Search results

Modularity has been identified as one of the most important methods for achieving mass customization. However, service models that apply varying levels of modularity and customization also exist and are appropriate for various business situations. The objective of this paper is to introduce a framework with which different customer service offerings, service production processes, and service production networks can be analyzed in terms of both modularity and customization.

The paper builds theory and offers a systematic approach for analyzing service modularity and customization. To illustrate the dimensions of the framework, the authors also provide service examples of the various aspects.

In the previous literature, the concepts of modularity and customization have often been discussed in an intertwined manner. The authors find that when modularity and customization are regarded as two separate dimensions, and different perspectives– such as the service offering, the service production process, and the service production network – are combined we can create a useful framework for analysis.

Rigorous testing is a subject for future research.

The framework helps companies to analyze their service offerings and to compare themselves with other companies. It seems that in practice many combinations of modularity and customization levels are used in the three perspectives.

This paper develops a framework for analyzing service offerings in terms of modularity and customization. The framework provides a basis for analyzing different combinations of these two aspects from the three perspectives, and herein lies its value.

Modules and modularity have been popular concepts in operations research and management rhetoric for decades. Nevertheless, it seems that there is no single universal definition of modularity for classical research themes such as modularity in physical products or modular manufacturing. The purpose of this paper is to describe the current state of modularity research and to clarify the concept and impacts of modularity by means of a literature review. The paper discusses whether the modularity concept originally developed in the context of physical products could be applied in the context of product‐related services.

In this paper, the authors use a methodology called systematic integrative literature review to describe the current state of modularity research and to define – based on the findings of the review – the themes that are most commonly related to the modularity concept. As service modularity research is a relatively new topic, the authors look for definitions and themes related to modularity from other areas of modularity research.

The paper presents four key themes and definitions associated with modularity in different perspectives. To illustrate how modularity can be comprehended in the service context, the paper presents examples related to logistics services.

The use of an integrative literature review has its limitations and a more thorough review of service literature is needed for more in‐depth understanding of how modularity is actually manifested and conceptualized in the service context. In the future, in‐depth interviews of service providers will be needed for a more thorough understanding of whether the modularity approach can be used in services today and in the future and if so, how it can be applied in practice.

The findings may be useful particularly for manufacturers and logistics service providers in improving their service offerings and processes.

There is growing interest in issues related to modularity. The paper discusses the key themes related to modularity in the contexts of product, production and processes, organization and supply chain, and service. In addition, the paper illustrates some practical implications for modularity, particularly in the logistics services context.

The automotive industry has been studied extensively, but few studies focus on outbound logistics in automotive supply chains, or on the logistics service provider’s (LSP’s) point of view. Furthermore, there is hardly any research on service model innovation in LSPs. The purpose of this paper is to narrow these research gaps.

The analysis is based on a single-case study – an LSP that specializes in services for the automotive industry. The paper examines the company’s service models and their development over time.

The findings show how the case company has moved towards multifaceted service models through a number of radical and incremental innovations. Moreover, it has used the same methods in developing all its new service models, and has applied modularity principles in service innovation to achieve better process efficiency and service effectiveness.

The rather narrow focus of this study – automotive logistics in a specific area – decreases the generalizability of the findings beyond this context. However, the single-case approach offers in-depth insights, and the analytical frameworks developed herein for service models is applicable in other contexts.

The analysis may help LSPs and service companies in their service design and development. The use of modularity principles makes it easier to offer mass-customized services and to develop efficient processes.

This study narrows a research gap in examining outbound logistics services in the automotive supply chain and focussing on the LSP’s perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the way in which the factors influencing a transformation towards or away from modularity, according to general modular systems theory, appear in the context of health services, and the extent to which the special characteristics of health services might support or prevent its application.

The arguments constructed in the study are based on the theme of modularity, reflected against the special characteristics of health services identified in the context of health economics.

The results include 11 proposition pairs that direct health services both towards and away from modularity.

Health services are highly heterogeneous in nature and the authors illustrate this with a wide range of examples from elderly care as the authors discuss the application of modularity in this context. Nevertheless, the authors recognise that modularity might suit some health services better than others. The findings provide potentially important information to health service managers and providers, enabling them to understand how modularity would benefit health service provision and where contradictions are to be expected.

This study contributes to the discourse on service modularity in general, and complements the literature on modularity with reference to both public and private health services.