The Convergence of Manufacturing and Service Technologies: A Patent Analysis Approach

Active technological convergence of manufacturing industries and service industries has been emerged as a core and essential phenomenon for recent business environment. Technology convergence has already been the basic force behind the both product innovation and service innovation, changing the ways in which firms interact with their customers. Despite the gravity, there has been limited approach to investigate the technological convergence of manufacturing technologies and service technologies from the empirical perspective. In response, this paper aims to investigate technological convergence between manufacturing technology and service technology using patent analysis. For this purpose, we define the service technology and manufacturing technology. Following on this, we analyze the USPC classification of those technologies to analyze the technological convergence. To investigate the dynamic change of convergence, 10-year-dyanamics are observed. As case studies, three industries which show high level of technological convergence of manufacturing and service - banking, healthcare, and education industries are selected and analyzed in detail

Designing the sustainable product-service integration: a product-service blueprint approach

As a means for providing the sustainable production and consumption, the concept of product-service system (PSS) has received increasing attention. What is at the core in the PSS is the design, since it determines the distinctive characteristics and quality of PSS. Even though some tools have been suggested for PSS design, previous tools mainly focus on identifying the relationship between actors in a conceptual level. Despite the fact that it is significant and cannot be neglected, what is more important in a practical situation is to represent the detailed flow or relationship of PSS elements, with the consideration of products and services. In response, this paper proposes a "product-service blueprint" which is a new and systematic way to elucidate the relationship between products and services, providing the implication of how PSS can provide the sustainable production and consumption. Employing the service blueprint as a starting point, new areas, lines, and symbols are introduced to represent the distinctive features of PSS. The proposed product-service blueprint represents the product use throughout the life cycle, service flow from the management to the customer, and the relationship between products and services. Taken together, the product-service blueprint will help both managers and researchers to promote the product-service integration under the concrete framework. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.AURICH JC, 2009, J MANUFACTURING TECH, V20, P591, DOI 10.1108/17410380910961000HARA T, 2009, CIRP J MANUF SCI TEC, V1, P262KIMITA K, 2009, J MANUFACTURING TECH, V20, P654, DOI 10.1108/17410380910961046Maussang N, 2009, J ENG DESIGN, V20, P349, DOI 10.1080/09544820903149313Shimomura Y, 2009, CIRP ANN-MANUF TECHN, V58, P379, DOI 10.1016/j.cirp.2009.03.025SUNDIN E, 2009, J MANUF TECH MANAG, V20, P723, DOI 10.1108/17410380910961073JUNG MJ, 2008, P DRS2008 DES RES SOBaines TS, 2007, P I MECH ENG B-J ENG, V221, P1543, DOI 10.1243/09544054JEM858Sakao T, 2007, J CLEAN PROD, V15, P590, DOI [10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.05.015, 10.1016/j.jclerpo.2006.05.015]Aurich JC, 2006, J CLEAN PROD, V14, P1480, DOI 10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.01.019Morelli N, 2006, J CLEAN PROD, V14, P1495, DOI 10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.01.023TUKKER A, 2006, NEW BUSINESS OLD EURVERKUIJL M, 2006, NEW BUSINESS OLD EURBOUGHNIM N, 2005, P INT C ENG DES ICEDVANHALEN C, 2005, METHODOLOGY PRODUCTFliess S, 2004, J BUS RES, V57, P392, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00273-4Aurich JC, 2004, CIRP ANN-MANUF TECHN, V53, P151Cunha PF, 2004, CIRP ANN-MANUF TECHN, V53, P13MANZINI E, 2004, SOLUTION ORIENTED PAMONT O, 2004, THESIS LUND U SWEDENTUKKER A, 2004, BUSINESS STRATEGY EN, V13, P246, DOI DOI 10.1002/BSE.414Manzini E, 2003, J CLEAN PROD, V11, P851, DOI 10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00153-1Maxwell D, 2003, J CLEAN PROD, V11, P883, DOI 10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00164-6TUKKER A, 2003, INNOVATION SCAN PRODMorelli N, 2002, DES ISSUES, V18, P3Mont OK, 2002, J CLEAN PROD, V10, P237BREZET H, 2001, DESIGN ECOEFFICENT SLINDAHL M, 2001, 8 INT SEM LIF CYCL ELUITEN H, 2001, P 2 INT S ENV CONSC, P190, DOI 10.1109/ECODIM.2001.992344GOEDKOOP M, 1999, PRODUCT SERVICE SYSTSHAHEEN S, 1998, TRANSPORT Q, V52, P35ELKINGTON J, 1997, CANNIBALS FORKS TRIPSTAHEL WR, 1997, FUNCTIONAL EC CULTURSTAHEL WR, 1989, LIMITS CERTAINTY FACSHOSTACK GL, 1982, EUR J MARKETING, V16, P49

A systematic approach for diagnosing service failure: Service-specific FMEA and grey relational analysis approach

In any organization, the importance of failure management cannot be mentioned by a single word. However, most failure analysis is dominated by the manufacturing sector, despite the increasing importance of the service sector. In response, this paper proposes a systematic approach for identifying and evaluating potential failures using a service-specific failure mode and effect analysis (service-specific FMEA) and grey relational analysis. The proposed approach consists of two stages: construction of service-specific FMEA and application of grey relational analysis. The first stage, construction of service-specific FMEA, aims at incorporating the service specific characteristics to the traditional FMEA, providing 3 dimensions and 19 sub-dimensions, encompassing the service characteristics. At the second stage, grey relational analysis is applied to calculate the risk priority of each failure mode to deal with the necessities of a flexible evaluation framework under these interrelated multi-dimensions. The proposed approach is expected to help the service managers to manage the service failure within the systematic framework. This paper contributes to the field in that it incorporates the service-specific characteristics to the traditional FMEA, as well as providing the appropriate evaluation framework using grey relational analysis. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.GEUM Y, 2010, SERV IND J 0928, DOI DOI 10.1080/02642069.2010.503876NARAYANAGOUNDER S, 2009, P WORLD AC SCI ENG TKuo Y, 2008, COMPUT IND ENG, V55, P80, DOI 10.1016/j.cie.2007.12.002Li GD, 2007, MATH COMPUT MODEL, V46, P573, DOI 10.1016/j.mcm.2006.11.021CHEN JK, 2007, J FAILURE ANAL PREVE, V7, P321Chuang PT, 2007, SERV IND J, V27, P91, DOI 10.1080/02642060601122587DONG C, 2007, INT J QUAL RELIAB MA, V24, P958TAY KM, 2006, INT J QUALITY RELIAB, V23, P1047TENG SG, 2006, INT J QUALITY RELIAB, V23, P179, DOI 10.1108/02656710610640943YANG CC, 2006, J MANUFACTURING TECH, V17, P926Chen MF, 2004, MATH COMPUT MODEL, V40, P1473, DOI 10.1016/j.mcm.2005.01.006Fliess S, 2004, J BUS RES, V57, P392, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00273-4LEWIS BR, 2004, INT J CONT HOSPITALI, V16, P6, DOI 10.1108/09596110410516516SYSON F, 2004, J SERV MARK, V18, P255Rhee SJ, 2003, ADV ENG INFORM, V17, P179, DOI 10.1016/j.aei.2004.07.002Hess RL, 2003, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V31, P127, DOI 10.1177/0092070302250898MUELLER RD, 2003, HOSP MANAGE, V22, P395Pillay A, 2003, RELIAB ENG SYST SAFE, V79, P69STAMATIS DH, 2003, FAILURE MODE EFFECTGoldstein SM, 2002, J OPER MANAG, V20, P121, DOI 10.1016/S0272-6963(01)00090-0PUENTE J, 2002, INT J QUALITY RELIAB, V19, P137WU HH, 2002, QUAL ENG, V15, P209CHANG CL, 2001, INTEGRATED MANUFACTU, V12, P211Colgate M, 2001, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V12, P215LEWIS BR, 2001, INT J BANK MARKETING, V19, P37MATTILA AS, 2001, J SERV MARK, V15, P583Michel S, 2001, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V12, P20Miller JL, 2000, J OPER MANAG, V18, P387Stewart DM, 1999, PROD OPER MANAG, V8, P240CHANG CL, 1999, KYBERNETES, V28, P1072ROOS I, 1999, J SERV RES-US, V2, P68SMITH A, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V34, P356Vandenbrande WW, 1998, QUAL PROG, V31, P97Tax SS, 1998, SLOAN MANAGE REV, V40, P75Boshoff C, 1998, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V9, P24*DAIML CHRYSL CORP, 1998, QSA QUAL SYST ASSJOHNE A, 1998, EUR J MARKETING, V32, P184MCDOUGALL G, 1998, J HOSPITALITY LEISUR, V5, P27VANLOOY B, 1998, SERVICES MANAGEMENTBoshoff C, 1997, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V8, P110HOFFMAN KD, 1997, ESSENTIALS SERVICE MEdvardsson B, 1996, SERV IND J, V16, P140Reichheld FF, 1996, HARVARD BUS REV, V74, P56BENDAYA M, 1996, INT J QUALITY RELIAB, V13, P43ARMISTEAD CG, 1995, MANAGING SERVICE RECBOWLES JB, 1995, RELIAB ENG SYST SAFE, V50, P203HOFFMAN KD, 1995, J SERV MARK, V9, P49KELLOGG DL, 1995, J OPERATIONS MANAGEM, V13, P323TAYLOR S, 1994, J MARKETING, V58, P56BAILEY D, 1994, MANAG SERV QUAL, V4, P25FITZSIMMONS JA, 1994, SERVICE MANAGEMENT CKELLEY SW, 1994, J ACADEMY MARKETING, V22, P52KELLEY SW, 1993, J RETAILING, V69, P429BOULDING W, 1993, J MARKETING RES, V30, P7ZEITHAML VA, 1993, J ACADEMY MARKETING, V21, P1BERRY LL, 1992, ORGAN DYN, V20, P5BITNER MJ, 1990, J MARKETING, V54, P71DALE BG, 1990, QUALITY RELIABILITY, V6, P179GRONROOS C, 1990, SERVICE MANAGEMENT MDENG JL, 1989, J GREY SYSTEM, V1, P1JONES P, 1989, MANAGEMENT SERVICE IBERRY L, 1991, MARKETING SERVICESBELL CR, 1987, MANAGE REV, V76, P32SHOSTACK GL, 1987, J MARKETING, V51, P34SURPRENANT CF, 1987, J MARKETING, V51, P73AGBONIFOH BA, 1986, EUR J MARKETING, V20, P43PARASURAMAN A, 1985, J MARKETING, V49, P41SHOSTACK GL, 1985, SERVICE ENCOUNTER, P243SHOSTACK GL, 1984, HARVARD BUS REV, V62, P133CHASE RB, 1981, OPER RES, V29, P698

Toward integration of products and services: Taxonomy and typology

Integration of products and services has been receiving increased attention from both practice and academia, but there is no common systematic framework that can accommodate various concepts. In response, this paper first defines an umbrella term, "integrated product-service" (IPS), that encompasses all related concepts. An extensive literature review is conducted, allowing the production of a taxonomy of IPS, called the IPS dichotomy. As a typology of IPS, the IPS cube, comprising eight cells, is also proposed along with practical examples. This paper is expected to lay a foundation for further advances in the field of integration of products and services. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.N

Analyzing Dynamic Change in Customer Requirements: An Approach Using Review-Based Kano Analysis

To seek sustainable product development, understanding customer requirements is critically important where the life cycle of products or services is so fast, and continuous updates should be provided. In particular, how a customer feels for the specific function of the product/service and how their needs have changed is a critical question. According to Kano model dynamics, customer requirements for certain functions change over time, because customers firstly feel attracted to the new service characteristics but come to take them for granted over time. However, previous research on proving this theory has relied on customer surveys and interviews, which are highly time-consuming and expensive. In response, this study suggests customer review-based analysis to investigate Kano model dynamics, because customer reviews can be considered to be excellent sources for reflecting customer needs. This study firstly categorizes customer reviews into two types—positive reviews and supplementation-required reviews—and suggests a five-section framework according to the frequency of each review type. We define characteristics of each section from the perspective of the Kano model. Based on this framework, we analyze the dynamics of customer requirements in the online businesses, for which customer reviews are the main indicator of service quality

Uncovering the Topic Landscape of Product-Service System Research: from Sustainability to Value Creation

As the product-service system (PSS) is considered a promising business model that can create more value for customers, PSS research has enjoyed remarkable growth in its volume and coverage over the last decade. This study aims to delineate the thematic landscape of PSS research by identifying latent topics from a large amount of scholarly data. Ten topics of PSS research are identified by applying the Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) model to 1229 PSS publications published between 2000 and 2016. The ten PSS topics are briefly reviewed to provide an overview of what has previously been studied in PSS research. We also investigate which topics rise or fall in popularity by identifying hot and cold topics of PSS research. It is observed that the focus of discussions on the benefits of PSS has shifted from sustainability to value creation. Also, increasing attention has been paid to more practical topics such as PSS implementation. The areas of subspecialty of the top ten PSS journals are also examined to explore the interdisciplinary nature of PSS research and thematic differences across disciplines. The findings of this study can provide rich implications for both academia and practice in the field of PSS

The customisation framework for roadmapping product-service integration

Product-service integration is becoming a dominant contemporary trend, motivated by how technology can shape areas of potential product/service interactivity and triggers interactions. Since the role of technology differs from case to case, the strategic planning of product-service integration should focus on accommodating the real-life business situation. In response, this paper suggests a customisation framework for product-service roadmapping according to the technological interface involved, and provides practical guidance in its implementation. This framework consists of five steps in three main stages. The first deals with the structural determination of roadmapping, planning ''''''''what to plan'''''''', determining the role of technology and the roadmapping format. The second phase plans the functional determination, dealing the issue of ''''''''how to plan'''''''', including deciding on the relevant roadmapping procedures and methodology. Finally, the roadmap for product-service integration is developed. To illustrate the workings of proposed approach, six case examples are provided for different modes of integration, providing a practical illustration for product-service integration.Geum Y, 2011, J ENG TECHNOL MANAGE, V28, P128, DOI 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2011.03.002Ruiz-Molina ME, 2011, SERV BUS, V5, P1, DOI 10.1007/s11628-010-0098-yGerdsri N, 2010, TECHNOL ANAL STRATEG, V22, P229, DOI 10.1080/09537320903498553GEUM Y, 2010, P PORTL INT CTR MANLEE SM, 2010, CONVERGENOMICS STRATMARTINEZ V, 2010, INT J MANUF TECH MAN, V21, P449Montoro-Sanchez A, 2009, SERV BUS, V3, P311, DOI 10.1007/s11628-009-0074-6Gerdsri N, 2009, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V76, P50, DOI 10.1016/j.techfore.2008.03.013PARK Y, 2009, P INT C MAN SERV SCIChadee DD, 2008, SERV BUS, V2, P109, DOI 10.1007/s11628-007-0027-xReinartz W, 2008, HARVARD BUS REV, V86, P90Lee LS, 2008, INT J PROD ECON, V112, P587, DOI 10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.05.008An Y, 2008, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V19, P621, DOI 10.1108/09564230810903497JUNG MJ, 2008, P DRS2008 DES RES SOBaines TS, 2007, P I MECH ENG B-J ENG, V221, P1543, DOI 10.1243/09544054JEM858WINDAHL C, 2007, THESIS LINKOPING U SKim YB, 2006, LECT NOTES COMPUT SC, V4061, P716NAKAMURA K, 2006, P IAMOT 06 BEIJ CHINSUNDIN E, 2006, P 11 INT C SUST INNLee S, 2005, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V72, P567, DOI 10.1016/j.techfore.2004.11.006Holmes C, 2005, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V72, P349, DOI 10.1016/j.techfore.2004.08.010FOUSKAS KG, 2005, INT J MOB COMMUN, V3, P350, DOI 10.1504/IJMC.2005.007023KAMEOKA A, 2005, P TOKY INT FOR EFF TMARKESET T, 2005, J QUALITY MAINTENANC, V11, P53, DOI 10.1108/13552510510589370Richey JM, 2004, RES TECHNOL MANAGE, V47, P37Froehle CA, 2004, J OPER MANAG, V22, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.jom.2003.12.004Phaal R, 2004, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V71, P5, DOI 10.1016/S0040-1625(03)00072-6TUKKER A, 2004, BUSINESS STRATEGY EN, V13, P246, DOI DOI 10.1002/BSE.414Manzini E, 2003, J CLEAN PROD, V11, P851, DOI 10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00153-1Stock GN, 2004, INT J OPER PROD MAN, V24, P642, DOI 10.1108/01443570410541975Oliva R, 2003, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V14, P160, DOI 10.1108/09564230310474138AUERNHAMMER K, 2002, KNOWLEDGE TECHNOLOGYDrejer A, 2002, INT J TECHNOL MANAGE, V24, P124MCALOONE TC, 2002, P 13 S DES X NEUK GEMILLER D, 2002, BUS HORIZONS, V45, P3Mont OK, 2002, J CLEAN PROD, V10, P237Kostoff RN, 2001, IEEE T ENG MANAGE, V48, P132, DOI 10.1109/17.922473LINDAHL M, 2001, P 8 INT SEM LIF CYCLPHAAL R, 2001, T PLAN FAST START TEStremersch S, 2001, IND MARKET MANAG, V30, P1ZARING O, 2001, CREATING ECO EFFICIEWise R, 1999, HARVARD BUS REV, V77, P133GOEDKOOP M, 1999, PRODUCT SERVICE SYSTSHAHEEN S, 1998, TRANSPORT Q, V52, P35Groenveld P, 1997, RES TECHNOL MANAGE, V40, P48Frambach RT, 1997, IND MARKET MANAG, V26, P341BRAY OH, 1997, P PORTL INT C MAN ENFITZSIMMONS JA, 1994, SERVICE MANAGEMENT CCAPON N, 1987, J MARKETING, V51, P1GUILTINAN JP, 1987, J MARKETING, V51, P74MATTSSON LG, 1973, IND MARKET MANAG, V3, P107

Application of fault tree analysis to the service process: service tree analysis approach

Purpose - This study aims to propose a tree-based analytic tool that may be used in analyzing a large-scale and complex service process. The tenet of this tool is based on the Boolean logic and named service tree analysis (STA). The proposed STA aims to reflect the customer participation perspective and to propose how to analyze the service process and deduce useful information. Design/methodology/approach - Fault tree analysis is used as an underlying methodology since it has a Boolean logic to describe the customer''''''''s selection of each element and identifies critical events. Taking these advantages of the fault tree, the proposed STA consists of three main parts; service tree construction, qualitative analysis, and quantitative analysis. First, a service tree is constructed depending on how the service elements are selected by the customer; If the subordinate events are always selected by customers, they are linked with an AND gate, otherwise, with an OR gate. Next, in the qualitative analysis, service elements are characterized as core services, supporting services, and optional services by deducing a minimal service cut set. Last, qualitative analysis deals with deriving the impact of each service element based on the Kano model. Findings - The suggested STA has advantages which help strategic operation and management of the service process. Originality/value - This study is unique and even exploratory in that it first adopts the notion of tree analysis in structuring a large-scale, complex service system. Further, the proposed service tree provides a systematic approach from customer participation perspective, which makes the service process to be managed efficiently.Sampson SE, 2006, PROD OPER MANAG, V15, P329FORMOSA D, 2005, BUSINESS WEEK 0727Fliess S, 2004, J BUS RES, V57, P392, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00273-4MAYER KJ, 2003, J SERV MARK, V17, P621SAMPSON SE, 2001, UNDERSTANDING SERVICTAN KC, 2001, MANAG SERV QUAL, V11, P418Tan KC, 2000, TOTAL QUAL MANAGE, V11, P1141ZEITHAML V, 2000, SERVICES MARKETINGKellner MI, 1999, J SYST SOFTWARE, V46, P91Matzler K, 1998, TECHNOVATION, V18, P25CONGRAM C, 1995, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V6, P6KELLOGG DL, 1995, J OPERATIONS MANAGEM, V13, P323ROBERTSHAW W, 1995, T 7 S QUAL FUNCT DEP, P201TINNILA M, 1995, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V6, P57ISHII K, 1995, ME217A COURSE READERKINGMANBRUNDAGE J, 1995, UNDERSTANDING SERVICKINGMANBRUNDAGE J, 1995, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V6, P20ISLAM A, 1995, T 7 S QUAL FUNCT DEP, P61FITZSIMMONS JA, 1994, SERVICE MANAGEMENT CEDVARDSSON B, 1994, QUALITY SERVICECOLQUHOUN GJ, 1993, INT J COMP INTEG M, V6, P252BERGER C, 1993, CTR QUALITY MANAGEME, V2, P3KELLEY SW, 1992, J BUS RES, V25, P197SILVESTRO R, 1992, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V3, P62COLQUHOUN GJ, 1991, INT J PROD RES, V29, P2239LAW AM, 1991, SIMULATION MODELINGLOVELOCK CH, 1991, SERVICES MARKETINGWEMMERLOV U, 1990, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V1, P20BROGOWICZ AA, 1990, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V1, P27GRONROOS C, 1988, INT C SERV MARK ARRSHOSTACK GL, 1987, J MARKETING, V51, P34MORRIS B, 1987, INT J OPER PROD MAN, V7, P13CARLZON J, 1987, MOMENTS TRUTHSCHMENNER RW, 1986, SLOAN MANAGE REV, V27, P21HILL DJ, 1986, ADV CONSUM RES, V13, P311LEE WS, 1985, IEEE T RELIAB, V34, P194BATESON JEG, 1985, SERVICE ENCOUNTER MA, P67KANO N, 1984, J JAPANESE SOC QUALI, V14, P39SHOSTACK GL, 1984, HARVARD BUS REV, V62, P133BOOMS BH, 1981, MARKETING SERVICES, P47*USAF, 1981, DYNAMICS MODELING MA, V6LOVELOCK CH, 1979, HARVARD BUS REV, V57, P168CHASE RB, 1978, HARVARD BUS REV, V56, P137SASSER WEJ, 1978, MANAGEMENT SERVICE OSHOSTACK GL, 1977, J MARKETING, V41, P73HILL TP, 1977, REV INCOME WEALTH, V23, P314BARLOW RE, 1975, RELIABILITY FAULT TR, P7BENNETTS RG, 1975, IEEE T RELIAB, V24, P194LEVITT T, 1972, HARVARD BUS REV, V50, P41BOHL M, 1971, FLOWCHARTING TECHNIQ

Technology roadmapping for technology-based product-service integration: A case study

Today, since a single product is no longer sufficient to cope with the dynamic market environment, firms are trying to provide the integrated offering of products and services. However, despite the importance and utility of product-service integration, a limited approach has been conducted regarding the planning of the strategic management of integrated offering. To deal with this issue, this paper firstly suggests the concept and typology of technological interface in product-service integration. Based on the technological interface, a generic structure of product-service integrated roadmap is developed. Extended from the generic structure, this paper finally proposes the typological configurations of integrated roadmap according to the technological interface and investigates the usage, characteristics, and roadmapping processes. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.SUNDIN E, 2006, P 11 INT C SUST INNLee S, 2005, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V72, P567, DOI 10.1016/j.techfore.2004.11.006FOUSKAS KG, 2005, INT J MOB COMMUN, V3, P350, DOI 10.1504/IJMC.2005.007023KAMEOKA A, 2005, TOKYO INT FORUM EFFEWells R, 2004, RES TECHNOL MANAGE, V47, P46Froehle CA, 2004, J OPER MANAG, V22, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.jom.2003.12.004ALONSORASGADO T, 2004, J ENG DESIGN, V15, P514KUMAR R, 2004, INT J SURFACE MINING, V18, P299Petrick IJ, 2004, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V71, P81, DOI 10.1016/S0040-1625(03)00064-7Yasunaga Y, 2009, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V76, P61, DOI 10.1016/j.techfore.2008.06.004PARK Y, 2009, INT C MAN SERV SCI BAbe H, 2009, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V76, P80, DOI 10.1016/j.techfore.2008.03.027Yang XY, 2009, COMPUT IND, V60, P184, DOI 10.1016/j.compind.2008.12.009Kim C, 2009, AUTOMAT CONSTR, V18, P330, DOI 10.1016/j.autcon.2008.09.008Badawy AM, 2009, J ENG TECHNOL MANAGE, V26, P219, DOI 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2009.11.001Meier H, 2010, CIRP ANN-MANUF TECHN, V59, P607, DOI 10.1016/j.cirp.2010.05.004GEUM Y, 2010, TECHNOLOGY INTERFACEHicks BJ, 2010, J ENG TECHNOL MANAGE, V27, P52, DOI 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2010.03.004KIM YB, 2006, LECT NOTES COMPUTER, P716McIvor R, 2006, J ENG TECHNOL MANAGE, V23, P374, DOI 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2006.08.006Baines TS, 2007, P I MECH ENG B-J ENG, V221, P1543, DOI 10.1243/09544054JEM858MEIER H, 2008, MAN SYST TECHN NEW, P485An Y, 2008, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V19, P621, DOI 10.1108/09564230810903497Daim TU, 2008, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V75, P687, DOI 10.1016/j.techfore.2007.04.006Phaal R, 2004, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V71, P5, DOI 10.1016/S0040-1625(03)00072-6NAKAMURA K, 2006, P 15 INT C MAN TECHNRinne M, 2004, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V71, P67, DOI 10.1016/j.techfore.2003.10.002Stock GN, 2004, INT J OPER PROD MAN, V24, P642, DOI 10.1108/01443570410541975TUKKER A, 2004, BUSINESS STRATEGY EN, V13, P246, DOI DOI 10.1002/BSE.414Vojak BA, 2004, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V71, P121, DOI 10.1016/S0040-1625(03)00047-7Walsh ST, 2004, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V71, P161, DOI 10.1016/j.techfore.2003.10.003Swink M, 2003, J ENG TECHNOL MANAGE, V20, P319, DOI 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2003.08.002Albright RE, 2003, RES TECHNOL MANAGE, V46, P31Bores C, 2003, TECHNOVATION, V23, P1Manzini E, 2003, J CLEAN PROD, V11, P851, DOI 10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00153-1AUERNHAMMER K, 2002, KNOWLEDGE TECHNOLOGYDrejer A, 2002, INT J TECHNOL MANAGE, V24, P124Galbraith JR, 2002, ORGAN DYN, V31, P194Mont OK, 2002, J CLEAN PROD, V10, P237BROWN R, 2001, I ELECT ENG, V7, P1Kappel TA, 2001, J PROD INNOVAT MANAG, V18, P39MCCARTHY JJ, 2001, P PICMETO1 PORTLTatikonda MV, 2001, MANAGE SCI, V47, P151Bitner MJ, 2000, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V28, P138Nihtila J, 1999, J ENG TECHNOL MANAGE, V16, P55GOEDKOOP M, 1999, REPORT DUTCH MINISTRFrambach RT, 1997, IND MARKET MANAG, V26, P341FITZSIMMONS JA, 1994, SERVICE MANAGEMENT CGUILTINAN JP, 1987, J MARKETING, V51, P74