Understanding luxury in the premium automotive industry

This paper summarises the findings of investigations to date in understanding what luxury and premiumness mean to the high-end automotive consumer. Existing writings on luxury and premiumness are considered. An exploratory study was carried out in two countries using 309 respondents and 18 prestige cars. A "stream of consciousness" approach was used to capture respondent's views on a selection of vehicles. The codified transcripts were used to identify key differences between the top and bottom rated vehicles, in terms of the nature and quantity of emotional responses elicited. This paper describes some of these key product differences that were self-reported to impact upon a luxury response. Finally, suggestions are made as to the next steps required for this research. © 2007 ACM.

Exploring industry dynamics and interactions

Within strategic technology management and innovation, often stakeholders extrapolate past industry dynamics, trends and patterns into the future. One frequently used concept is that of 'lifecycles' - an analogy of a sequence of stages encountered by living organisms. Lifecycle terms - such as technology, product, industry - are frequently used interchangeably and without clear definition. Within the interdisciplinary context of technology management and forecasting, this juxtaposition of dynamics can create confusion rather than simplification. This paper explores some of the dynamics typically associated with technology-based industries, illustrated with data from the early US automotive industry. A wide range of dimensions are seen to have potential to influence the path of industry development, and technology roadmapping architecture is used to present a simplified visualisation of some of these. Stakeholders need to consider the units of analysis, causality and synchronicity of relevant different dynamics, rather than isolated lifecycles. Some graphical curves represent simple aggregation of components; other dynamics have significant impact, but incur time lags, rather than being superimposed. To optimise alignment of the important dimensions within any technology development, and for future strategy decisions, understanding these interactions is critical. © 2012 Elsevier Inc.

Exploring the impacts of the interactions between lifecycles and other dynamics that influence the development of technology-based industries

To address future uncertainty within strategy and innovation, managers extrapolate past patterns and trends into the future. Several disciplines make use of lifecycles, often with a linear sequence of identified phases, to make predictions and address likely uncertainties. Often the aggregation of several cycles is then interpreted as a new cycle - such as product lifecycles into an industry lifecycle. However, frequently different lifecycle terms - technology, product, industry - are used interchangeably and without clear definition. Within the interdisciplinary context of technology management, this juxtaposition of dynamics can create confusion, rather than clarification. This paper explores some typical dynamics associated with technology-based industries, using illustrative examples from the automotive industry. A wide range of dimensions are seen to influence the path of a technology-based industry, and stakeholders need to consider the likely causality and synchronicity of these. Some curves can simply present the aggregation of components; other dynamics incur time lags, rather than being superimposed, but still have a significant impact. To optimise alignment of the important dimensions within any development, and for future strategy decisions, understanding these interactions will be critical. © 2011 IEEE.

Improving co-development through process alignment

There has been a recent surge of enthusiasm icithin tlie automotive industry to build closer supplier relationships idthin the area of product development. One concept deemed central to these relationships is the alignment of development processes between the collaborating organizations, an area that is expanded upon idthin this paper. We suggest that synchronization can be achieved through the four key steps of process standardization, knowledge sliaring, alignment of existing practices, and continuous elimination oftcaste idthin the joint development cycles. A methodology for implementing these stages is presented along idth the underlying prindples on which it is based - the importance of joint teamworking and multi-company involvement idthin the alignment process is higlilighted. © MCB University Press.