by Pankaj CHANDRA* and Mihkel TOMBAK** N° 90/61!TM

"MODELS FOR THE EVALUATION OF
MANUFACTURING FLEXIBILITY"
by
Pankaj CHANDRA*
and
Mihkel TOMBAK**
N° 90/61!TM
*
Faculty of Management, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
** Assistant Professor of Production and Operations Management, INSEAD, Boulevard de
Constance, Fontainebleau, 77305 Cedex, France.
Printed at INSEAD
Fontainebleau, France
MODELS FOR THE EVALUATION OF
MANUFACTURING FLEXIBILITY
Pankaj Chandra
Mihkel M. Tornbak
August 14. 1990
'Of the Faculty of Management, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, and Dept. of
Technology Management, INSEAD, Fontainebleau, France, respectively. This research was
supported by NSERC grant number OGP0042150, and INSEAD research grant number
2172.
Abstract
We present models by which flexibility for a manufacturing system can be
asessed. These models enable a manager to compare different systems with respect to certain flexibility types. These models reflect the view that the flexibility
of a system is a function of the technology as well as how well the system is managed.
Two of the most fundamental types of flexibility, routing and machine flexibility,
are examined. The efficacy of the met.hods are shown through numerical examples.
1 Introduction
Flexibility, along with cost, quality and service is an important aspect of manufacturing strategy (Wheelwright, 1986). Throughout most of the industrial era a
great deal of attention was focused on the cost component in production. In the
1970's and 1980's, as a result of increased Japanese competitiveness, quality was
the factor which came into the limelight. Now, with product life cycles becoming
more compressed, firms are looking for a way of extending the design life of their
plant in order to get more from their capital investment. As a result of this change
in the market, together with the advent of new manufacturing technologies referred
to as "flexible manufacturing systems", flexibility is receiving more notice. The aim
of this investigation is to provide methods for the evaluation of certain key types of
production flexibility. Since flexibility is a function of the system layout and operation this will enable managers to compare different manufacturing system designs.
Several researchers have developed alternative taxonomies for manufacturing
flexibility (Mandelbaum, 1978; Buzacott, 1982; Zelenovic, 1982; Browne, et. al.,
1984; Jaikumar, 1984; and Swarnidass, 1988). We make use of the terminology
proposed by Browne et. al. and develop measures for certain types of flexibility
described therein. In only three studies have measures of flexibility been developed
(Chatterjee, et. al., 1984, Graves, 1988, and Kumar, 1987). For a survey of flexibility in manufacturing see Gupta and Goyal (1989) and Sethi and Sethi (1990).
Browne et. al.'s taxonomy breaks flexibility down into eight classes: routing.
machine, process, product, volume, expansion, operation, and production flexibility.
Routing flexibility gives the system the capability to continue producing a given set.
of parts despite machine breakdown. Machine flexibility is the ability to easily make
changes to a given set of parts. Browne et. al. state that process and product flexibility are dependent on machine flexibility. They also assert that volume, expansion
and operation flexibility are dependent on routing flexibility (production flexibility
being a functioin of all the other seven types). Thus, the natural starting points to
develop evaluation procedures for manufacturing flexibility would be routing and
machine flexibility.
Chatterjee et. al. offered four different measures for routing flexibility. These
measures were: (i) the cardinality of the set of routings, (ii) the ratio of the number
of module centers capable of carrying out an operation on a certain part to the total
1
number of module centers, (iii) the number of alternative paths within a module
center, and (iv) the possible trajectories through the module centers. An important
consideration ignored in these measures is the reliability of machines that make up
the system, i.e. if a particular machine has broken down the routes going through
that machine do not add to the flexibility of the system. Another factor neglected in
their measures was that of machine capacities, as machines with differing capacities
are weighted equally under their framework. The measure that we propose takes
both of these factors into account.
Graves (1988) provides a measure for what he calls rate flexibility (Browne et.
al.'s volume flexibility) as the ratio of the slack in production capacity normaliy
available to the variablility in the demand process. He then develops a relationship
of this flexibility measure with the inventory base stock level. This measure is for
a given product mix. Jaikumar (1984) argues that flexibility should be defined
over a given family of part types since an FMS is designed in that fashion. Once
the family is chosen (which is difficult since it should be viable in the long run)
the flexibility has to be defined within that domain. Our procedure also assumes
a given part mix, although we seek to appraise different types of flexibility than
Graves. Kumar (1987) suggests that entropy (a concept used in thermodynamics
reflecting randomness or uncertainty in the system) may be a suitable measure of
However, we demonstrate situations in §2.1 in which this approach is not
appropriat e.
These measures of manufacturing flexibility (cardinality of the route set, rate
flexibility, and entropy) are difficult for managers to interpret. This, in turn, creates
complications for managing a production facility to attain flexibility. An empirical survey revealed that, "As of mid-1983, no FMS installation in the U.S. was
being managed for flexibility" (Bessant and Haywood, 1986). This implies that
those who were managing the aforementioned FMS facilities were not aware of the
benefits of manufacturing flexibility. Our procedure demonstrates how operations
performance can translate into economic measures relevant for managers. In §2
we outline our proposed method for evaluating routing flexibility, in §3 we discuss
machine flexibility, and in §4 we present our conclusions.
2
2 Routing Flexibility
In this section we propose a method for appraising routing flexibility. As defined
by Browne et. al., routing flexibility is exhibited when machines breakdown, as
a result we incorporate the reliability of machines in our models. The system
design consists of machine centers and the materials handling system. The design
specification includes the reliability of the different machines, their capacities for
the each part type, and the precedence relationships. Reliability is defined as the
probability that the machine is capable of performing an operation at a given time.
Capacity is defined as the total number of units of a part type a machine can process
in a given block of time. The procedure results in the computation of an expected
maximal cashflow for a given production system design and product mix which we
propose as an economic measure representing routing flexibility. We first present
the proposed procedure for the computation of the measure and then provide an
example and explain its relevante.
Consider a manufacturing system consisting of a number of machining centers
and a materials transfer system. This network can be represented by a random,
planar graph where the vertices (machining centers) are subject to failure. We
assume that the failures are independent. Models for the expected flow in networks
subject to arc failure are provided in Aneja and Nair (1980, 1982) and Wallace
(1987).
We define the following parameters and variables:
• i is the index of the part type; i = 1,
• k is the index for machine type; k = 1,
, m.
, n.
• h is the index of an elementary path from the load to the unload station;
h = 1,
,H.
• i, k is the time required to process one unit of part i on machine k.
• Tk
is the total number of hours available for processing at machine k.
• pi, is the probability that machine k is operating at a given point in time.
• b,kh is a zero-one parameter which if equa1 to one indicates that product i can
be produced on machine k on path h.
3
• adk is the element of the arc-incidence matrix for product i indicating a con-
nection between machine 1 and k. The element is one if a connection exists
and zero otherwise.
• ci is the contribution margin of part type i.
• d, is the minimum demand that must be satisfied for each part type i.
• x,h is the flow of part i on path h.
The performance measure to reflect the routing flexibility (RF) of the manufacturing system should combine both the cardinality of the route set and the reliability
of the system. The measure we propose is the maximum expected contribution of
the system. Such a measure translates operational differences of systems into financial terms which would be of greater use to managers evaluating various designs.
This measure can be computed by one of the following mathematical programming
models. The first model is formulated by considering flows over a given path as the
decision variable while the second model considers the flow between t.wo machines.
Path Formulation
RF = M AX E E ci • Xih
i
h
Subject to:
tik
E E
• X ih
i hlb,kh=1 Pk
Eh Xih
X ih
< Tk v
k
(1.1)
> d, v i
(1.2)
> 0
V i,h (1.3)
(1.1) is the capacity constraint for each machine given the reliability of that machine. 1.1
is the expected amount of time to process part i on machine k. Constraint
Pad
(1.2) ensures that certain minimal demand conditions are satisfied. This formulation involves n + constraints and m .(1 + EZ.:i k!Ckn-2 ) variables in the worst case
(i.e. when the machine network is totally connected). Hence this formulation is
preferred when the network is sparse.
4
An alternative formulation is one which centers around the machine. In addition
to the previously defined variables we specify a new variable yak to be the flow of
part i from machine I to machine k.
Machine Formulation
EEci.yiin
RF = MAX
Subject to:
E
l i a ta
E
Yslk
=1
0
Wel =
V
k,i (2.1)
lia,tà=1
EE
=1
tir
5
Tk
k (2.2)
Pk
E
y, i,
>
d,
V
i (2.3)
4,1,=1
ydb. >
0 V
i,l,k
(2.4)
where n is the index for the unload station. Constraints (2.2) and (2.3) are equivaient to constraints (1.1) and (1.2), respectively. Constraint (2.1) is introduced in
this formulation to ensure the balance of flows, i.e. the number of units flowing
into a machine is equal to the number of units flowing out from a machine. This
formulation lias in it s worst case n•rn 2 variables and rz•m+n+m constraints. Consequently this formulation is preferred when the network is dense. Both of the above
formulations are LP models which can be solved using a standard simplex code as
is done in the example in the following section.
From bot.h of the above models it is clear that with increasing reliability (p's)
and capacity (T's) of the components in the system, the expected thruput of the
system is nondecreasing. We now give an example to illustrate the evaluation of
this flexibilit• measure.
2.1 An example
Let us use the procedure of the previous section to evaluate the following two
manufacturing system designs. The first system has two machines and load and
unload stations (Figure 1) while, the second differs in that it has a third machine
5
(Figure 2) and the reliability of the machines are different. Let Tk = 300 time units
Vk, d 1 = d2 = 10 units with the part types having the following characteristics:
Part
1
2
P rocessing Times (t,k)
M1 M2
Contribution (c,)
M3
3.3 3.5
4.5
3.5
3.5 3.4
4.9
4.0
The systems are illustrated in the following two figures, where the reliability of
the machines (pk V k) are the numbers in parentheses (i.e. the probability that
machine M1 is operating at a given point in time is 0.9 while for machine M2 it is
0.95).
(0.9)
Figure 1 - Sample System Design No. 1
6
The routes for each part type in this system are:
1. L - M1 - U
2. L - M2 - U
This system yields an optimal expected contribution of 641.2 with 10 units of part
1 processed on machine 1, 67.71 units of part type 2 being processed on machine 1
and 83.82 units processed on machine 2. The design of the second system is,
(0.6)
Figure 2 - Semple System Design No. 2
The routes for each part type in this system are:
1. L - M1 - U
2. L - M2 - U
3. L - M3 - U
This system yields a lower optimal expected contribution of 551.9 with 10 units of
part type 1 being processed on M3 and the processing of part type 2 being spread
out on all three machines (M1 producing 51.4 units, M2 producing 44.1 units, and
M3 producing 33.7 units).
7
It is clear from the above example, that the cardinality of the route set is insufficient for appraising a value of flexibility. In the example, System No. 2 has a
greater number of alternative routes (a higher cardinality of the route set) but is less
preferable. Thus, reliability must be incorporated along with the number of routes
in the evaluation of a manufacturing system. One could examine the possibility of
adding more machines on to the first network by using the method described in
Wallace (1987).
It can also be shown from the examples that the entropy measures of Kumar
(1987) are inadequate. His first measure (–Eh phIn(ph) where ph represents the
proportion of the total flow along path h) for the first sample system would give
a value of 0.688, and for the second design a value of 1.07. Thus, by this measure
the second system would again seem preferable. This is clearly driven by Kumar's
assumption that an essential feature of these measures is that they be monotonically
increasing with the number of paths (and consequently has the same characteristics
as the approach given by Chatterjee et. al.).
Increasing reliability, however, does not always imply an increase in contribution
as the analysis of a more complex machine network illustrates. Let Tic = 300 time
units Vk,
d2 = 10 units with the part types having the following characteristics:
Part
1
2
P rocessing Times (ik
M1 M2 M3
M4
3.3 3.5 4.5
3.8
3.5 3.4 4.9
3.9
8
Contribution (c,)
3.5
4.0
(0.6)
(0.7)
Unloadi
Load
Figure 3 - Sample System Design No. 3
The routes for each part type in this system are:
1. L-M1-M3- U
2. L - M2 - M4 - U
3. L - M2 - M3 - U
The optimal solution in this system yields an RF of 346.16 with 10 units of part 1
produced on route 1 and 33.67 and 44.11 units of part 2 produced on routes 1 and
2, respectively. In this system M2 and M3 are bottlenecks, so that increasing the
reliability of any one of those machines would yield an increased contribution. If
the reliability of M2 were increased, there would initially be an increase in RF, but
beyond 0.52, M4 becomes a bottleneck and any further increase in reliability of M2
brings no added contribution. Thus the RF line for System 3 in Figure 4 becomes
flat.
9
RF
500
System 3
400
300
200
100
0.1 0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Reliability of M2
FIGURE 4 - RF vs. Reliability of M2
As can be seen from Figure 4, for any given reliability of M2 system 2 generates
more contribution than either system 1 or 3. Thus, system design No. 2 stochastically dominates both system designs 1 and 3. With equal machine reliabilities
stochastic domination provides a clear indication of the superior performance of
one design over another. Stochastic domination, however, may not always be attainable. For example, if we increased the reliabilities of machines in system 3 we
could obtain a situation where initially RF is greater in system 3 than 1, but as the
reliability of M2 increases RF of system 3 goes below that of design 1.
It is also evident that for the same reliability the value of flexibility for different
designs will be affected by the capacities of the machines. For example, System
No.1 could stochastically dominate System No. 2 if the Tk 's for design No. 1-were
raised sufficiently.
10
3 Machine Flexibility
Machine flexibility (according to Browne et. al.) is dependent on the Base with
which one can make changes in order to produce a given set of part types. One
possible measure of this form of flexibility could be the time taken to set up the
machine to perform some operation on a different part type. DeGroote (1988) has
shown that with a decrease in set up time the scope of product designs produced
efficiently increases, thus demonstrating (as Browne et. al. anticipated) how product flexibility is dependent on machine fiexibility. Rafler and Tombak (1990) have
shown the market conditions under which this type of flexibility is desireable. In
this section we propose a measure by which alternative manufacturing systems can
be evaluated with respect to machine flexibility. Since machine flexibility is not
only built into the design of the system but is also a function of how the system is
managed, our measure can also be used for control of operations.
Sethi and Sethi (1990) point to "numerical control, easily accessible programs,
automatic tool changing ability, sophisticated part loading devices, size of the tool
magazine, standardized tools, number of axes, etc." as sources of machine flexibility.
Browne et. al. suggest that the appropriate measure for machine flexibility is the
time required to: replace worn-out or broken cutting tools, to change tools in a tool
magazine, t.o assemble or mount the new fixtures required, prepare cutting tools,
position the part, and changeover the numerical control program. We have choosen
t.o concentrate on the time required to change tools in a tool magazine, the lime
required to change the tool in the machine when the tool is in the magazine, and
the time required to assemble or mount the new fixtures required. We do so because
we believe that these factors are the most significant portion of set up time in many
cases.
In order to derive a model to evaluate machine fiexibility let us define the following:
j are indices for part types; i = 1, ... ,m; j = 1, , m.
• q is the maximum number of too:s that can fit in a tool magazine
•
is the time to position the tool in the machine from the tool magazine
if the tool for part j is diffèrent from that of part i (this assumes that each
tool can be picked from the tool magazine in the same amount of time), also
v,, = 0 if the tool for part j is the same as that for part i.
11
• u„ is the time to change the fixture if the fixture for part j is different from
that of part i
• s is the time required to change a tool in the tool magazine (this is considered
the sanie for all tools since it involves picking, placing, and returning tools to
the same location).
•
1 if part i requires tool r
0 otherwise
=
•
zij
1 if part i precedes part j on the machine
- 0 otherwise
•
Y')
f 0 if bi, = 1 and b„,. = 1 for any r E Y
1 1 otherwise
where Y is the set of tools in the tool magazine since the last tool change.
In order to find the minimum set up time for a given manufacturing system and a
given part mix one must solve the following mathematical program. We assume that
the tool changing time is the same for all tools but the fixture changing time may be
different for each part. This is based on observations of many FMSs where the tool
size and shapes do not vary as considerably as the part geometry. Assuming that
the machines were incapable of changing fixtures and tools simultaneously machine
flexibility (MF)can be evaluated using the following nonlinear integer programming
model.
MF = MINE
Subject to:
E
Vii • zji
E E
EE
Ujj • Zij .5 •
EE
ij •
(3.0A)
m — 1 (3.1)
j
Yij Zji
E (0,1)
V i, j (3.2)
The first term in the objective function is the tool positioning time, the second
terni is the fixture positioning time, and the third term is the time required for
12
tool interchanges. For (3.0 A), (E, E ) yij •z,j ) gives the number of distinct tool
interchanges. The implicit assumption for this formulation of the objective function
is that a certain amount of time is taken for each tool change. This is true of systems
which have a large central magazine from which tools travel back and forth and it
is not economical to have large local tool magazines. The constraint (3.1) forces
one to schedule m parts for production.
Note that Y is dynamic and changes with each reconfiguration of the tool magazine. This reconfiguration is done by placing the next q tools demanded by the
forthcoming part sequence in the tool magazine.
If the machines are capable of making tool and fixture changes in parallel, then
objective function in the above model would be:
MAX (MIN(
E E • 2-tj
- )
• .1.1
i
MIN(s bi' (1 l'fr)zy ))
(3.0B)
j
The use of b - (1-1
b ' ) '" in (3.0 B) implies that there is a set up each time the tool
9
magazine is exhausted and that the parts are sequenced in the order of tool usage.
The evaluation of machine flexiblity requires the simultaneous determination of
both the part sequence and the sequence of tools. In order to focus on the set
up times associated with machine characteristics (as discussed above) and to make
our analysis tractable we assume that the sequence of parts is given. This is not
unrealistic since due dates are often exogenously given to the operations manager.
Simple heuristics can be used to solve the above problem. If both the time
required to change tools in the magazine and the time to change the tool in the
machine dominat es over the time to change fixture, a reasonable heuristic would be
to group the parts by tool used. If, conversely, the fixture changing time dominates,
the parts could be grouped by fixture utilized.
3.1 An example
Say u i; = 1 V i j and 0 otherwise, and let s = 10, q = 2, and m = 4. Also let
v,, = 1 if the tool for part i is diffèrent from part j and 0 otherwise. The resulting
problem formulation using (3.0A) is
MIN
E E( Zii vij •
+
i i
10 • E E yi; • zij
i iei
13
Subject to:
E zi; _ 3
E (0,1) V i,j (3.1)
Let the sequence in which the parts are to be processed be 1, 2, 3, 4 with tools
required being A, B, C, and B, respectively. Hence the v v s are as given in the
following matrix:
0 1 1 1
1 0 1 0
1 1 0 1
1 0 1 0
where, for example, th 2 = 1 since the tool for part 1 is A and the tool for part 2 is
B, thus setting up the machine for part 2 involves a tool change. Assuming that the
fixture and tool required by the first part is already in place the above expression
is then reduced to:
MIN
{6 + 10 • (Y22 + Y23 + Y34)}"
This minimization involves choosing which tools belong in the magazine at a particular state in production. We know that, b iA re b2B = b3B = b 4c = 1 with ail other
= 0. Let the initial configuration of the tool magazine contain tools A and B,
i.e. let. Y = {A, B}. Then, y12 = 0 since 61 ,4 = b 2B = 1. In order to process part. 3
we need to reconfigure the tool magazine since it does not contain tool C. Y is reset
to Y = {B,C} since tools B and C are the next two tools required. Then y 23 = 1,
since b2B = 1 but 634 = b3B = 0 , and y34 = 0, since bac = b4B = 1. The result is
one tool change removing tool A and replacing it with tool C at a cost of s. The
objective function value, MF, would then be 16. A better solution would be the
sequence 1, 2, 4, 3, which has the same number of tool changes to the tool magazine
(one), yet fewer tool changes to the machine (two instead of three), yielding an MF
of 15.
In the above models we have used set up times as a surrogate measure for evaluating the effort required to make the necessary changes to produce a given set
of parts. This allows for the comparison of various manufacturing system designs
which are capable of producing the same part mix. The models also give the capability of measuring the effort involved in producing varions sets of parts with the
saine production system. In such a case the model must be solved for each set
of parts. Thus these models could be applied to the allocation of sets of parts to
varions plants.
14
4 Conclusion
We have provided several models for the evaluation of alternative manufacturing
system designs with respect to routing and machine flexibility. These models facilitate the design/technology choice process by providing a link between operational
performance and economic implications.
We present two models by which routing flexibilty can be assessed. The resulting
measure is the maximum contribution in monetary terms which is easily interpreted.
These models incorporate factors such as reliability of the machines and the capacity
available for production. Machine fiexibility is assessed by the minimum set up time
required to produce a given set of parts. The utility of this measure could be seen
in choosing a design or in deciding the portfolio of part types to be produced on a
given system. This measure clearly shows that flexibility is a function of operational
considerations such as sequencing of parts and the positioning of tools. It also shows
what impact such operational decisions have on the plant finances.
Clearly further work is required to strengthen the link between operational measures of a manufacturing system and the corresponding impact on a firm's financial
status. hout models defining such links managers will continue to have difficulty
assessing investments which contribute to a firm's manufacturing flexibility. Operational measures of the other types manufacturing flexibility eg. process, product.,
volume, etc.. also need to be developed. Finally. relationships between the different
types of fiexibility need to be more clearly established.
15
References
Aneja, Y., and K. Nair, 1980. "Maximal expected flow in a network subject to arc
failures", Networks, Vol. 10, pp. 45-57.
Aneja, Y., and K. Nair, 1982. "Multicommodity network flows with probabilistic
losses", Management Science, Vol. 28, No. 9 (September), pp. 1080-1086.
Bessant, J., and B. Haywood, 1986, "Flexibility in Manufacturing Systems", OMEGA,
14, No. 6, pp. 465-473.
Browne, J., D. Dubois, K. Rathmill, S. Sethi, and K. Stecke, 1984. "Classification
of flexible manufacturing systems", The FMS Magazine, April, pp. 114-117.
Buzacott, J., 1982. "The fundamental principles of flexibility in manufacturing
systems", Proceedings of Me lst International Conference on Flexible Manufacturing
Systems, Brighton, U.K., (20- 22 October).
Chatterjee. A.. M. Cohen, W. Maxwell, 1984. "Manufacturing flexibility: Models
and measurements", Prodceedings of Me 2nd International Conference on Flexible
Manufacturing Systems, Detroit, MI.
DeGroote, X., 1988. "The manufacturing/marketing interface", Wharton Decision
Sciences Working Paper No. 88-09-06.
Gupta, Y.P., and S. Goyal, " Flexibility of Manufacturing Systems: Concepts and
Measurements", European Journal of Operational Research, 43, pp. 119-135.
Jaikumar, R., 1984. "Flexible manufacturing systems: A managerial perspective",
Harvard Business School Working Paper.
Kumar, V., 1987. "Entropic measures of manufacturing flexibility", International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 25, No. 7, pp 957-966.
Mandelbaum, M., 1978. "Flexibility in decision making: an exploration and unification", Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. of Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto,
Ontario, Canada.
11511er L-H. and M. Tombak, 1990. "Strategic choice of flexible production technologies and welfare implications", Journal of Industrial Economics, XXXVII, No.
4 (June), pp. 417-431.
Sethi, A., and S. Sethi, 1990, "Flexibility in manufacturing: A Survey", forthcoming
in: International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems.
16
Swamidass, P., 1988. "Manufacturing flexibility", Operations Managment Association Monograph No. 2 (Jan.).
Wallace, S., 1987. "Investing in arcs in a network to maximize the expected max
flow", Networks, Vol. 17, pp. 87-103.
Zelenovic, D., 1982. "Flexibility - A condition for effective production systems",
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 319-337 (MayJune).
17
IIMARMAKINMEIZISME5
111r4
86/11
Philippe A. NAERT
and Alain BULTEZ
86112
Roser BETANCOURT
and David GAUTSCHI
April 1986.
S.P. ANDERSON
•Spatial emapetitiesa à le Cannet".
•hm •Lydienne," te •Pinklnnisetien•r
miapeeNjirl elidedishmt *maties rade
affecta prordeffstr.
meneenice d niait Mas", Revised
16101
Arnoul DE MEYER
'The R & D/Production interface".
$6/02
Philippe A. NAERT
Mutai WEVERBER011
•Suldertive estimation M integrating
tenemmientimi budast and amaties
and Guide VERSWUVEL
decisimm: • une ande. lsnuary 1986.
86/14
Charles WALDMAN
"Cempandeen internatieraele dm marial bridas In
tassante", lune 1983.
Michael BRAM
•Speneerthip and the tiffueitie of orgenisational
Innevatier: a prefuninary rieur•
86/15
Mihkel TOMBAK and
Arnaud DE MEYER
"Hem the memserial attitudes ef fines nier
PINS iller from semer manuthaterine lInns:
earvey reenkedune 1986.
86/16
B. Eapen ECKBO end
Henvig M. LANOOHR
L. plume des offre milients. In mie
enfermai« et le eme•W dm inonder& de
«Math dm mciltde.
06/17
David B. IEMISON
"Strate* capaidIty Menefer M arenérithe
Minutiers", May 1986.
86/18
lames TEBOUL
and V. MALLERS!'
"Tema* eperatiend deBodlar ef
servies". 1986.
86/19
Rob R. WElTZ
•Neserathwt a tawdolge-batel
faveratiag adviees•.
86/20
Albert CORHAY.
Gabriel HAWAWINI
and Pierre A. MICHEL
44491•11e: eemensity and sine pestinse,
lune 1986.
Albee CORHAY,
Gabriel A. HAWAWINI
European «in markets", Penny 1986.
R6/I3
86103
$6/04
Spyros MAKRIDAK1S
and Michèle H1BON
•Cenlideare Intervale,: an empirkel
investiestien fer the serins M the M-Compatitian".
86/05
Charles A. WYPLOSZ
nste en the redut-dm ef the werkweek",
luly 1985.
86/04
Frincesee OIAVAll1,
leff R. SHEEN end
Charles A. WYPLOSZ
"The nal an imite rale and Hm fierai
mem& ef a eatend remonte diennere,
Revised version: Fenian 1986.
86/07
Douglas L. MacLACHLAN
and Spyros MAIOUDAKIS
"Jedloweei Mme M ides fent satine
February 1986.
116/40
lord de la TORR/1 and
David H.NEC1CAR
•Parmalliss matirai ridas fer
86/09
Philippe C. HASPISLA011
inienatienal 'pendions', Second Draft: Mach 3.
1986.
"Caneeplardlais the *nt* portereee
dhersilled Berna: the reine and mature ef Me
empan» kellneme primes". Februmy 1986.
86/10
R. MOENART.
Annuel DE MEYER.
J. BARBE and
D. DESCHOOLMEESTER.
and Damien NEVEN
04/21
•Anairin& the Mme temerine
technologies' demalurity".
'The priekte «made eue lie Lanka steak
Itisk-promis se mari M U.S. and
and Pierre A. MICHEL
66/22
Albee CORHAY,
Gabriel A. HAWAWINI
and Pierre A. MICHEL
•Seasomity in the risk-cairn relatienr&ips
sente international evideme", luly 1986.
86/23
Arnaud DE MEYER
•An mderstary Mudy NI the «Migration of
infime« Min» mannfactnrins•,
86/31
Philippe HASPESLAOH
and David JEMISON
•Atenisitionn mythe and redite, July 1986.
16/35
Jean DERMINE
•Mermarins the mark« vaine of a bank, a
July 1986.
86/24
David OAUTSCH1
and Wilde R. RAO
"A molhoriaMsy for apecinution and
asgreption product concept festins",
My 1986.
86/25
H. Pater GRAY
and Ingo WALTER
primer', November 1986.
86/36
Albert CORHAY and
Gabriel H AWAWINI
"Sommally Ibo rielt-rstome
men. Mtenmtiond evidence", July 1986.
David GAUTSCHI and
evolobinn af «Mi«
atome Intermetalion".
"Protection", Muguet 1986.
86/37
Roger BETANCOURT
$6/26
96/27
Barry EICHENOREEN
and Charles WYPLOSZ
Karel COOL
and Immun DIERICIOC
"Tbe montamic comeseemes of the Franc
foinean •, September 1986.
"Nasse, rith-return rektionshipe is
imminem etnutegy: pendu er treuil?•,
October 1986.
86/28
Manfred RETS DB VRIES
and Demy MILLER
"Interpelins afflanhational Mats.
86/29
Manfred KETS DE VRIES
'My Meer the hadar7".
86/38
86/31
Arnaud DE MEYER
Arnold DE MEYER,
NAKANE.
Jeffrey G. MILLER
and Km« FERDOWS
onttanien same: the red 'tory.
"Plnendal innovatins nul ment
ihmelopeonts in the Firme eapll marint•,
Updated: Semember 1916.
86/39
86/10
Manfred KETS DE VRIES
Gabriel HAWAWINI
Gabriel HAWAWINI
Plerve MICHEL
•Ibo pians «tomme elloths on On
11rnmele Melk onciamsof • renemeinatian of
and Albert CORHAY
the «idem", Novernber1986.
Chacun WYPLOSZ
capital Boum ilbendlimilm »d the EMS, a
rmcb parometive•. Dmernber 1916.
86/41
Kami FERDOWS
and Maltant SKINNER
"Manulatterins ln a mn perepeetive,
1986.
• Pledbilityt ibe neut romprai« baffle",
October 1986.
86142
Kaon FERDOWS
and Per LINDBERG
•PMS aI indicalar et mehrturis
obfflese, December 1916.
"Pledbility: the ne« competitive baffle",
Revieed Venins: Marck 1987.
16/13
Demi« NEVEN
Y« en efielnum of Nmillinium in
hote/fing's nyder, November 1916.
86/14 Ingemar DIERICIOC
Carmen MATUTE.%
and Damien NEVEN
86/32
Karel COOL
and Den SCHENDEL
l'adonnante di ferons. mem strate*
meup naembere", October 1986.
86/33
Enlai BALTENSPERGER
and Jean DERMINE
elle robe of public poney ba inondas
fmancial etabBity: • crono-country,
comparative perspective", Angola 1986.
Revieed November 1986.
"'Vains aidai tem end tammtilies",
December 1916.
1987
17/01
Manfred KETS DE VRIES
•Priennere of leadenddp•.
*7/02
87/03
071$1
07/05
07/06
Claude VIALLET
David CIAUTSCIII
end Visitais RAO
'An spirleal ration of international
muet priebe • , November 1986.
*7/15
Spyroe MA/CRIDAKIS
'A naelbodology fer specifitation and
agentgation i product concept testine,
Revised Vernon: Jenuery 1987.
87/16
Susan SCHNEIDER
and Roger DUNBAR
tell .7, lune 1987.
André LAURENT and
Fernando BARTOLOME
'Ampers' cognitive nue fer npwaml and
dovnnvand relatienehipe, lune 1987.
Reinhard ANGEIMAR and
auietoph LIEBSCHER
•Patate and the Empesa Itietechuiegy
bri: a nady of largo European phannaesutical
firme, lune 1987.
*7/19
David BE00 end
Charles WYPLOSZ
'Why the EMS? Dynamite Ore and de
equillbrim paie rugine, May 1987.
T7/20
Spyroe MAKIUDAKIS
'A new approads ft Mattatleal fertertia•,
lune 1987.
87/21
Susan SCHNEIDER
"Strategy Temandedbless Ihe impact ennemi
collnr •, Revimd: Isly 1987.
87/22
Sumo SCHNEIDER
•Connielble lamaient structurel and
nudivotienal conengunces•, Anna 1987.
87123
Roger BETANCOURT
David OAUTSCHI
Sumatra GHOSHAL and
Christopher BARTLEIT
•OrganizIng fer ismovatiews: ose of the
andtinational corporation', Februery 1987.
87/17
Arnold DE MEYER
end Kaon FERDOWS
•Managerial focal points in manuftetering
einem•, Febtuary 1987.
07/111
Anie K. SAIN,
Chrietian PINSON and
Nam* K. MALHOTRA
•Cultswer loyally as a constnet in the
marketing of banian services", July 1986.
Rolf RANZ and
Gabriel HAWAW1NI
Meade peins rd stock mue«
anentaire, Febfuery 1987.
B7/00
Manfred KETS DE VIUES
'leaders Mis tiret manage, Februery 1987.
07/09
Lister VICKERT,
Mort PILIUNOTON
end Paul READ
•Enhepresewrial activities of European
07/07
87/10
André LAURENT
111ETAPORECASTING: Won of Improving
ForeceatIng. Aemsracy and Usefalnese,
May 1987.
°Tabo►« attoopts: what dom the hulguage
MEM% Marat 1987.
'A tubard view of erganiantional change,
Mach 1987
B7/11
Robert FILDES nad
Syros MAKTUD/UCD
"PawastIng and lem Assetions•, Match
1987.
87/12
Fernando BART:NAM
and André LAURENT
"Ife Janea Head: lemming houe the superinr
and onbordinate faces of the nunamer's Joe.
Apeil 1987.
07/13
Sumantra OHOSHAL
and Nitin NOHRIA
•Multinatimed corperatiens as differentiated
sfflorliO, April 1987.
87/14
Lundi. GABEL
•Predert Standards and Cotupetitive
Strategy: An M'Iris of the Principle •. May
1987.
07/24
II7/25
S7/26
'ne dormi Ter rad prulacts and the
bonashotil prodattion ami* rem *wu an
complensentarigr end enhatitntablity".
C.B. DERR end
'Ibo neural end Marra «net
André LAURENT
theeendeal and creaucalbsral perspective,
Sein 1987.
A. K. SAIN,
rolseelnam of MDS canfleamtions
N. K. MALHOTRA and
Christian PINSON
the face of inconeldete date, Marat 1987,
Revised: Italy 1987.
Roger BETANCOURT
end David GAUTSCHI
"Denuend trompemeaaritien, hmehold
production and ratai araortmente, Italy
1987.
87/21
Miami BURDA
els Imre r moka sbortnae in Eerope•,
Auge« 1987.
87/39
Manfred KETS DE VRIES
"The da* dde of CEO anceendoe,
November 1987.
87/28
Gabriel HAWAWINI
•Centreibm lbe interesteste risk of banda
87/40
CUIR«
MATUTES and
Pierre REGIBEAU
"Piedra emeasdbillty and die seepe of
entre, November 1987.
87/41
Gabriel HAWAWINI end
•Sereerity. ire proche and tbe
relationabip between tbe rirk and die retenu
of Freneb comme docks*, November 1987
ne introduction te dorades amines and
imenaniandoe aramides". September 1987.
t7/29
87/30
Soma SCHNEIDER and
Pad SHRIVASTAVA
•Interpretinsi alrategir behevior: basic
asemptions amen in erannisatioes",
September 1987
Jonathan HAMILTON
W. Dentier MACLEOD
and 1. F. TRISSE
"Spatial compeRtion and the Core". Auge«
87/31
Martine QUINZII and
I. F. TRISSE
'On üe eptionality of certnd rimes",
September 1987.
87/33
Arnaud DE MEYER
*Germa. Plomb and Bridai manefecterinsr
Malades Mue different than one Baas",
September 1987.
87/33
Yves DOZ Mid
Amy SHUEN
•A mem frennewerk fer atudydas
87/34
Kano FERDOWS and
Arnoud DE MEYER
Claude VIALLET
87/42
Damien NEVEN and
Jacques-F. TRISSE
"Cenatinias bednental nad vertical
differesdadon: de @dorlote of nias-sain
differestintion", December 1987.
87/43
Jean GABSZEWICZ and
Jacques-F. TRISSE
"Leention", December 1987.
87/44
locution HAMILTON,
lacquerF. TRISSE
and Anita WESKAMP
`Spatial diarimimilent Bertrand vs.
Courant in • needef urbanisa cheire".
December 1987.
87/43
Karel COOL,
•Iledems stridor, roba Medan and
David JEMISON and
Intenter DIERICRX
Yak-rotent reintisardipat a taud
interpolation% December 1987.
Werner DIERICIC7C
•Ami Onk anemeuldien rad santdeabillly
ef compotidire advantage% December 1987.
1987.
couperai» between fines', September 1917.
"%reps» manefarturers: the anearli
templatency. letiebts froc 6.19117
87/46
and Karts COOL.
European naminfacturina Ratures survey".
October 1987.
87135
P. 1. LEDERER end
J. F. TRISSE
•Compeddve Mention en netwerks ander
distrimMatery
September 1987.
*8/01
Michel LAWRENCE and
Spyme MAKRIDAKIS
87136
87/37
87/3/1
Manfred KETS DE VRIES
Lundis LABEL
Susan SCHNEIDER
•Faelese affadis birman' fanera and
confidence intervele, 1•1111/117 1988.
'Primer' ef leadership', Revised version
October 1987.
88/03
Spyros MAICRIDAKIS
•Predktith recarder rd aber ternies
peinas', %mari I988.
"Privadsstion: Its motives nad likely
cessernmeres", October 1987.
88/03
lame. TEBOUL
"Deindeatriallse senke fer mon gte, lenuary
1988.
"Strategy forundaten: the impact of Mimai
culture", October 1987.
88104
Sua« SCHNEIDER
Pladonsi vs. corporal* rdtore: implications
Imam ramure. managemen •, lanuary
1988.
*8/16
Gabriel HAWAWINi
Mn mirer dollar: le Hampe out of
•, lamary 1988.
68/17
Miami BURDA
fer
88/05
Charles WYPLOSZ
de
88/06
88/07
Reinhard ANCELAIAR
"Les melte dam lee maux de
tishilertion", lanuary 1988.
oMM« eflkinary and rode pritiott
internadond «Mense and Impliratisas for
global invendue Mach 1988.
•Monorollstie tonsreddon, tub of
nenboent and de labre« of European
sploymene, September 1987.
88/18
Michael BURDA
•Itellecdons an rame Compliquant" In
Farop •, November 1987, revised Fermi?,
1988.
88/19
Mi. LAWRENCE and
Spyros MAKRIDAKIS
•Inolvédkul Mao lek...mente of
maddeare", Marck 1988.
88/20
Jean DERMINE,
•Fortfeo selortion boy merl Bade, an
annilibdua mode, Mach 1918.
Ingmar DIERICIOC
and Karel COOL
rentrertiv • , lenuary 1988.
811/011
Roinhard ANGELMAR
and Susan SCHNEIDER
"hues in die ready of orrsalzational
rogaltion •, February 1918.
18/09
Bernard SINCLAIRDESCAGNE
' rire fonneso and validai denier dame
biaise February 1918.
11111111
Iman' SINCLAMDESOAGNÉ
.-hostos envase dandard matira
ire fenns", Febmary 1988.
88/21
lames TEBOUL
"Doindulrldise amies
1980 018/03 Ruile.
88/11
Bernord SINCLAIRDESCAON11
•Mea stermary Mute/ as ore ordlibrium
bien Mater: ne siude-rreniat
properte, February 1988.
88/22
Larreendrik RÔLLER
"Power Quendiellidellus lei ta
Aveulira Io AT&T•, May 1987 (Radia
Marck 198111.
88/12
Spyros MA/UUDAJUS
"Beim anns Md mafflu in the 21st
restore, Fsbnary 1918
88/23
Sjur Didrik FLAM
•Errallirat de Narbeaarast dmu h rarreld
ernpdnaduImsenehlssbdoner
88/13
Manfred KETS DB VICES
88/14
Abia NOEL
▪Coameddve advantage: a remue baud
Damien NEVEU and
1.F. THISSE
and Georges ZACCOUR
88/24
B. Barn EC1C110 and
Herrig LANOOHR
• airratadon &dure, mur of Mme
takeover mol& hèle rad Frimas
tender offres la Trame, loly 1985, Shah
•
April 1988.
88/25
Evert« S. OARDNER
and Spyms MAKRIDAKIS
• lbe robre ef forareadre, April 1988.
rd/26
Sjur Dittrik FLAM
"Sentimenreddre Clown« eirdlibrion
multatage eropolies•, April 1988.
the hume of CHO. on the
...pends.", Mach 1988.
18/15
And DBDLAUKAR end
Lars•Hendrik RÔLLER
'The pruhation of and retenu from
inthatrial karinatiso: un er000metric
itnalysis for • oleveloping country. December
1987.
onnie, Marck
lamie ouverte d • furia& rollaridtar,
Mars 1988.
•AledlIqualn i orenalsodund Ife: the
orrarisation man revis:te •, Febnary 1988.
"MW inlarrutesa of straleides: m ready of
fer
end George. ZACCOUR
84/27
88/24
Murupppa KRISHNA/4
Lare-Hendrik RÔLLER
"Tatry lame with rendable eaparity",
Sumatra OHOSHAL and
C. A. BARTLETT
onitInational corporation an a network:
peramedves from interoroanizational
6114/7 • . May 1988.
88/39
Manfred KETS DE VRIES
"Ifs Leader d Mines : abdeal
Reflertioan •, My 1988.
88/40
Jouet LAKONISHOK
The° VERMAELEN
*Amadeu mire Wieder moud
remneene tuer offers", Moud 1981.
88/11
Charles WYPLOSZ
April 1988.
•Aasymetry i Ope 8413: intentimal or
metannier, Mou« 1988.
11/29
Nared K. MALHOTRA,
awiallan PINSON and
Mun K. /MN
"Gnome« cognitive romplenity and dm
ion-, -nallity of atultidianensional «an
118142
48/34
Catherine C. ECKEL
and Theo VERMAELEN
"bu flonelal fanent from Chernoby1:
pereeptlent and remdatory romane", May
1988.
11/31
Sumatra OHOSHAL
Chriatopher BARTLETT
*Cemaina, adeptIon, anal «frima of
Innoreatione by onboidiariat of amdlinatiotud
corporatime, lune 1988.
W32
Kant PERDOWS and
David SACKRIDER
"hatermationd mannfortoring: politise/4
enta for surcem", lune 1988.
88/33
Matkel M. TOMBAK
"111e Importance of lieribility In
raanufarterino•, lune 1988.
88/34
Moltke! M. TOMB«
Medblity: r important drerir
alannfarearkedune 19M.
88/33
Mihkel M. TOMBAC
'A etratecir mir* of inmehnent ln
mannforinries ristenne, luly 19118.
88/M
Vikas IIIIREWALA sud
Bmee BUCHANAN
•A Perdre* Test of the NID Model that
Controls for Non-statiosarite, lune 1988.
88/37
Mu:nappa KRISHNAN
Lars-Hendrik RÔLLER
•Iterdatino hire-Liabolty Compethion T.
"Orominadomi *Memnon in the
tramnaeland enterprie, lune 19M.
88/43
B. SINCLAIR-DESOAONt
'Grum amidon enomet mer limplanal
Bamako rationality", Septembor 1988.
88/44
Emin: MAHMOUD end
Spyros MAKRIDA/CIS
"Ife MM of am art aml fatum iridium
emaldning foremate, September 1988.
88/43
Robert KORAICZYK
and Claude VIALLET
saut pridme. November 1986, reviesd
"Am omphirtdioniadenlim of illerrdarl
Auge« 1988.
88/46
Manfred KETS DB VRIES
Paul EVANS
twelkenratieas", May 1988.
Yves DOZ and
'Tram Meut Io mime« orgeat
Amy SHUEN
frameiverk fer partnerdhlp •, Auge« 1988.
88/47
Main BULTEZ,
Els OUSBRECHTS,
Philippe NAERT and
Net VANDEN ABEELE
*Amman** amis bamum mhellane
leente baud by retallers•. September 1988.
88/48
Miehael BURDA
Itellertleme an 'Wall anomploymene ln
Umm, II•, Amal 1988 revient &member
1988.
88/49
Nadudie DIERKENS
• alionnatien noyer dry ad Mably
leptember 1988.
88/30
Rob WEITZ and
Arnoud DE MEYER
whiammiao ami« maman from brelan
*roue monades', October 1987.
88/31
Rob WEITZ
"Tedmologr, work, and the eriaisatlee:
the import of moere moteme", /n'y 1988.
Improve Wenn', luly 19M.
elle »Aman Rale of Favy A %motte.
Filer i Mfflagelnelgr. APril sg.
88/63
118/51
88/53
Nam SCHNEIDED and
Rehdiand ANOELMAR
Manfied KETS DB VRIES
°Cogailisn Bad organizationd aria
SM% mirbane the none?", September 1988.
'Animer lhappened to the piaompher-
Fernando NASCIMENTO
and Wilfried R.
vANNONACKER
88/61
Kant.. FERDOWS
°Chu/4 *Mak reins fer isiernational
facteriee, December 190.
Arnoud DE MEYER
"Quality lm, technology dons', October 190
idng: the leader% addiction t. power,
September 1988.
88/65
98154
1/a►S5
Lam-Hendrik RÔLLER
and Mihkel M. TOMBAK
Peter BOSSAERTI
and Piero H111.10.4
g
ale* choke of flexible /induction
technologies end wdfare implicatione.
October 19U
Piero MILLION
linemeted portfolios and the violation a
tue randiser malt hymalmain Adntional
empirical evidence and inptication for tests
et omet /ricins modela• , Une 190.
Uni
Wilfried VANDONACKER
and Lydie PRICE
B. SINCLAIR-DESOAONE
and Mâtai M. TOMBAK
1181511
Martin IOLDUPP
and Kami FERDOWS
88/66
88/61
IWO
Lam-Hendrik RÔLLER
Cynthia VAN HUILE,
Theo VERMAELEN and
Paul DE WOUTERS
"A diression af sari nomnares
hdonsation ansymetryt the example of litera
Mid %Our Bodel or the importance af the
sas« stintinni et the lin", December 1988.
88/67
Paul S. ADLER and
Kami FERDOWS
▪
chier lechnelogy affinera, December
1988.
"Dota transferabillIty: meknating ne rumine
affect of Daum 'venin haned on Inamical
»Mg •, October 1918.
89/01
Joyce K. BYRER and
Tanit JELASSI
"Ibo impact seing*. tinerim en DSS
Daine". Item,
•Asseming œmen* inegniatity", November
8913
Louis A. LE BLANC
end Tolet /ELASSI
•DSS mftwere adieliens a melple Misti
*chien mulhedelege, lemary 1989.
Bette H. JONES and
ntiegetishm emport: the offerts oftimpnler
intemention and amati 1nd en bargaiing
senne, /smog 1989.
1988.
"Ibo iMormemeal structure of decidon
89/03
Tawfik IELASSI
mainte: ■ mariol eomparlana approach ta
organnationai choke, November 1988.
Michiel BURDA
Nathalie DIERKENS
' Matha of memsts tees «contingent
char met priciae BI ode , October 1988.
88/S6
' Strate* pattue of differentiated camus
durables ha a dyminde dnopoly: a numerkel
analysle, October 19U.
lis Mamie rosit the /signe Sors
estimais of the Chenard Gate 11 mode.
with US tiot •, September 1988.
89/04
"ModeOng mot sinstare: the Bel System
mente'. November 190.
89/05
lieselation, taos and the matit« for
corporste control in Belgium% September
1988.
Kaon FERDOWS and
Amoud DE MEYER
Manin KILDUFP and
Reinhard ANOELMAR
89/06
Mihkel M. TOMBAK and
B. SINCLAIR-DESGAGNE
'Ladin impniemont ka monnfachning
peelormancs In mann of a mn theary",
January 1919.
•Slareell hiaerry er dure «Nue? The
effets of *se, enitwe, and performance on
institntionatiation in inniated
organization •, boum 1989.
"Coordinating mannfaciarieg and haine«
strategies: l e, February 1989.
89/07
89/08
Damien J. NEVEM
Arnaud DE MEYER and
HeIhnut SCHOTTE
89/09
Damien NEVEM,
Carmen MATUTE!, and
Marcel CORSTJENS
89/111 Netbdie DIERICENS,
Bruno GERARD and
Pierre HIWON
°Structurel alemlnient ln Eurepeen renie
Isanidie. Some rien from industrial
ermaisatIon°, lanuary 1989.
89/18
•Tree in Me ambrant* ef nehmen
and Meir offerte en the menacerai structure
in the European Connemity, Jsnuary 1989.
89/19
•Brand preeferatiaa and eatry deterrence°,
February 1989.
89/20
Wilfried VANHONACIŒR
end Rumen WINER
•A rader. rendent Minier muid st
einice•, Revised Match 1989.
89/21
Arnaud de MEYER end
▪I diome
*A emolost Med appreach ta the vilenie*
ef the amas in place and the mem*
epperbenitise ef the fine •, December 1988.
Srinivasen BAL►KRISHNAN and
Mitchell KOZA
"Infermalisn asymnetry, market Mure ad
jrnst-weeness: !Mary sud evidence•,
Match 1989.
Wilfried VANHONACKER,
Donald LEHMANN end
°C..endidep relent and amuse data in laser
rearanien medeb", Revised Match 1989.
Fereene SULTAN
Kama FERDOWS
.f matarlerhe inprevemen
Putronamee r pselennance°, April 1989.
Manfred Kiffs DE VRIES
and Sydney PERZOW
pricheandyeld• April 1989.
89/23
Robert KOltAJCZYK and
Claude VIALLEF
°Tapie Mt menin Mi the prieMs ef
fente mem. NOM' April 1989.
89/22
•WhatlaOnreMefcharatter In
Manfred 10ETS DE VRIES
end Main NOEL
•Undentandies the leadmetrateay interface:
appentis* ef Me etrategic rebtionship
&Mordue neether, February 1989.
89/12
Wilfried VANHONACKER
Taenatbra enraie reeperree medels when
Me data ma subject te raffermi temporal
neigniatien •January 1989.
89/24
Martin KILDUFP end
Mitchel ABOLAF1A
secW daignant et mater
Ormainatlensi tmellat r triai draina•
zApril 1989.
89/13
Manfred PIM DE VRIES
• lbe hamar indemne: a die:pieds,
89/25
Roger BETANCOURT end
David GAUTSCH1
•Tem ammed chanweerblin ef retall
madone end Meir eznennic cememumes•
Match 1989.
89/26
Charles BEAN.
Edmond MALEMAUD,
Peter BERNHOLZ.
Francesco CHAVAll/
and Marke WYPLOSZ
"Meeremenseeie /Mes far 1993: en
transition end iller", Apte 1989.
David KRACKHARDT end
°Prientithip pattenn end cubera,
attendue: the centrai ef ernanizadenal
ennity*, April 1989.
pismanenen In evandostimal KW, February
1989.
Reinhard ANOELMAR
Tree« imentient • rail fer nanntieve
advautage•, Match 1989.
Min
Reirbard ANOELMAR
nivalleseg a en.% melba imeraden
perfennam •, Match 1989.
89/16
Wilfried VANHONACKER,
°Cembhdai rend and averse data in hum
nprenden made, Felnuary 1989.
89/27
•Chreereet ersaufsationnel et nonne
cullundlem contrastes france-marricaine.
Match 1989.
89/28
Donald LEHMANN and
%mn. SULTAN
89/17
Oillee AMADO,
Claude FAUCHEUX end
André LAURENT
Martin KILDUFF
Menin KILDUFF
°TM Interpereenal etranere ef deciden
.rein: a ucW csiaparben sperme te
ereenisational chaire', Revised April 1989.
89/29
89/30
89/31
89/32
89/33
89/34
89/35
89138
Robert 000E1. and
leen-Claude LARRECHE
ad
Lare-Hendrik ROLLER
*compaties and lairentment ire Fleade
and M'artel M. TOMBAK
Teelmelegiee, May 1989.
Mielres1 C. BURDA and
Stefan OERLACH
Peter HAUO end
Tarrlik lELASSI
Bernard SINCLAPIDESGAGNÉ
Sumatra OHOSHAL and
Nittin NOHRIA
Jean DERMINE and
lemme H1LLION
Martin ICILDUPP
Manfred ms
rel VRIES
89138
Manfred RETS DE VRIES
89/39
Robert KORAICZYK and
Claude VIALLET
89/40
89/41
Bele CHAKRAVARTHY
B. SINCLAIR-DESOAONE
and Nathalie DIERKENS
fer 1992: po dort strennth
89/42
Robert ANSON and
•A dieveimmend frainewerk fer eammenter-
TarrEk /ELASSI
enppertad teenet reeehrtien*, /My 1989.
89/43
Miami BURDA
"A nuée en Béai ante and taverne. bene%
in aquilibeium mmangdomseal", lune 1989.
latertemnameal prima and Ume US trade
balance i durable anode, luly 1989.
89/44
%lep CHARRAVARTHY
and Peler LORANCE
finne•, lune 1989.
'Apolealina and «dundee of a muid«Beria derinlen support system for the
dynanie section of U.S. ananufactarina
89/43
Rob wEnz and
Atimoud DE MEYER
Itfrarmairea minet systems: a framewarit and
rare saide, lune 1989.
locations% May 1989.
89/46
Marcel CORSTIENS,
•Fatry Enersaregeasert*, Mi 1989.
asegraphle tonnage, May 1989.
"Stratesie adaptation fa unalti-baisa
Carmen MATUTES end
Damien NEVEN
*Dada. attelle i monapermirtie
isdnetriee, May 1989.
89/47
Manfred RETS DE VRIEI
and Martine MEAD
nte elsbd chai_ i lenderoldp and
araandratima Yawl tad eautroverdee, April
1989.
89/48
Damien NEVER and
Lat.-Hendrik RÔLLER
• bamper inlesmiles and Inde filme,
Aue« 1989.
89/49
lem DERMINB
num emintry emitraf and archal
marealline, July 1989.
Ise tas d maendsatisnal chaire, May 1989.
89/30
Jean DERMINE
apedallbaslian lof Ineneini inatiludem.
the EF tender. Amena 1919.
•Ife argaisatlead fo* balancine a
leader% balaie, May 1989.
89/31
Spyros MAKRIDAIGS
'Mas dandatient a nem nomma& te dore
taries foraemtlat •, luly 1919.
89/32
Arnaud DE MEYER
•Repiden varlety venus idlared rem:
arammeinst emporattrividen relationships
the M-Forer ergeniudiee, May 1989.
•Depeall rate eau. and the merls« value
ef bealme: The ers of Prame 1971-1981•,
May 1989.
•A dlepuilland apprends te eedal nehreetts:
CIZO Nase, /une 1989.
•A. melte! heelednathan of Ineernatimmed
•Sherlimhe devalipment mie Umm s
mannfarturee's perspective, Aue« 1989.
met prieine, (Revised lune 1989).
"Illnanetement mass for inmevaden and
prodnethim", lune 1989.
"le strate:rie napply of preridene, lune
1989.
89/33
Spyroa MAKRJDARIS
"V/by enadrYaa werhar, luly 1989.
89/54
3. RALAKRISHNAN
and Mitchell KOZA
•Oramehmdm cab and a theam 'U MM
emmure, September 1989.
89/33
H. SCHUITE
ellurambpateme enaperatien in information
technology", Septale« 1989.
89/67
(FIN)
Peter BOSSAERTS and
Pierre HILIJON
"Morisot nderoslrechne efforts g
pamenmaant inerrmatIon i am Foreign
enchonge men • December 1989.
end Lydie PRICE
'On As penclical neefimis of metrantalyids
malts", Septenéer 1989.
Taeiwon KIM.
'Market yen» end the &fusion of
Lare-Hendrik RÔLLER
end Madre! TOMBAK
randtimmanct tatnalogies", september 1989.
90/01
TM/EP/AC
B. SINCLAIR-DESGAGNE
"Untiveidalde Meer
Lara-Hendrik RÔLUIR
and Mitkel TOMBAK
"Strette porta of amble production
kchnoindes", October 1989.
9042
EP
Miclutel BURDA
(EF,T00
Ittonspsilotis Compelltion. CNR M
Adjwatamt, and the Belmvisar of Earepoon
Manufachnins Enaploymenr, humary 1990.
89/39
(OB)
Manfred KETS DE VUES,
Mena ZEVADI.
"Locus of eanbrol and entrepremenrelip: a
thrmstemdry comparative nue, October
1989.
90/03
TM
Arnaud DE MEYER
"Mannimaent of Conmmokation In
Interintimard Reminell and Development",
lanuary 1990.
"Ibo Tronsfernalisitif the Empan
Fbanntial Sanies bintryt Prim
Pi*___—.en N ladapration•, January 1990.
119/36
89/37
89/38
Wilfried VANHONACICER
Main NOEL end
Mihkel TOMBAK
im
89411
(1M)
Enver YUCESAN end
Lee SCHRUBEN
•Slmuladion graphe fer design and mamie of
dIscrehe 'vent ohnidatian models", October
1969.
90/04
FIN/EP
GaMiel HAWAWINI end
Eric RJUENDRA
8941
(AIII)
Sem SCHNEIDER and
Arnoud DE MEYER
•Mterprelinp ad reapeadiai to **kik
salues: The import of national eulenre".
October 1989.
90/03
Gabriel HAWAWINI and
Bertrand 1ACQUILLAT
Arnold DE MEYER
•Tothnnlopy Mutin and haternationd RAD
opersitione, October 1989.
Enver YUCESAN end
•Erpdvaiste of simulations: A empli
approncl •, November 1989.
89/63
(1M)
Lee SCURUBEN
89/64
(TM)
Enver YUCESAN end
Los SCIIRUBEN
'Campin:11y et shauledee modela: A grue
litteretir spnrancr, November 1989.
89/611
Soumit,* DUITA and
Piao BONISSONE
"MARS: A martien and anedtions
reareaing syntem", November 1989.
(TM,
AC, FIN)
89/66
(TM,Er)
B. SINCLAIR-DESOAGNÉ
FIN/EP
January 1990.
"Emme Eger Minehalm Tomei 1992
end Eisend% lame, 1990.
90/06
FIN/EP
Gabriel HAWAWINI and
9047
FIN/EP
Gabriel HAWAWINI
90/08
TM/EP
Tewfik IELASSI end
B. SINCLAIR-DESOAGNÉ
"Modales MOI MCDSS: What Ment
Edda?", larmary 1990.
90/09
EP/FIN
Alberti) GIOVANNINI
end lm WON PARK
"Capital Controls and Internadand Trade
nome, lenuary 1990.
90/10
TM
loyer BRYER end
Tinvtik 1ELASSI
*The /spart of Lm panse Thermies on DSS
Dia1011". lenuary 1990.
Eric RA1ENDRA
"Inétpraden of Emplie Eger Mark*:
hapliestimaa of StrutInnd Champ fer Roy
Market harticipmis te and Boyard 1992",
lenway 1990.
"Slink Modal Amuie and the »Mn et
Finie an the Tally, Stock Enthannee,
lareary 1990.
'On dee reemIntion of prontreneent
November 1989.
A. Ovitirview of Free/une Demis
FIN
Roy SMITH ad
Ingo WALTER
"Retinfignretien ef the Gisiel Sereines
industry M the 1990%•, Febnury 1990.
Methedeleuy fer Fridetion Sensitivity
Annlyeis°,1enuery 1990.
90122
>go WALTER
•Enrayer Phineriel Inburnien
Iii
Impludem fer the United States•, Februery
1990.
90/21
90/1I
TM
Enver YUCESAN
FIN
90/12
Mich»! BURDA
EP
°Structurel Channe, Unemployment Bene%
end He Unemployieent: A U.S.-Europe..
Comprisse, Jenuary 1990.
90/13
TM
Soundtre DUTTA end
Shan SNEXIIAR
90/23
EP/SM
Damien NEVEN
90/24
Lare Tyge NIELSEN
o ndes Poires M CAJT •, lenuery 1990.
90125
F1N/EP
Lare Tyge NIELSEN
•Enneere of EinWheimn M CAM*,
lenuery 1990.
90/26
011/BP
Charles KADUSHIN and
Miami BRIMM
90/27
TM
Abbe. FOROUOHI and
TIWEk IELASSI
•NSS Seledeuefflor Nelolloills
Stimilhe
FihnergY 1990.
90/28
TM
Arnaud DE MEYER
•Ibe Men.-etielep Cellbibldiel .0
Innemnee, Febreery 1990.
90/29
Nathalie DIEJUCENS
•A Dfieneelen of Courut Miment 'f
Infeemoden Paymenetry°, boum 1990.
Lars Tyge NIELSEN
•ni Eipud.d Urne of Pernelhe of
Amers•, Mach 1990.
•Appnenniete Remuais shoot Teeepend
Ceentreints in Red Timm Planeing end
Senreledenuery 1990.
•EEC Inhoretien tem* 1992: Seine
Distribetiend Aspects', Revieed December
1919
FIN/EP
90114
TM
Albert ANOEFIRN end
Hune-lekob LOTIII
•Vbend Inlerodive Modelling and Intelligent
DU: Punies Theory bite Pm-tir •, lanuary
1990.
90n5
TM
Arnaud DE MEYER,
Dirk DESCHOOMBESTER.
Rudy MOENAERT end
len BARBE
Richard LEVICH end
FIN
hep WALTER
9be Inlered Tubule /kid Renewei of.
Peines Uni with • Mature Terbeeieme,
Imam 1990.
"Te-DrIven Reinletery Dru: European
Phimdel Canters in the 1990r • , hum
1990.
90117
PIN
Nathalie DIERKENS
•bdiermotien Asymmetry end &mie Imu&,
Renon lemery 1990.
F1N/AC
Wilfried VANHONACICER
MKT
90119
TM
Bath JONES end
Tenfik /ELASSI
°My neheorhion ME Dulie Bleds and
the Unilingue of Simien Neturke,
Febreary 1990.
libnagenel Deriden Raies mn the
Fainutius ef Dynensie Soles Rumen»
Medele•, Revieed Jimmy 1990.
90/30
FIN/EP
"Ib. Effort of Computer InIerventiee
Tisk Shunt ure en Bergeinins Onlreme,
90/3I
MKT/F,P
David GAUTSCHI and
•91hat Delermime U.S. &tel Moubs•,
Roger BETANCOURT
Febniery 1990.
Sriniveme BAUXR1SHNAN and
ledeuentien Asyrunetry, Adverse &bedon
und bint-Venturem Minou land Endure,
Revieed, leneary 1990.
retenue 1990.
90/32
9001
TM
Tevlik IELASSI,
Gregory KERSTEN and
Stanley ZIONTS
A. Intredurilen to Green Deriden end
Nesetietion Support', February 1990.
SM
90/33
OB
Mitchell KOZA
Cana SIEHL,
David BOWEN and
Chridine PEARSON
9be Rob of Rites of Ineepreden M Service
D'aveu°, Mue 1990.
90/34
FIN/El
Jean DERP40411
•llse Gala houe European Beaddem
Integratiem, ■ Cal fer • PrmArtive
Compila» Tobey", April 1990.
hie Won PARR
Mmes Utseeetainty and the Timm
Varyh• Risk Prenda in the Tem Striarbre
of Neminad laterent Rates •, December 1918,
EP
Raviaed Mareh 1990.
90136
TM
Arnoul DE MEYER
•A. Earpirird Investigation te
Maamfarturkg Strategies in European
Induire, Aptil 1990.
90137
Willima CATS-BARIL
Itaethhe himmatioo Systems: Developiag
Th1/011/SM
9W45
TM
Soinnitre DUTTA end
Piero BONtSSONB
"baggerelina) Che li guai mi Rde lame
Reasealag: The reedbilietle Ceemedg•,
May 1990.
90/46
TM
Sem« MAP3t1DMCIS
"Expeeeellai Segeellist Tic Met et
beige V. end Ler Phutler eu PeelServie rentaethe Attente.
90/47
MET
Lydie PUCE and
Wilfried VANHONACKER
"limpepur Shen h Nagerai
Erprrl. i. Ihathien gIhe Use et
MehAueehis Rhea h Bayais.
Ugolethe Revisse May 1990.
Ise WON PARK
latermelleu es OS Teno &nem et
luterai Me g: OughiSafflie Reheigths
Perteniugu • , hue 1990.
90/49
TM
Sommital MITA
*Appradrw msweil bY Auber le
Answer Ne Quhisedase 1990.
90/30
EP
Daniel COHEN and
Charlet WYPLASZ
•Prise ad Traie RIlludi et %free Rhee
Plgeheligh nul the bute af Haley
and Michèle H1BON
EP
Apormait te Open the Peasibles", April
1990.
Nin
Wilfried VANHONACKER
MICT
"Mmeguriai flw1
Behneimar nad the
Fatimatisa af Dymmaie Sales Renomme
PAIdgie, (Itevited Februery 1990).
*In
1M
Louis LB BLANC and
MASS
•Am Beshallem ad &Maks Mededelegy
Par Expeel System Siens•, May 1990.
90/40
OB
Maafrad KIRS DB VRIES
Medan am the Couda lbe enne af Roberte
Cale, April 1990.
911141
FIN/EP
Oebriel HAWAWIN/,
'Ciel Martel Rame« te the
Anammammall et Intentai. Baddag
Ledelatlee, Mme 1990.
Ceintieedee, Aguil 1990.
911/SI
bah* SWARY 'ad
lk IMAN JANO
EP
90/51
FIN
Michael BURDA and
Charles WYPLOSZ
Lars Tyge N1ELSEN
lled STEMM mad
Wilfried YANHONACICER
•CheeValklegiug Ithrehieg Modela à
Meekeile. Renearele, Oteviaed April 1990).
90/43
PIN
Robert ICORAJCZYIC end
Claude YIALLET
Melle RU Prends and the Priera ef
Foreign Endure MW, May 1990.
90144
Oillee AMADO,
Claude FAUCHEUX end
André LAURENT
*Ontamiontional Change and Cadlwal
Realities: Frame-Ameritam Contrasta• , April
1990.
OB
1b Utility et lothile Mar • Jas 1990.
Michael Bada
"IL Caregusees et Germa Rhum*
ad Megutary Ude. • hes 1990.
Fe
Modem NEVEM and
Colin MEYER
Faverter flurdel Reesiali gh A
Pngeewerk ter Nie Ardyil • , (Revisse
May 1990).
90/55
EP
Michael BURDA and
Stefan GERLACH
geégeteupend Prie« ad the US Trade
Balant •, (Revieed Italy 1990).
EP
90142
MRT
*Cam talseur Me gbet lime h flaira
Soue Stylleed Phl •, hue 1990.
90/S4
90156
EP
Damien NEVEN and
Lars-Hendrik RÔLLER
"The Structure and Deternmituinb of East-West
Tntde: A Prelintinary Analysis of the
Manufacturing Sector*, July 1990
90/57
FINIE?!
Lars Tyge NIELSEN
Comma Knowledge of a Multivariate Aggregate
Statistic", July 1990
90158
FIN/EP/TM
Lars Type NIELSEN
90/59
FIN
Jean DERMINE and
ni
"Comma Knowledge of Price and Espected Cost
in sa Oligopolistic Marker, Augura 1990
Lars-Hendrik RÔLLER
"Etonotnies of &ale and
Scope in the French Mutuel Fonds (SICAV)
Industry", Augure 1990
90/601
TM
Peri IZ and
Tawfik IELASSI
"An IMeractive Group Decision Aid for
Multiobjective Protden►s: An Enspatical
Assument', Semember 1990