The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring Modularity‐Based Manufacturing Practices and Their Impact on Mass Customization Capability: A Customer‐Driven Perspective
Abstract
As uncertainty in markets and technology intensifies, more companies are adopting modular product and process architectures to cope with increasing demands for individually customized products. Modularity‐based manufacturing is the application of unit standardization or substitution principles to create modular components and processes that can be configured into a wide range of end products to meet specific customer needs. This study defines modularity‐based manufacturing practices (MBMP), develops a valid and reliable instrument to measure MBMP, builds a framework that relates customer closeness, MBMP, and mass customization capability, and tests structural relationships within this framework using LISREL. Based on 303 responses from members of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers, statistically significant and positive relationships were found among customer closeness, modularity‐based manufacturing practices, and mass customization capability. Managerial implications of the empirical findings of this study and future research directions are also discussed.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests
Cronbach, L. J. (1951) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02310555 · Cited by 43,931
(1997) · Chemometrics in Environmental Analysis · doi:10.1002/352760216x.ch5 · Cited by 18,653
A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs
Churchill, G. A. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377901600110 · Cited by 16,549
Design Rules: The Power of Modularity
Baldwin, C. Y., & Clark, K. B. (2000) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/2366.001.0001 · Cited by 3,504
Marsh, H. W., & Hocevar, D. (1985) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.97.3.562 · Cited by 3,407
Foundations of Behavioral Research
Buttram, J. B. (1967) · Journal of Music Therapy · doi:10.1093/jmt/4.4.144-a · Cited by 2,948
The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm
Ulrich, K. (1995) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(94)00775-3 · Cited by 2,885
Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organization design
Sanchez, R., & Mahoney, J. T. (1996) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250171107 · Cited by 2,490
Re-Examining Perceived Ease of Use and Usefulness: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Segars, A. H., & Grover, V. (1993) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249590 · Cited by 1,515
Toward a General Modular Systems Theory and Its Application to Interfirm Product Modularity
Schilling, M. A. (2000) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259016 · Cited by 1,460
Cited by
Kortmann, S., Gelhard, C., Zimmermann, C., & Piller, F. T. (2014) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2014.09.007 · Cited by 317
Ward, P., & Zhou, H. (2006) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2006.00121.x · Cited by 309
The power of integrality: Linkages between product architecture, innovation, and industry structure
Fixson, S. K., & Park, J.-K. (2008) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.026 · Cited by 286
Metadata
- Authors
- Tu, Q., Vonderembse, M. A., Ragu‐Nathan, T. S., & Ragu‐Nathan, B.
- Venue
- Decision Sciences
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-04-22
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 147-168
- ISSN
- 0011-7315 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5915
- OpenAlex
- W2128160592
- Cited by
- 317
- References
- 39
- FWCI
- 19.12
- 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: Measuring Modularity‐Based Manufacturing Practices and Their Impact on Mass Customization Capability: A Customer‐Driven Perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.02663.x
- The paper
- Tu, Q., Vonderembse, M. A., Ragu‐Nathan, T. S., & Ragu‐Nathan, B. (2004). Measuring Modularity‐Based Manufacturing Practices and Their Impact on Mass Customization Capability: A Customer‐Driven Perspective. Decision Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.02663.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.
