alliance's successful development and use of a modular "Common Module Family" architecture between 2009 and 2014.

Suggested Citation

  • Ron Sanchez & Tomoatsu Shibata, 2018. "Modularity Design Rules for Architecture Development: Theory, Implementation, and Evidence from Development of the Renault-Nissan Alliance "Common Module Family" Architecture," DSSR Discussion Papers 80, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Tohoku University.
  • Handle: RePEc:toh:dssraa:80
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10097/00122482
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Björn Klamann & Hermann Winner, 2021. "Comparing Different Levels of Technical Systems for a Modular Safety Approval—Why the State of the Art Does Not Dispense with System Tests Yet," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-16, November.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:toh:dssraa:80. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Tohoku University Library (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fetohjp.html .

    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.