Decision making in product development: are you outside‐in or inside‐out?

Abstract

PurposeThis paper proposes a relationship between decision making and key qualities of business systems.Design/methodology/approachThe authors explore the relationship between decision making and systems by contrasting the decision making in two well‐known systems: MRP and JIT. The two systems present two sets of opposing qualities. By considering the relationship between a decision and its environment, we propose that these sets of qualities are not unique to MRP and JIT. They arise from two general approaches to decision making. Having introduced the two approaches, we analyze three product development systems: Stage‐Gate, Agile and Lean.FindingsIn manufacturing, MRP is a push system; JIT is a pull system. MRP seeks perfection; JIT seeks consistency. MRP gives decision makers great discretion; JIT constrains decisions. These opposing qualities, and others, arise from two general approaches to decision making: outside‐in and inside‐out. As the difficulty of decisions increase, relative to a decision maker's ability, the cost of mistakes becomes significant. In these situations, the inside‐out approach should outperform the outside‐in approach. The inside‐out approach constrains decision making to limit the cost of errors. The outside‐in approach embraces complexity, exposing itself to more decision errors. In product development, the Lean and Agile systems exploit the inside‐out approach. They constrain decisions and reduce the cost of errors that arise from two sources. Lean addresses interactions, which add complexity to business systems. Agile addresses unpredictability, which adds uncertainty to business systems.Originality/valueThe relationships the authors propose show how decision making affects the development, control and performance of business systems.

Quality assurance practices for competitive data warehouse management systems

“…There are important theories on finding the right balance of COQ to resource investment needed to achieve a zero-defect process (Summers and Scherpereel, 2008). One of the best know is from Juran, his view proposed that the balance of quality is found when the company is able to set the cost of conformance for quality parallel to a standard offset by the cost of non-conformance (Love, 1995).…”

Establishing and managing effective internal quality control measures in small service companies

“…In layman terms, quality is the ability of a product or service to meet customer needs or demands. Quality management can be defined as a concept of managing quality that is characterised by its principles, practices, and techniques (Bhat, 2008;Summers and Scherpereel, 2008). It is essentially a business philosophy or company ideal that, when implemented properly, can lead to increased operating income and sales.…”

Staging Innovation Projects: (When) Does it Pay Off?

“…At early stages, when uncertainty regarding the technical and commercial viability of the innovation project is typically high, investments are relatively limited. As uncertainty is reduced, the projects that have not been killed advance to subsequent stages where funding increases (Summers and Scherpereel, 2008).…”