Complex product and supplier interfaces in aeronautics

Abstract

International audienceurpose - The aeronautical industry is a perfect example of a complex product industry characterized by a hierarchically-organized supply chain. The authors can identify four types of supplier interfaces: interactive, translation, specified and standardized ones. The purpose of this paper is to understand the factors explaining the diversification of these relationships between aircraft manufacturers and their suppliers, through the example of Airbus suppliers. Design/methodology/approach - Network analysis (to define the complexity level of aircraft components), data analysis (to characterize the diversity of aircraft suppliers) and a logit model were combined in order to link the supplier interfaces to the complexity of components and to the suppliers' characteristics. Findings - It is shown that the earlier a supplier is involved in the development process, the more responsibility is delegated to him and the more intertwined its relationship is with the prime contractor. Also, it is shown that component complexity plays a major role in a supplier's involvement during the integral design and face-to-face interactions matter greatly during the co-design phases of the products. Research limitations/implications - The research has rather a static perspective covering all the inter-firm relations within Airbus programs at once. By using the same databases, one could look into the evolution of supplier interfaces within the aeronautical supply chain. A dynamic view would provide some evidence regarding the recent restructuring of the supply chain. Originality/value - The originality of the paper comes from the methodology and the use of original data allowing to test in the same analysis the role of the component complexity and the characterization of the suppliers on the form of relationship between the manufacturer and its principal suppliers

Integration principles for complex systems

“…Lloyd asserts that information is always needed to specify the integration trajectory that the system has followed to its present state 2,11 . Without this information, the primary integrator has no information on the overall complexity of the system or how the interactions of complimentary subsystems that integrate together might affect one another or even the system as a whole 8,11,14,21,35–39 . Literature often calls this information transparency 11 .…”

Conceptualization of a T‐Shaped engineering competency model in collaborative organizational settings: Problem and status in the Spanish aircraft industry

“…Literature suggests that modern aircraft “is without any doubt one of the clearest and most convincing examples of a complex system.” Some authors express that modern aircrafts contain systems of increasing levels of complexity. At a technology level, an increasing number of highly integrated and interacting functions and physical elements, which are embodying new technologies that massively depend on distributed software and digital electronics, have contributed significantly to the growing of complexity (Elgezabal and Schumann, 2012) . At an organizational level, this requires intensive cooperation between stakeholders to conceptualize and design interdependencies between elements that had been traditionally interpreted by different areas of disciplinary expertise (Elgezabal and Schumann, 2012) .…”

Factors that influence product life cycle management to develop greener products in the mechanical industry

“…This study, and the aeronautical industry in general, provides an illustrative example of a complex, product-oriented industry characterised by a hierarchically organised supply chain. As such, past researchers have been able to evaluate the role of component complexity and supplier characteristics on the nature of the relationships between manufacturers and their principal suppliers (Cagli, Kechidi, and Levy 2012).…”