Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 481

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Modularity, product variety, production volume, and component sourcing: theorizing beyond generic prescriptions

Salvador, F, Forza, C, Rungtusanatham, M·2002·Journal of Operations Management

Abstract

Research in operations management suggests that firms can mitigate the negative impact of product variety on operational performance by deliberately pursuing modularity in the design of product family architectures. However, modularity is not a dichotomous property of a product, as different types of modularity can be embedded into a product family architecture. The present paper explores how manufacturing characteristics affect the appropriate type of modularity to be embedded into the product family architecture, and how the types of modularity relate to component sourcing. The study is based on a qualitative research design involving a multiple case study methodology to examine six product families belonging to six European companies. The themes derived through case analyses are synthesized in the form of empirical generalizations. Insights from these empirical generalizations are subsequently developed into two propositions explaining why and under what conditions these empirical generalizations might hold for a product family outside of the original sample. The theoretical results formalize, first of all, a type of modularity (i.e. combinatorial modularity) not currently described in literature. Second, the theoretical propositions suggest that when the desired level of product variety is low (high) relative to total production volume, component swapping modularity (combinatorial modularity) helps to maximize operational performance. Finally, the complexity of component families outsourced to suppliers and the geographical proximity of component family suppliers affect the extent to which the product variety–operational performance trade‐off can be mitigated through modularity.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0272-6963(02)00027-x

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 41 references

Cited by

See all 481

Metadata

Authors
Salvador, F., Forza, C., & Rungtusanatham, M.
Venue
Journal of Operations Management
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-04-26
Volume
20
Issue
5
Pages
549-575
ISSN
  • 0272-6963 (ISSN-L)
  • 1873-1317
OpenAlex
W2060155144
Cited by
481
References
41
FWCI
17.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Modularity, product variety, production volume, and component sourcing: theorizing beyond generic prescriptions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0272-6963(02)00027-x
The paper
Salvador, F., Forza, C., & Rungtusanatham, M. (2002). Modularity, product variety, production volume, and component sourcing: theorizing beyond generic prescriptions. Journal of Operations Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0272-6963(02)00027-x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.