Over the years, much attention has been given to the analysis of the pull type ordering system to reduce in-process inventory and to improve product quality. Kanban Control Systems are widely used to control the release of parts in multi-stage manufacturing systems operating under a pull mechanism. Considerable research has been done to study the individual manufacturing systems for multi stage and single product. However, not much research has been done to compare different pull control policies for multi product manufacturing systems. Most of the research done in multi-product system assumes that a kanban card is dedicated to a part type. The aim of this research is to compare the Kanban Control System (KCS), Generalized Kanban Control System (GKCS) and Extended Kanban Control System (EKCS) in the context of multi-product manufacturing systems where the kanban cards are either dedicated to a single part type or shared among the different part types. In this study, we analyze the performance of various control policies for a multi-product multi-stage manufacturing system. The manufacturing system considered in this research use a single-card kanban system, where the transportation of materials between the different work-centers is controlled by production kanbans. Demands that arrive to the system are satisfied from the finished goods inventory whenever possible and are backordered otherwise. Performance measures are number of backorders, average waiting time of backordered demand and average work in process. Our results show that Shared GKCS has lower number of backorders when the variability in the processing time is low, while Shared EKCS performs better when variability in the processing time is high. Trade off analysis was performed on average WIP and time to satisfy backorders. The Shared EKCS makes a better service-inventory compromise than traditional KCS. The Shared GKCS results in lower average waiting time to satisfy the backordered demand indicating responsiveness of this control system. The overall results indicate GKCS and EKCS with dedicated or shared kanbans outclass kanban control policy. The shared kanban-like control systems outperform dedicated control systems for all performance measures considered in this research.

In contemporary software development, an emergent understanding of the problem domain and envisioned goals forms the basis of designing, testing and development activities. Lack of a common understanding of the domain can result in costly rework or client dissatisfaction. Research shows that the development of shared understanding in this context is a complex and error-prone process and there is room for improvement. Is this because practitioners are not following suggested practice from literature? Or are the actual barriers to shared understanding not being addressed by current tools and techniques? Is the development of shared domain understanding even viewed as problematic (or even important) by practitioners? These are some questions that need to be investigated in order to effectively design process improvements and tool support in this area, yet there is little information related to this. This study takes a multi-case study approach, which incorporate semi-structured interviews with representative from ten small-to-medium organisations. This study focuses on the vendor’s perspective and includes a mix of application domains. Result of the interviews is analysed to discover themes and patterns related to an analysis framework constructed from the literature review. The findings indicate that vendors perceive the process of developing shared application-domain understanding with their clients as being both problematic and important to a successful implementation. Twelve barriers have been identified from the analysis. The results also confirm that the process of sharing understanding development is generally perceived as being evolutionary and collaborative. This process is described by most interviewees comprises iterative phases of elicitation, confirmation and refinement of the understanding. A definite preference for face-to-face interaction is evident at regular times throughout development, particularly in early stages, although the importance of ad-hoc communications by phone or email, as domain knowledge needs arise, is also emphasised. Access to cooperative domain-expert throughout development is generally seen as a critical success factor. Several companies report using in-house domain-expert as client “proxies” in this regard. There is a mix of attitudes apparent regarding the direct communications of developers with client stakeholders. This ranged from insisting that developers are involved from initial elicitation and “kick-off” meetings, to “shielding” developers almost entirely from client. In terms of representations of understanding, participants relate natural-language, screen-shots, mock-ups, prototypes and product-demonstrations as the most useful artefacts for sharing and confirming understanding of the problem domain. They emphasise the importance of flexibility and client familiarity with the representations. In general, there is no clear separation between problem and solution spaces evident when the interviewees discussed representations of understanding, and the preference seems to be for concrete rather than abstract representations. In conclusion, comparisons between the findings and literature generally confirm contemporary thinking regarding domain knowledge sharing, although a number of barriers were given particular emphasis in this field study. The use of computer-based tool support is not widespread and the need to improve the domain knowledge sharing process and tool support in practice is widely acknowledged by the participants in this investigation. This study has identified some fruitful areas of research in this regard.

This thesis explores the utility of interest management in peer-to-peer environments. Specifically, it proposes: a model for formulaic specification of interest criteria that is implementation neutral in terms of underlying interest operators (the functions that determine the satisfaction of interest); and, an interest management propagation model that ensures the specifications (termed formula interest expressions) are only sent to those DVE components that are likely to be able to satisfy the interest criteria. This selective propagation model uses a distributed index of supported interest operators to determine candidate remote filterers. Remote filtering ensures that a state change message is only sent if it meets the interest criteria previously expressed by the intended recipient. The selective remote filtering model requires no central infrastructure and is entirely supported by peer DVE components, which may join and leave the DVE dynamically. The performance of the proposed propagation model, in terms of the number of logical messages required, is compared to the only existing propagation model where interest expressions are simply sent to all participating DVE components. Analysis reveals that for stable long-lived DVEs the proposed model can significantly messaging overhead and thereby increase the potential scale-up of the DVE. The viability of the proposed model is examined by means of proof-of-concept system, which exercises the specification and propagation models over a range of values for key variables. / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

While 3D digital design tools have extended the reach of architectural and engineering designers within their own domains, restrictions on the use of the tools and an approach to practice whereby the architect designs (synthesises) and the engineer solves (analyses) - in that order ¡V have limited the opportunities for interdependent modes of interaction between the two disciplines during the early design phase. While it is suggested that 3D digital design tools can facilitate a more integrated approach to design exploration, this idea remains largely untested in practice. The central proposition of my research is that that 3D digital tools can enable interdependencies between crucial aspects of architectural and engineering design exploration during the early design phase which, before the entry of the computer, were otherwise impossible to affect. I define interdependency as a productive form of practice enabled by mutual and lateral dependence. Interdependent parties use problem solving processes that meet not only their own respective goals, but also those of others, by constructively engaging difference across their boundaries to actively search for solutions that go beyond the limits of singular domains. Developed through practice-based project work undertaken during my 3 year postgraduate internship within the Melbourne Australia office of the engineering firm Arup, my research explores new and improved linkages between early design exploration, analysis and making. The principal contribution of my research is to explore this problem from within the context, conditi ons and pressures of live practice. To test the research proposition this dissertation engages firstly with available literature from the fields of organisation theory and design, secondly with information gathered from experts in the field principally via interview, and lastly with processes of testing through practice-based (as opposed to university-based) project work. The dissertation is organized as follows: The Introductory Chapter outlines the central hypothesis, the current state of the discourse, and my motivations for conducting this research. I summarise the structure of my research, and the opportunities and limitations that have framed its ambitions. Chapter Two, Approach to Research and Method, details the constraints and possibilities of the Embedded Research within Architectural Practice context, within which this work has been undertaken, and describes the Melbourne office of Arup, the practice with whom I have been embedded. These contexts have led to the selection of a particular set of ethnographic research instruments, being the use of semi-structured interviews and the undertaking of practice-based studies as a participant-observer. These modes of testing are explained, and the constraints, limitations and requirements associated with them described. Within Chapter Three, Factors for Separation and Integration in Architectural and Engineering Design, I examine selected design literature to detail several factors impacting upon the historic and contemporary relationship between architects and engineers, and to introduce the problem towards which this thesis is addressed. I describe a process of specialisation that has led architects and engineers to see different aspects of a common problem, detail the historical factors for separation, the current relationship between domains and the emerging idea of increased integration during the early design phase. The aim of this section is primarily contextual - to introduce the characters and to understand why their interaction can be difficult - and investigation occurs through the concepts of specialisation and disciplinary roles. Chapter Four, Unravelling Interdependency, establishes an understanding of interdependency through the concept of collaboration. While I differentiate interdependency from collaboration because of the inconsistent manner in which the latter term is employed, the concept of collaboration is useful to initialise my understanding of interdependency because it, as opposed to the closely linked processes of cooperation and coordination, is recognised as being characterised by interdependency, and in fact is a viewed as a response specific to wider conditions of interdependency. From the literature, I identify four sites of intersection crucial to an understanding of interdependency; these are differing perceptions, shared and creative problem solving, communication and trust. These themes, which correlate with my practice experience at Arup Melbourne, are developed to introduce the concepts and vocabulary underlying my research. Chapter Five, Intersections & Interdependency between Architects and Engineers, grounds these four sites of intersection within contemporary issues of digital architectural and engineering practice. Each site is developed firstly through reference to design literature and secondly through the experiences and understandings of senior Arup practitioners as captured through my interviews. The views and experiences of these practitioners are used to locate digital limits to, and potential solutions for, interdependent design exploration between architects and engineers as they are experienced within and by practice. Through this combination of design literature and grounded experience, I extend: * the understanding of differing perceptions through reference to problems associated with digital information transfer. * the understanding of joint and creative problem solving by connecting it to the notion of performance-based design. * the understanding of communication by focussing it upon the idea of back propagating design information. * the understanding of trust by connecting it to the management and reduction of perceived complexity and risk. Chapter Six, Testing through Projects, details the project studies undertaken within this research. These studies are grouped into three discourses, characterized as Design(Arch)Design(Eng), Design|Analysis and Design|Making. As suggested by the concurrency operator that separates the two terms that constitute each of the three labels, each discourse tests how architectural and engineering explorations might execute in parallel. The section Design(Arch)|Design(Eng) reports projects that use a common language of geometry to link architectural and engineering design ideas through geometric interpretation. The section Design|Analysis reports projects in which analytical tools have been used generatively to actively guide and synthesise design exploration. The final section, Design|Making, reports projects in which the architectural and engineering design processes are synthesised around the procurement of fabrication information. Conclusions are then drawn and discussed in Chapter Seven. In evaluating the research I discuss how 3D digital design tools have enabled alternative approaches that resolve issues associated with differing perceptions, establishing common meanings, communication and trust. I summarise how these approaches have enabled increased interdependency in architect engineer interaction. Lastly, I draw together the impacts of intersecting 3D digital aspects of architectural and engineering design exploration during the early design phase, and indicate those aspects that require further analysis and research.

<p>Syftet med denna studie var att undersöka hur multipla roller upplevs och hanteras av personer som delar en professionell och en privat domän. Tidigare forskning har visat att multipla roller ofta upplevs som stressande och är en grund till konflikter i såväl den privata som den professionella domänen. Åtta personer i fyra intervjupar intervjuades individuellt med hjälp av en semistrukturerad intervjuguide. Studiens resultat visar att samtliga deltagare har positiva upplevelser kring de delade domänerna då de anses ge en ökad förståelse för den andra parten och leda till en utvecklad relation. Vidare forskning föreslås koncentreras kring negativa upplevelser av fenomenet då denna undersökning inte undersökt detta.</p>

<p>Delat ledarskap är ett arbetssätt som många verkar vara nyfikna på men har svårt att finna information om. I en kvalitativ undersökning har chefer runt om i Sverige som både delar och inte delar ledarskap intervjuats. Kompetens och arbetsuppgifter, värderingar, tillgänglighet och effektivitet, kommunikation och makt och konflikter är områden som påverkar om man kan få ett delat ledarskap att fungera eller inte. Studien visar att en handbok bland annat bör innehålla övergripande information om ämnet, ha en lättförståelig text, tips och råd, begreppsdefinitioner, bilder och scenarier. Med hjälp av studien har vi skapat oss en bild av vad som krävs för att chefer ska få till stånd ett delat ledarskap och vad som bör stå i en handbok för chefer som är intresserade av delat ledarskap.</p> / <p>Many people seem to be curious about shared leadership but are having a hard time finding information about this subject. Leaders from Sweden that practice and don't practice shared leadership have participated in a qualitative study. Whether or not shared leadership works, depends on the influence from areas such as competence and assignments, values, availability and efficiency, communication and power and conflict. A handbook about shared leadership should include general information about the subject, should be written in a straightforward way, contain advice, word definitions, pictures and scenarios. This study has given us a clear picture of what is needed to carry out a shared leadership and what content that needs to be presented in a handbook intended for leaders with an interest in shared leadership.</p>

<p>Syftet med denna studie har varit att undersöka delat ledarskap ur ett ledar- och medarbetarperspektiv i en statlig verksamhet. Vi önskade få svar på hur ledarna samverkar och delar upp arbetsuppgifterna mellan sig och hur medarbetarna ser på detta. Vi undersökte också hur kommunikationen upplevdes av inblandade parter. Vår metod för att lyckas med detta har varit kvalitativ med induktiv ansats där vi genom enkätfrågor, till såväl ledarna som ett urval av gruppens medarbetare, fått svar på frågeställningarna beträffande samverkan och arbetsuppdelningen samt hur kommunikationen fungerar mellan parterna. Svaren från respondenterna ger en samstämmig bild av att det fungerar mycket bra. Denna bild styrks även av den medarbetarundersökning, som utfördes inom organisationen i december 2008. Vi konstaterar att den största skillnaden med delat ledarskap, jämfört med traditionellt ledarskap,är att de är två ledare. I vår undersökta grupp svarade respondenterna att delat ledarskap är en fördel främst för ledarna, då de kan bolla frågor och stötta varandra och att en förutsättning för att lyckas är just att samverkan mellan ledarna fungerar, vilket vi fått indikationer på att det gör i vår undersökta grupp. Farhågan att det delade ledarskapet skulle uppfattas som otydligt har inte besannats. Medarbetarna har delats upp mellan ledarna för utvecklingssamtal etc och alla uppger sig vara nöjda med detta. Ledarna som delar ledarskapet upplever att omgivningen är nyfikna på det delade ledarskapet och ser många fördelar i det. Vi tror att det delade ledarskapet kommer att öka i omfattning då ledarskapet idag är komplext, förändringstakten i samhället har ökat och att då vara ensam ledare sliter. Delad börda är hälften så tung.</p> / <p>The purpose of this study was to examine shared leadership from a management and employee perspective of a government aistration. We wanted answers to how the leaders work together and divide the tasks among themselves and how the employees experience this. We also examined how communication experienced by parties involved. Our method to achieve this have been qualitative with the inductive approach in which we survey questions to both leaders as a selection of group employees, received answers to questions concerning trust and labor division, and how communication works. The responses from the respondents give a coherent picture of that it works very well. This image is also of the employee survey conducted in the organization in December 2008. We note that the biggest difference with shared leadership, compared with traditional leadership is that they are two leaders. In our investigated group of respondents replied that shared leadership is an advantage mainly for leaders, as they can juggle issues and support each other and that a prerequisite for success is that the interaction between the leaders work, which we have received indications that it is in our investigated group. Concern that a divided leadership would be seen as unclear was not true. Employees were split between the leaders of performance review etc and all seem satisfied with this. The leaders who share the leadership experience that environment is curious about the shared leadership and sees many benefits in it. We believe that the shared leadership will grow in scale as the leadership today is complex, the pace of change in society has increased and to be sole leader rips. Shared burden is half as heavy.</p>

<p>Background: A constant market pressure on companies to increase their competitiveness has compelled managers to explore business models outside of the traditional ones. The Shared Service Center (SSC) forms part of these untried models, and can be seen as a hybrid. When it comes to its management control, the research is scarce, and hence, there are no obvious paths to follow when it comes to the designing and use of management control systems in such organizations. </p><p>Purpose: The purpose of this thesis is to describe the design of the management control system in a SSC, and further to analyze the underlying reasons for its outlining. </p><p>Demarcation: The study is limited to the investigation of the SSCs of Electrolux, SKF and Volvo. Moreover, the problem is highlighted from the perspective of the SSC management. </p><p>Realization: In the form of a case study, the thesis was realized through the undertaking of four interviews with individuals in the SSCs’ respective management or its close surrounding. </p><p>Results: Sprung out of the process orientation, SSCs in their management control primarily focus on customers, process improvement and people. In their striving to obtain cost reduction and service quality, several control tools are used, the choice of which depends on variables such as organizational structure, external environment, technology and strategy.</p>

<p>In the paper different views on the question of world government and world governance are presented. I take the position that only a <em>democratic</em> world government is a desirable political goal, as it is only possible to promote individual autonomy consequently solving global problems. While accepting that there could be different answers to this condition, I analyze three approaches to the subject by Tannajo, Nielsen and Held and argue that shared sovereignty within a world federation defined by a democratic global constitution is a necessary condtion to call a world order a democratic one.</p>

<p>Wireless On-board diagnostics functionality, which is a future outlook to vehicle system </p><p>parameter analysis, enables measurements and controlling without the limitation of a physical </p><p>connector. Today every vehicle must by law provide the possibility to analyze engine and </p><p>emission related parameters (OBD II). The wireless connection requires a high security level </p><p>to prevent unauthorized communication establishment with the truck’s bus system. The aim </p><p>of the project is to make a survey of the available security mechanisms and to find the most </p><p>promising solutions. Furthermore, several usage scenarios and access right levels are </p><p>specified and a risk analysis of the whole system is made. The greatest challenge is the </p><p>specification and implementation of a proper key-exchange mechanism between the analyzing </p><p>device and the truck’s bus system, which is therefore carried out with the highest possible </p><p>level of awareness. Consequently several different concepts have been formulated based on </p><p>the different usage scenarios.</p>