Christian F. Durach, Stefan Kurpjuweit and Stephan M. Wagner
The purpose of this paper is to offer empirical insights on emerging additive manufacturing (AM) processes, barriers to their adoption and a timeline of expected impacts on the…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to offer empirical insights on emerging additive manufacturing (AM) processes, barriers to their adoption and a timeline of expected impacts on the supply chain in the manufacturing industry.
Design/methodology/approach
A multi-stage survey study was conducted with a panel of 16 experts from industry and academia.
Findings
Only five out of today’s seven AM processes are of future importance, as are two emerging key processes. In total, 15 barriers to their adoption are identified, all of which are expected to be gone within ten years. Eight propositions are derived postulating as to whether and when supply chain impacts can be expected in terms of changes to supply chain structure, customer centricity, logistics and supply chain capability.
Research limitations/implications
“Soft” barriers are new to the literature, which has traditionally focused on “technical” barriers. Often-discussed barriers such as production speed and costs do not reflect the true concerns of the research panel. Furthermore, some of the supply chain implications discussed in both the academic literature and the media are found to be unlikely to materialize.
Practical implications
The study summarizes AM processes, technologies, barriers and supply chain implications solicited from experts in the field.
Originality/value
This is one of the first studies to make empirical contributions to a vastly conceptual discussion. It is also the first study to give insights on a timeline for barriers and supply chain implications.
Details
Keywords
Denis Hübner, Stephan M. Wagner and Stefan Kurpjuweit
This study aims to explore the service recovery paradox (SRP) in business to business (B2B) relationships. Previously, this phenomenon has been identified in consumer-facing…
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to explore the service recovery paradox (SRP) in business to business (B2B) relationships. Previously, this phenomenon has been identified in consumer-facing industries. The research advances the marketing literature by highlighting the ways in which the antecedents of the service recovery paradox differ between B2B and consumer markets.
Design/methodology/approach
This research draws upon findings on the SRP in the consumer setting and service failure literature in business to consumer and B2B contexts. For the analysis, interview data were collected from 43 informants among clients and service providers in the aftermath of a service failure.
Findings
The authors propose an exploratory model of the SRP for B2B relationships. In the B2B setting the propensity of eliciting the SRP depends on (1) the characteristics of the service failure, (2) the attributes of the service recovery and (3) the shared subjective perceptions among boundary spanners.
Practical implications
Empowered operating-level employees, straightforward communication, immediate responses and action plans that ensure future conformance are the key factors to turn service failures into increased customer satisfaction.
Originality/value
This study is the first to transfer the SRP from consumer marketing into the B2B domain. Moreover, it derives an exploratory model of the SRP, which can be refined by future research.
Details
Keywords
Luis Lisandro Lopez Taborda, Heriberto Maury and Jovanny Pacheco
There are many investigations in design methodologies, but there are also divergences and convergences as there are so many points of view. This study aims to evaluate to…
Abstract
Purpose
There are many investigations in design methodologies, but there are also divergences and convergences as there are so many points of view. This study aims to evaluate to corroborate and deepen other researchers’ findings, dissipate divergences and provide directing to future work on the subject from a methodological and convergent perspective.
Design/methodology/approach
This study analyzes the previous reviews (about 15 reviews) and based on the consensus and the classifications provided by these authors, a significant sample of research is analyzed in the design for additive manufacturing (DFAM) theme (approximately 80 articles until June of 2017 and approximately 280–300 articles until February of 2019) through descriptive statistics, to corroborate and deepen the findings of other researchers.
Findings
Throughout this work, this paper found statistics indicating that the main areas studied are: multiple objective optimizations, execution of the design, general DFAM and DFAM for functional performance. Among the main conclusions: there is a lack of innovation in the products developed with the methodologies, there is a lack of exhaustivity in the methodologies, there are few efforts to include environmental aspects in the methodologies, many of the methods include economic and cost evaluation, but are not very explicit and broad (sustainability evaluation), it is necessary to consider a greater variety of functions, among other conclusions
Originality/value
The novelty in this study is the methodology. It is very objective, comprehensive and quantitative. The starting point is not the case studies nor the qualitative criteria, but the figures and quantities of methodologies. The main contribution of this review article is to guide future work on the subject from a methodological and convergent perspective and this article provides a broad database with articles containing information on many issues to make decisions: design methodology; optimization; processes, selection of parts and materials; cost and product management; mechanical, electrical and thermal properties; health and environmental impact, etc.