CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology 63 (2014) 397400

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology

jou rnal homep age : ht t p: // ees .e lse vi er . com /ci r p/ def a ult . asp

Multi-objective optimization of global manufacturing networks taking into

account multi-dimensional uncertainty
Gisela Lanza (2), Raphael Moser *
wbk Institute of Production Science, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Kaiserstr. 12, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T R A C T

Keywords:
Manufacturing network
Uncertainty
Optimization

By designing global manufacturing networks still purely cost-based decisions are made, in which objectives
such as delivery time, quality, exibility, closeness to customer and coordination effort are neglected. The
design and decision-making process becomes more complex, the more inuencing factors of the business
environment are considered. Due to the dynamic and uncertainty of these factors a decision support is
required which includes all relationships in the network and its environment. This paper presents a dynamic
multi-objective optimization model for global manufacturing networks, which evaluates the impact of
changes of inuencing factors and optimizes the global design of the manufacturing network.
2014 CIRP.

1. Motivation

2. State of the art

Today, besides huge multinational companies also small and

medium-sized enterprises (SME) operate in globally distributed
manufacturing networks [1,2]. Individual steps of the manufacturing
process are performed on globally distributed sites. In addition, the
proportion of purchased parts is signicantly increased by focusing on
core competencies [3]. Overall, globalization is leading manufacturing
companies into an unpredictable business environment [4,5]. The
complexity in the environment makes it impossible to predict future
developments from past ones [6,7]. However, manufacturing and its
global network must change and adapt to the new environment [8
11]. On the one hand, the design of global manufacturing networks is
of increasing importance for the sustainable competitiveness of
companies in the global market and on the other hand, the adaptation
process is a growing challenge for the management [12]. Currently,
teams of experts advise on strategic decisions and mostly intuitively
make quasi-rational decisions that by far do not include all
correlations of the global manufacturing network and its environment [13]. As the wave of back-sourcing of formerly outsourced
production capacities clearly shows, the original relocation decisions
have not been properly analyzed and evaluated. Thus, besides quality
problems, the delivery time, growing personnel and transport
expenses, increased coordination efforts and the unavailability of
skilled employees are listed as the most common reasons for backsourcing [14]. The exclusive consideration of costs based on attractive
factor advantages is unsuitable for a sustainable network planning.
Rather, multiple objectives have to be integrated into the evaluation
[1517]. The management task becomes more complex as always the
most efcient possible global manufacturing network has to be
realized under the given conditions.

There are approaches that deal with the planning and design of
changeable production systems in order to prepare early for changes in
the business environment. For example, Refs. [18,19] focus on the
evaluation of the adaptability of a production system. However, Ref.
[20] aims more strongly at the economic evaluation of the
changeability of a production system. Besides, there are research
approaches that explicitly focus on the design, evaluation and
optimization of manufacturing networks. These approaches, such as
Refs. [21,22], often describe holistic methods of designing manufacturing networks, while evaluation approaches like Refs. [23,24] provide
new methods for the planning of manufacturing networks, often also
purely focusing on site evaluations. Optimization approaches such as
Refs. [2527] strongly focus on the product-site-allocation and
capacity planning in the manufacturing network. Especially in this
eld, Refs. [15,2830] provide concise summaries and analyses.
In the eld of optimization approaches, many approaches, such as
Refs. [27,3133] do not pursue a multi-objective target hierarchy and
exclusively optimize the network conguration based on cost-oriented
perspectives. Other works such as Refs. [25,34,35] neglect the objective
consideration of qualitative target dimensions despite the multiobjective target hierarchy. However, especially the approach of Ref. [25]
offers considerations for modeling global manufacturing networks that
are the basis for this work. The chosen modeling of the manufacturing
steps and the use of alternative technologies are promising. The
integration of a solution method for the identication of a preferenceoriented optimal conguration of a manufacturing network is neglected,
though. The approach proposed by Kohler [25] identies all paretooptimal solutions based on cost and delivery time. Furthermore, there
are approaches like Ref. [17] that are based on methods of the multiattribute-decision-making class (MADM), although they follow
multi-objective target hierarchy including qualitative criteria. The
disadvantage of such methods is that eventually better, more

* Corresponding author.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2014.03.116
0007-8506/ 2014 CIRP.

398

G. Lanza, R. Moser / CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology 63 (2014) 397400

optimal solutions are not considered due to the pre-selection of

discrete alternatives. Generally, none of the mentioned approaches
shows the possibility to adequately take the business environment
into account. Especially the interdependencies between inuencing
factors in combination with multiple future considerations are not
adequately appreciated in optimization approaches, as for example
in Ref. [36]. For this purpose, Ref. [24] provides a rst approach.
However, this method considers only isolated sites without
transport connections and cause-effect relationships within the
network and is based on a cash-ow evaluation without further
quantitative and qualitative target dimensions.
In summary it can be stated, there is no approach which
combines the derived requirements for the strategic planning of
global manufacturing networks as followed:
 Identify the optimal conguration of the manufacturing network
by evaluating quantitative and qualitative target criteria in a
multi-objective optimization model.
 Consider the uncertainty in the business environment. Especially
consider indirect inuencing factors which cannot be measured
directly.
 Identify the point in time and demand for changes in global
manufacturing networks. In particular when continuously
changes to discrete point in times are required.
3. Approach
The target of this paper is therefore to take the multidimensional uncertainty in the business environment into account
and to integrate the impact of drivers of change on the
manufacturing network in a multi-objective, dynamic evaluation.
Using a multi-objective optimization, the optimal conguration of
the manufacturing network is determined for the discrete time
points in the considered planning horizon. Essentially, three
modules emerged for the methodology for strategic planning of
global manufacturing networks and the determination of the need
and timing for change. These are described as followed.
3.1. Optimization module
The optimization module is based on the model that has already
been presented in Ref. [37]. It was additionally expanded by a time
component. The model dynamically identies the optimal network
congurations Conf at the discrete time t in the considered
planning horizon E, including the preceding and subsequent state
in the evaluation. First, a manufacturing network model focusing
on network objects and their attributes is created. As objects, the
product P with the required manufacturing process W and the
technology T are illustrated. Additional objects are sites S, where
technologies are localized, and customers K who demand products.
Also suppliers L are modeled, who provide the materials M or
components in the form of semi-nished parts w for the
manufacturing of a product. Suppliers, sites and customers are
linked by transport mode V. A conguration of the production
network is described by the following decision variables:
8 t
Xs
site
>
>
>
>
Ystt
technology
>
>
>
>
> xtpwst production volume
<
t
(1)
Conf tls pmv transport volume material supplier
>
t
>
>
> tss pwv transport volume site to site
>
t
>
>
tzs
transport volume component supplier
>
pwv
>
: t
tsk pv
transport volume site customer
E.g. Xst represents the binary decision variable for site S in period t
while Ystt is for technology t at site S in period t. xtpwst represents the
production volume for product p and manufacturing step w at site s
and technology t in period t. It is necessary to depict not only the
existing objects in the status quo but also possible future alternatives.
This way, the solution space is unfolded in its entirety. The objects of
the solution space and their attributes are included into the calculation
of the objectives as part of the multi-objective optimization.

For each of the I objectives cost, delivery time, quality,

exibility, coordination, customer proximity and site qualication,
a linear objective function in selected units, such as Euro for costs
and days for delivery time, is derived and calculated in the
respective unit. These are converted into one common unit in a
mono-objective replacement problem by means of a transformation. As common unit the benet u is applied. For this purpose, the
upper and lower limits for the objectives are dened. These allow
the normalization of the target dimensions on the interval [0,1].
The result is a vector-valued objective function with:
0
1
ucosts
B udelivery time
C
C
B
B uquality
C
B
C
B
C
maxu Conf B uflexibility
(2)
C
B ucoordination
C
B
C
@ ucustomer proximity A
usite qualification
It is solved with the hybrid scalar method, a combination of the
reference point to a distance method after Zeleny and the emethod [38] which delivers the following objective function:
"
#1=2
I
X
min
li j1  ui Confj2
(3)
i1

li allows to weight the objectives individually to the preferences of

the deciders. The solution space of the multi-objective optimization is limited by constraints. For this reason, nine linear functions
have been formalized. So, the objective function has to be
minimized under the following constraints:










rawmaterial-, semi-nished- and nished product ows,

outsourcing decisions,
capacity restrictions,
minimum activity level for an active site,
matching of technology, product and site,
local-content-requirements,
optional strategic inputs,
non-negativity requirement and
aspiration level per objective.

As a result, the formal, mathematical optimization model for a

global production network is developed as a mixed-integer problem.
3.2. Uncertainty module
In the uncertainty module, future scenarios for uncertain drivers
of change are created and the stochastic modeling of uncertain future
developments is derived mathematically. This module requires a
collection of drivers of change, which affect the focal company. With
the help of the inuence and relevance analysis, the key drivers are
determined next. The key drivers are specied further according to
their impact level with regard to the evaluation model. As a result,
different global, regional or procedural drivers of change are
determined. At the local level, for example, labor costs at German
sites differ from those at Chinese sites. At the procedural level,
differences in material prices for different production steps can be
mentioned. As part of a scenario workshop, possible future
projections are created exclusively for the key drivers and then
linked to consistent scenarios. This step is performed by a consistency
check and subsequent clustering into distinct scenarios. Since it is a
quantitative approach, future developments of each key driver n are
modeled stochastically and for each scenario a random number with
the corresponding distribution assumption for the expected trend m
and the variance s is generated. A distinction is made between
change driver events CDE that occur at discrete times during the
planning horizon and continuously changing processes CDP.
Changes of local content requirements for instance are discrete
events. The associated driver of change CDEn is modeled with the
manifestation h of the event as follows and the time of occurrence t
is randomly determined as it is equally distributed with:

0  t < tn
0
(4)
CDRn t
hn t n  t  E

G. Lanza, R. Moser / CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology 63 (2014) 397400

Daily changing exchange rates are, however, presented as drivers

of change CDP that change continuously. These ones start at the
current value m0 and evolve according to a general Wiener Process
with the expected drift m, the volatility s and the standard Wiener
Process Wnt using the following formula:
CDP n t m  m0 

t
E

s  W nt m0

(5)

In addition, there are drivers of change, such as the market entry of

a competitor, which are only indirectly measurable. Therefore,
events and processes were linked, so that cause-effect relationships between inuencing factors based on measurable change
drivers integrated CDI can be evaluated:
CDIn t CDEn t CDP n t

(6)

3.3. Control module

As part of the control module, random developments of the key
drivers for the planning horizon are simulated based on the
uncertainty module. The stochastic simulation is used to simulate
random developments of drivers of change over the considered
planning horizon. According to the modeled and parameterized
development of the random number per drivers of change, a random
manifestation of the driver of change is generated at discrete points
in time during the planning horizon. In case of application, these
discrete times correspond to a two-year slice in a ten-year planning
horizon. For the identication of the need and timing of change, the
optimization model of the manufacturing network is solved under
the inuence of the random courses of the drivers of change. In fact,
the CPLEX solver by IBM is used in the present approach.
4. Case study
The developed method is tested using the example of small and
medium-sized enterprise (SME) from the railway industry. A
manufacturing network for the manufacturing of electronic couplers
is analyzed. The pilot network has grown historically and has currently
three manufacturing sites. The aim of the testing is to derive strategic
recommendations for the proactive design of the manufacturing
network. As a starting point, the actual structure of the manufacturing
network and the dynamic business environment need to be determined
and the developments of the drivers of change predicted into the future.

399

(26%), quality (12%), exibility (2%), coordination (9%), customer

proximity (16%) and site qualication (0%). As constraints, strong
local content requirements are xed in the BRIC countries and USA.
4.2. Future scenario
In the context of an expert workshop with representatives from
development, manufacturing, purchasing and logistics, the following key drivers were identied: demand, local content requirements,
number of competitors, product innovation of competitors, exchange rates, material price, energy price, oil price, political stability,
supplier quality. In the scenario workshop, they were then predicted
and quantitatively parameterized for the future on the three efcacy
levels: global, regional and process. Particularly signicant changes
in the demand are expected for India and USA. In addition, local
content requirements changes in China, India and USA are expected
in the planning horizon, along with an increase in labor costs by 300%
until the end of planning in year 2022.
4.3. Results
The model identied the optimal structure for the manufacturing
network for the discrete points in years 2014, 2016, 2018, 2020 and
2022. Between the years 2014 and 2022 no changes in the structure of
the manufacturing network is shown in the optimization results. In
fact, only values of production volume, transportation volume and
procurement volumes varied over time. This change is necessary due
to changing customer demand over planning horizon according to
the generated and simulated scenarios. Fig. 1 visualizes the structure
of Status Quo in year 2012 and the optimal conguration as an
average of 10 optimization runs for year 2014 and at the end of the
planning horizon in the year 2022.
In order to minimize the computing time, sites in Russia and South
Africa were excluded of the solution space as they were never
occupied with manufacturing steps at the rst optimization run. The
optimization studies point to a multi-stage development of the
manufacturing network. In the rst time step, the site in Poland is
closed. The former cost advantage has clearly shrunk due to the
increases in wages in Poland. The difference is 10 s per hour in 2014
but is not as benecial as the reduction in delivery time of two days,
due to the reduction of two additional transport processes (1 day each

4.1. Solution space

The manufacturing process is dened in a total of 13
manufacturing steps (ms). The nal stage describes the outgoing
goods and shipment of products to customers. Step 1-5 combines
the manufacturing processed of single parts which are mainly
driven by investment costs due to utilized machines. Step 68
comprises the commissioning of parts. Step 9 visualizes the
assembly process which is purely labor (wage) driven. Step 10-12
concludes the testing process with high investments for the testing
facility again. The technologies are currently located in China (C),
Germany (G), Poland (P). Material suppliers are exclusively
available in Europe, mainly in Germany. In addition to existing
sites, possible sites are located in India (I), Russia (R), USA (U) and
South Africa (S) and included in the assessment. For the
implementation of the manufacturing processes, 23 technologies
are available. These can be located in their entirety at a single site
or duplicated in different sites. Technologies are combined
machines, work stations and employees. Each technology is
suitable for at least one step of manufacturing process. Strategic
limitations of management regarding the protection of know-how
are not made. Sufciently large provisions of capacities for future
demands are important. In this use case the transport by ship, truck
and airfreight is relevant as possible transport modes. They differ
in speed and cost. The weighting of the objective criteria for the
optimization model results directly from the corporate strategy.
The weighting is assumed as follows: costs (35%), delivery time

Fig. 1. Structure of the manufacturing network to discrete time points in planning horizon.

400

G. Lanza, R. Moser / CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology 63 (2014) 397400

via truck). With a total delivery time on average in the network of 4.6
days, 2 days is a big improvement. At the US site, technologies for
almost complete manufacturing process are located. Only
manufacturing step 5 has not been localized. One reason is the
impact of local-content requirements of 37.5%. Moreover, the
proximity to the market is increased by the local production
signicantly by 25%. The delivery times and shipping costs do not
change. In fact, one transport between supplier market Germany to
customer market USA is essential. It can be carried out in one day by
airfreight or 34 days by ships freight. This can be done before the start
of manufacturing, meaning at the time of purchasing material, as in
the case of conguration in 2014, or during the manufacturing
process, as in case of Status Quo year 2012. The situation is similar
with the transport costs. Also, import duties do not differ for the
various steps of manufacturing for the product under consideration. In
China MS 7 and MS 8 are located. Based on the comparison of the local
labor wage in China of CNY 50 per hour to the wage in Germany from
50 s per hour, this change is clearly due to the cost. The quality level of
0.7 compared to 0.85 for Germany in the interval [0,1] deteriorates the
quality objective in average slightly. In India the location is opened in
year 2014 to generate the primary market access through customer
proximity which increases with 25%. Additionally the site meets the
local content requirements of 20%. In fact, simply manual tasks such as
picking of the components and cables that are assembled and nally
checked at the site China, as well as the dispatch of the nished
products for distribution to local customer are localized in India.
In the year 2022 site India gets developed as a full assembly and
checking site. MS 9, 10, 11 and 12 are located in India. On one hand,
labor costs in China with CNY 175 in comparison to India 2588 INR
rising so strong that assembly and checking in India compared to
China is benecial from an overall cost perspective view. In addition,
the site needs to be extended due to the local-content requirement of
35% in India. Finally, the technologies for the MS 9, 10, 11 and 12 can
be utilized sufciently to 65.8% due to increased demand in India, so
that the existing economies of scales through the assembly in China
compared to the start-up and xed costs in India are no longer
adversely for the decision. The progressive qualication of employees in India leads to a qualication level of 0.7, which does not
prevent localization of manufacturing due to poor quality index. In
parallel USA gets fully equipped with the missing MS 5.
5. Conclusion
The presented approach was developed at the Institute of
Production Science (wbk) at KIT, Germany. The model is able to
simulate random developments of drivers of change. In particular
relations between drivers of change of the uncertain business
environment can be generated. Furthermore effects of the environment are evaluated. The optimization module identies the optimal
conguration of the manufacturing networks in terms of suppliers,
sites, technologies and logistics at each point in time during the
planning horizon. The approach was tested in industry and able to nd
an optimal strategy until 2022 according to the dynamic business
environment. The overall approach was realized and implemented in a
software prototype within the research project Planning and
Optimization of global changeable production networks (POWer.net).
Acknowledgments
The ndings presented are being investigated within the research
and development project Planning and Optimization of global
changeable production networks (POWer.net), which is funded by
the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) within
the Framework Concept Research for Tomorrows Production and
managed by the Project Management Agency Karlsruhe (PTKA).
References
[1] Moller K, Klatt T, Drees A (2011) Heutige und zukunftige Paradigmen des
Produktionsstandorts Deutschland. Wertschopfung und Beschaftigung in
Deutschland, Springer Verlag: 1933.

[2] Lu JW, Beamish PW (2001) The Internationalization and Performance of SMEs.

Strategic Management Journal 22:565586.
[3] Seliger G (2011) Emerging Markets bei materiellen Grenzen des Wachstums
Chancen nachhaltiger Wertschopfung. Wertschopfung und Beschaftigung in
Deutschland, Springer Verlag: 3546.
[4] McKinsey CI (2009) Made in Germany Zukunftsperspektiven fur die Produktion
in Deutschland.
[5] Vancza J, Monostori L, Lutters D, Kumara S, Tseng M, Valckenaers P, Van Brussel
H (2011) Cooperative and Responsive Manufacturing Enterprises. CIRP Annals
Manufacturing Technology 60:797820.
[6] Wiendahl H, Worbs J, Peters K (2002) Turbulente Zeiten. Nichtlineare Dynamik
in der Produktionslogistik. ZWF Zeitschrift fur wirtschaftlichen Fabrikbetrieb
97(12):633637.
[7] Nyhuis P (2008) Wandlungsfahige Produktionssysteme: Heute die Industrie von
morgen Gestalten, PZH-Produktionstechnisches Zentrum, Garbsen.
[8] Abele E, Reinhart G (2011) Zukunft der Produktion, Carl Hanser Verlag.
[9] Koren Y (2010) The Global Manufacturing Revolution: Product-Process-Business Integration and Recongurable Systems, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hoboken, New Jersey, pp.
140.
[10] Schuh G (2012) Erfolgsfaktor Wandlungsfahigkeit. wtWerkstattstechnik online
4:175.
[11] Wiendahl H (2002) Wandlungsfahigkeit. Schlusselbegriff der zukunftsfahigen
Fabrik. wtWerkstattstechnik online (4)122127.
[12] Schmidt B (2011) Gestaltung Globaler Produktionsstrategien. Wertschopfung
und Beschaftigung in Deutschland. (acatech Diskutiert), Springer Verlag. 7184.
[13] KPMG (2000) Shareholder Value Konzepte: Eine Untersuchung der DAX 100
Unternehmen.
[14] Kinkel S, Maloca S (2009) Modernisierung der Produktion: Produktionsverlagerung und Ruckverlagerung in Zeiten der Krise. in Kinkel S, Maloca S, (Eds.)
Fraunhofer-Institut fur System- und Innovationsforschung (Hrsg.): Mitteilungen
aus der ISI-Erhebung, .
[15] Beamon BM (1998) Supply Chain Design and Analysis: Models and Methods.
International Journal of Production Economics 55(3):281294.
[16] Meixell MJ, Gargeya V (2005) Global Supply Chain Design: A Literature Review
and Critique. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review
41(6):531550.
[17] Ude J (2010) Entscheidungsunterstutzung fur die Konguration globaler
Wertschopfungsnetzwerke: Ein Bewertungsansatz unter Berucksichtigung multikriterieller Zielsysteme, Dynamik und Unsicherheit, Shaker Verlag.
[18] Heger CL (2007) Bewertung der Wandlungsfahigkeit von Fabrikobjekten, PZH,
Produktionstechn. Zentrum.
[19] Klemke T (2011) Bewertungsmethodik fur die Wandlungsfahigkeit von Produktionssystemen. Industrie Management 27(3):5356.
[20] Moller N (2007) Bestimmung der Wirtschaftlichkeit wandlungsfahiger Produktionssysteme, Herbert Utz Verlag.
[21] Herm M (2006) Konguration globaler Wertschopfungsnetzwerke auf Basis von
Business Capabilities, Shaker Verlag.
[22] Lofer C (2012) Systematik der strategischen Strukturplanung fur eine wandlungsfahige und vernetzte Produktion der variantenreichen Serienfertigung, Jost
Jetter Verlag.
[23] Sudhoff W (2007) Methodik zur Bewertung standortubergreifender Mobilitat in
der Produktion, Herbert Utz Verlag.
[24] Krebs P (2011) Bewertung vernetzter Produktionsstandorte unter Berucksichtigung multidimensionaler Unsicherheiten, Herbert Utz Verlag.
[25] Kohler K (2008) Global Supply Chain: Konzeption und Implementierung eines
multikriteriellen Optimierungsmodells fur die Gestaltung globaler Wertschopfungsaktivitaten, Gabler Verlag.
[26] Friese M (2008) Planung von Flexibilitats- und Kapazitatsstrategien fur Produktionsnetzwerke der Automobilindustrie, PZH, Produktionstechn. Zentrum.
[27] Chakravarty AK (2005) Global Plant Capacity and Product Allocation with
Pricing Decisions. European Journal of Operational Research 165(1):157181.
[28] Melo MT, Nickel S, Saldanha-Da-Gama F (2009) Facility Location and Supply Chain
Management A Review. European Journal of Operational Research 196(2):401412.
[29] Julka N, Baines T, Tjahjono B, Lendermann P, Vitanov V (2007) A Review of
Multifactor Capacity Expansion Models for Manufacturing Plants: Searching for a
Holistic Decision Aid. International Journal of Production Economics 106(2):607621.
[30] Vidal CJ, Goetschalckx M (1997) Strategic Production-Distribution Models: A
Critical Review with Emphasis on Global Supply Chain Models. European
Journal of Operational Research 98(1):118.
[31] Peters S (2013) Markoffsche Entscheidungsprozesse zur Kapazitats- und Investitionsplanung von Produktionssystemen, Shaker Verlag.
[32] Singh AR, Mishra P, Jain R, Khurana M (2012) Design of Global Supply Chain
Network with Operational Risks. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 60(14):273290.
[33] Stephan HA, Gschwind T, Minner S (2010) Manufacturing Capacity Planning
and the Value of Multi-Stage Stochastic Programming Under Markovian
Demand. Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal 22(34):143162.
[34] Varthanan PA, Murugan N, Kumar GM, Parameswaran S (2012) Development
of Simulation-Based AHP-DPSO Algorithm for Generating Multi-Criteria ProductionDistribution Plan. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology 60(14):373396.
[35] Wang F, Lai X, Shi N (2011) A Multi-Objective Optimization for Green Supply
Chain Network Design. Decision Support Systems 51(2):262269.
[36] Chen C, Yuan T, Chang C, Lee W, Ciou Y (2006) A Multi-Criteria Optimization
Model for Planning of a Supply Chain Network Under Demand Uncertainty.
Computer Aided Chemical Engineering 21:20752080.
[37] Lanza G, Moser R, Jondral A (2013) Method for the Identication of Point in
Time for Changes in Production Networks. 6th IFAC Conference on Management
and Control of Production and Logistics.
[38] Zopounidis C, Pardalos PM (2010) Handbook of Multicriteria Analysis: Applied
Optimization, Springer Verlag.