Traditional product development efforts are primarily based on well-structured and hierarchical product development processes. The products are systematically decomposed into subsystems that are designed by dedicated teams with well-defined information flows. Over the last 2 decades, a new product development approach called mass-collaborative product development (MCPD) has emerged. The fundamental difference between a traditional product development process and a MCPD process is that the former is based on top-down decomposition while the latter is based on evolution and self-organization. The paradigm of MCPD has resulted in highly successful products such as Wikipedia, Linux, and Apache. Despite the success of various projects using MCPD, it is not well understood how the product architecture affects the evolution of products developed using such processes. Toward addressing this gap, we present an agent-based model to study the effect of product architectures in MCPD processes. The model is executed for different architectures ranging from slot architecture to bus architecture and the rates of product evolution are determined. The agent-based modeling approach allows us to study how (a) the degree of modularity of products and (b) the sequence of decoupling affect the evolution time of individual modules and overall products developed through MCPD processes. The approach is presented using the architecture of mobile phones as an illustrative example. This approach provides a simple and intuitive way to study the effects of product architecture on the MCPD processes. It is helpful in determining suitable strategies for product decomposition and module decoupling, and in identifying the product architectures that are suitable for MCPD processes.

1.
Tapscott
,
D.
, and
Williams
,
A. D.
, 2006,
Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything
,
Penguin
,
New York
.
2.
Oscar Project
, 2008, “
Oscar: Reinvent Mobility
,” (cited Feb. 8, 2008) Web Link: http://www.theoscarproject.org/http://www.theoscarproject.org/
3.
Open Prosthetics
, 2008, “
The Open Prosthetics Project: An Initiative of the Shared Design Alliance
,” (cited Apr. 11, 2008) Web Link: http://openprosthetics.org/http://openprosthetics.org/
4.
Panchal
,
J. H.
, 2009, “
Agent-Based Modeling of Mass Collaborative Product Development Processes
,”
ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng.
1530-9827,
9
(
3
), p.
031007
.
5.
Panchal
,
J. H.
, and
Fathianathan
,
M.
, 2008, “
Product Realization in the Age of Mass Collaboration
,”
ASME
Paper No. DETC2008-49865.
6.
Buede
,
D. M.
, 2000,
The Engineering Design of Systems: Models and Methods
,
Wiley
,
New York
.
7.
Pahl
,
G.
, and
Beitz
,
W.
, 1996,
Engineering Design—A Systematic Approach
,
K.
Wallace
, ed.,
Springer
,
Berlin
.
8.
Klein
,
M.
,
Sayama
,
H.
,
Faratin
,
P.
, and
Bar-Yam
,
Y.
, 2003, “
The Dynamics of Collaborative Design: Insights From Complex Systems and Negotiation Research
,”
Concurr. Eng. Res. Appl.
1063-293X,
11
(
3
), pp.
201
209
.
9.
Ulrich
,
K.
, 1995, “
The Role of Product Architecture in the Manufacturing Firm
,”
Res. Policy
0048-7333,
24
(
3
), pp.
419
440
.
10.
Pimmler
,
T. U.
, and
Eppinger
,
S. D.
, 1994, “
Integration Analysis of Product Decompositions
,”
ASME Design Theory and Methodology
, Minneapolis, MN, pp.
343
351
.
11.
Fixson
,
S. K.
, and
Park
,
J. -K.
, 2008, “
The Power of Integrality: Linkages Between Product Architecture, Innovation, and Industry Structure
,”
Res. Policy
0048-7333,
37
(
8
), pp.
1296
1316
.
12.
Yassine
,
A. A.
, and
Wissmann
,
L. A.
, 2007, “
The Implications of Product Architecture on the Firm
,”
J. Syst. Eng.
0022-4820,
10
(
2
), pp.
118
137
.
13.
Gulati
,
R. K.
, 1996, “
The Coupling of Product Architecture and Organizational Structure Decisions
,” MS thesis, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science and Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
14.
Ulrich
,
K. T.
, and
Seering
,
W. P.
, 1990, “
Function Sharing in Mechanical Design
,”
Des. Stud.
0142-694X,
11
(
4
), pp.
223
234
.
15.
Steward
,
D. V.
, 1981, “
The Design Structure System: A Method for Managing the Design of Complex Systems
,”
IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage.
0018-9391,
78
(
3
), pp.
71
74
.
16.
Smith
,
R. P.
, and
Eppinger
,
S. D.
, 1997, “
Identifying Controlling Features in Engineering Design Iteration
,”
Manage. Sci.
0025-1909,
43
(
3
), pp.
276
293
.
17.
Bonabeau
,
E.
, 2002, “
Agent-Based Modeling: Methods and Techniques for Simulating Human Systems
,”
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
0027-8424,
99
(
3
), pp.
7280
7287
.
18.
Gilbert
,
N.
, 2007,
Agent-Based Models: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences
,
Sage Publications
,
Thousand Oaks, CA
.
19.
Erol
,
K.
, 1998, “
A Study of Agent-Based Traffic Simulation
,” FHWA, US DOT.
20.
Macal
,
C. M.
, and
North
,
M. J.
, 2005, “
Tutorial on Agent Based Modeling and Simulation
,”
Proceedings of the 37th Winter Simulation Conference
, Orlando, FL, pp.
2
15
.
21.
Sim
,
Y. W.
,
Crowder
,
R.
,
Robinson
,
M.
, and
Hughes
,
H.
, 2009, “
An Agent-Based Approach to Modelling Integrated Product Teams Undertaking a Design Activity
,”
ASME 2009 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference
, San Diego, CA, ASME Paper No. DETC2009-86957.
22.
Crowder
,
R.
,
Hughes
,
H.
,
Sim
,
Y. W.
, and
Robinson
,
M.
, 2009, “
An Agent Based Approach to Modeling Design Teams
,”
International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED ‘09)
, Stanford, CA, Paper No. ICED'09/201.
23.
Nissen
,
M. E.
, and
Levitt
,
R. E.
, 2004, “
Agent-Based Modeling of Knowledge Flows: Illustration From the Domain of Information Systems Design
,”
Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (Track 8, Vol. 8)
, Hawaii, p.
80249
.
24.
NetLogo
, 2008, “
NetLogo 4.0.3 User’s Manual
,” (cited Sep. 7, 2008) Web Link: http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/docs/http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/docs/
25.
Swarm Development Group
, 1999, “
Swarm
,” (cited Sep. 15, 2008) Web Link: www.swarm.orgwww.swarm.org
26.
Borshchev
,
A.
, and
Filippov
,
A.
, 2004, “
AnyLogic—Multi-Paradigm Simulation for Business, Engineering and Research
,”
The Sixth IIE Annual Simulation Solutions Conference
, Orlando, FL.
27.
Mikkola
,
J. H.
, 2001, “
Modularity and Interface Management of Product Architecture
,”
Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET)
, p.
359
.
28.
Cho
,
S. -H.
, and
Eppinger
,
S. D.
, 2005, “
A Simulation-Based Process Model for Managing Complex Design Projects
,”
IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage.
0018-9391,
52
(
3
), pp.
316
328
.
29.
Cho
,
S. -H.
, and
Eppinger
,
S. D.
, 2001, “
Product Development Process Modeling Using Advanced Simulation
,”
ASME
Paper No. DETC2001/DTM-21691.
30.
Sosa
,
M. E.
,
Eppinger
,
S. D.
, and
Rowles
,
C. M.
, 2007, “
A Network Approach to Define Modularity of Components in Complex Products
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
0161-8458,
129
(
11
), pp.
1118
1129
.
31.
Hölttä-Otto
,
K.
,
Suh
,
E. S.
, and
de Weck
,
O. L.
, 2005, “
Trade-Off Between Modularity and Performance for Engineered Systems and Products
,”
ICED 2005: The 15th International Conference on Engineering Design
, Melbourne, Australia.
32.
Hölttä-Otto
,
K.
, and
de Weck
,
O.
, 2007, “
Degree of Modularity in Engineering Systems and Products With Technical and Business Constraints
,”
Concurr. Eng. Res. Appl.
1063-293X,
15
(
2
), pp.
113
126
.
33.
Guo
,
F.
, and
Gershenson
,
J. K.
, 2004, “
A Comparison of Modular Product Design Methods on Improvement and Iteration
,”
ASME
Paper No. DETC2004-57396.
34.
Baldwin
,
C. Y.
, and
Clark
,
K. B.
, 1997, “
Managing in an Age of Modularity
,”
Harvard Bus. Rev.
0017-8012,
75
(
5
), pp.
84
93
.
35.
Bergstrom
,
T.
,
Blume
,
L.
, and
Varian
,
H.
, 1986, “
On the Private Provision of Public Goods
,”
J. Public Econ.
0047-2727,
29
, pp.
25
49
.
36.
Johnson
,
J. P.
, 2002, “
Open Source Software: Private Provision of a Public Good
,”
J. Econ, Manage. Strategy
1058-6407,
11
(
4
), pp.
637
662
.
37.
Lakhani
,
K. R.
, and
Wolf
,
R. G.
, 2005, “
Why Hackers Do What They Do: Understanding Motivation and Effort in Free/Open Source Software Projects
,”
Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software
,
J.
Feller
,
B.
Fitzgerald
,
S.
Hissam
, and
K.
Lakhani
, eds.,
MIT
,
Cambridge, MA
, pp.
3
21
.
38.
Keeney
,
R. L.
, and
Raiffa
,
H.
, 1976,
Decisions With Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs
,
Wiley
,
New York
.
You do not currently have access to this content.