Successful approaches for implementing additive manufacturing
| Published date | 08 April 2020 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/WJEMSD-12-2019-0100 |
| Pages | 131-148 |
| Date | 08 April 2020 |
| Author | Robert Martens,Susan K. Fan,Rocky J. Dwyer |
| Subject Matter | Strategy,Business ethics,Sustainability |
Successful approaches for
implementing
additive manufacturing
Robert Martens
Rotterdam Business School, Rotterdam University of Applied Science, Dordrecht,
Netherlands, and
Susan K. Fan and Rocky J. Dwyer
College of Management and Technology, Walden University, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, USA
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this qualitative, multiple-case study was to explore the successful strategies that
managers of light and high-tech small and medium-sized manufacturing companies in the Netherlands, use to
adopt additive manufacturing (AM) technology into their business models.
Design/methodology/approach –A qualitative, multiple-case study approach was used. The participants
for this study consisted of executive-level managers of light and high-tech manufacturing companies in the
Netherlands. Company documents were studied, and individual interviews were undertaken with participants
to gain an understanding of the strategies they used to adopt AM technology into their business models.
Findings –Three significant themes emerged from the data analysis: identify business opportunities for AM
technology, experiment with AM technology and embed AM technology.
Research limitations/implications –The findings of this study could be of advantage to industry leaders
and manufacturing managers who are contemplating to adopt AM in their business models.
Originality/value –This study may contribute to the further proliferation of AM technology. Industry
leaders may also gain a clearer understanding of the effects of 3DP on local employment. The results of the
study may also work as a catalyst for increased awareness for manufacturing firm leaders who have not yet
considered the opportunities and threats AM technology presents to their organizations.
Keywords Additive manufacturing, 3D printing, Innovation adoption, Disruptive innovation, Supply chain
management
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Hull (2015) invented additive manufacturing (AM) in 1983. In the United States, the
automotive and aviation industries were early adopters of this innovative technology. After
essential patents expired in the 2000s, new companies selling AM equipment emerged rapidly
(Yeh, 2014). AM technology builds items layer by layer, thereby enabling design freedom and
supporting the production of customized products in small series (Gibson et al., 2015).
Uncoupling design and production enable local production that may lead to the rise of
advanced business models and supply chains. Products made using AM may be lighter or
even stronger than products created with traditional manufacturing processes (Thomas and
Gilbert, 2014). Moreover, items produced with AM enhance sustainability (Mani et al., 2014;
Thiesse et al., 2015) as they can be designed lighter, produced locally and require fewer
natural resources (Despeisse and Ford, 2015). These phenomena have the characteristics of a
disruptive innovation that may affect existing marketplaces but also may offer new
opportunities through innovative business models (Amshoff et al., 2015).
Implementing
additive
manufacturing
131
The authors would like to thank Dr Robert Martens for providing the seminal research, which
significantly contributed to development of the paper.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/2042-5961.htm
Received 28 December 2019
Revised 29 February 2020
Accepted 9 March 2020
World Journal of
Entrepreneurship, Management
and Sustainable Development
Vol. 16 No. 2, 2020
pp. 131-148
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2042-5961
DOI 10.1108/WJEM SD-12-2019-010 0
Research methodology/design
A research design outlines the framework for the main components of a study: what to ask,
which data to collect, and how to evaluate this data (Yin, 2018). With the qualitative research
approach, the most common designs are case studies, phenomenology or narrative inquiry
(Collis and Hussey, 2014;Dixon, 2015;McNulty et al., 2013). An exploratory multiple-case
study is a suitable research design to explore a phenomenon (Dixon, 2015;Houghton et al.,
2013;Yin, 2018). In this study, the researcher attempted to answer how or what questions on a
complex contemporary phenomenon. Cronin (2014) argued that using case studies generates
a wealth of experience and allows readers to view the study through the eyes of the
researcher, thereby creating more acceptance of the research conducted. A method to increase
the validity of a study is methodological triangulation by data saturation. Data saturation
originates from grounded theory, but it also applies to case studies (Cleary et al., 2014). When
researchers obtain sufficient information for their study to be replicated and no additional
information can be acquired, they achieve data saturation (Fusch and Ness, 2015;Houghton
et al., 2013;Robinson, 2014). Saturated data consist of information that is both rich, meaning
high quality and thick, meaning large quantity (Fusch and Ness, 2015).
Purposeful sampling was used for this study. Elo et al. (2014) and Kaczynski et al. (2014)
indicated that no set rules exist to decide the sample size for a case study. Ishak and Abu
Bakar (2014) argued that purposeful sampling is appropriate when researchers: (1) wish to
select particularly interesting cases, (2) want to include members of specialist groups and
(3) wish to select specific case types to study more intensely.
Based on the principles of purposeful sampling, a sample size of four participants was
used, each one from four different companies. Yin (2018) argued that sample sizes of two or
three are adequate for multiple-case studies where no utmost certainty is required. By
interviewing four participants and reviewing documents such as business plans, reports,
meeting minutes, memos, e-mails, organizational charts or market surveys, data saturation
was expected to be achieved. However, interviewing more participants and reviewing more
documents continued until no new information emerged. In case studies, obtaining quality
data through rich description is more important than acquiring thick data through larger size
populations (Morse, 2015;Palinkas et al., 2015).
The target population consisted of senior-level executives with comprehensive expertise
in the subject area within different light and high-tech manufacturing companies in the
Netherlands. In addition, methodological triangulation was used to ameliorate the validity of
the research findings from various sources, which included semistructured interviews,
company documents, a review of publicly available data and internal and external websites.
Atlas.ti was used as QDAS to assist in the organization, assessment, querying, matching and
explanation of the collected data to develop themes.
Conceptual framework
In 1997, Christensen introduced the disruptive technology theory, later relabeled the
disruptive innovation theory (Christensen, 2006). In this theory, Christensen (2016) described
a process where at first, people use innovative products or services in uncomplicated
situations outside the mainstream application. Next, the disruptive innovators take over the
existing market and, in the end, force incumbent companies out (Christensen, 2016). Often,
disruptive technologies initially perform less well than current technologies (Christensen,
2016). Novel technologies attract first users because of their distinctive features, such as more
natural use or convenience, cost, smaller or more flexible than existing technologies
(Christensen, 2016). Usually, incumbent firms’most profitable clients are initially not
interested in these innovations, so, as a result, disrupters can test their innovative
technologies in smaller markets that existing companies tend to ignore (Christensen, 2016).
Slowly, the novel technology improves, in performance or price, until demands of
WJEMSD
16,2
132
To continue reading
Request your trial