Agile Stage-Gate Management (ASGM) for physical products

We present a qualitative study of Agile Stage-Gate Management (ASGM),: a hybrid new product development methodology that combines Agile and Stage-Gate Management (SGM) approaches for the coordination of new product development. When applied to software projects, Agile is expected to deliver reduced development times, improved resource utilization, and greater financial success. We examine whether ASGM practitioners realize similar outcomes in a sample of global firms developing complex electro-mechanical products (e.g., automobile components, railway propulsion systems, and medical devices). Our grounded theory approach articulates an understanding of ASGM through extensive interviews of experienced professionals. Our thematic analysis supports many expected benefits (i.e., speed to market, innovation enabling), but also does not encourage others, and reveals new pitfalls that deserve recognition (i.e., resource inefficiency). ASGM is not a panacea for all product development. Overall, physical product firms adopting this method can expect reduced development times and higher levels of innovation but will expend more resources to complete development projects, but a dichotomy exists. Physical product developers using ASGM experience a negative impact on project resource efficiency due to the need for dedicated resources, frequent product demonstrations, and duplicative management structures.     

Why did we make that cheese? An empirically based framework for understanding what drives innovation activity

In the more recent product development literature the interplay between R&D skills and competencies and market skills and competencies is seen as a major determinant of successful innovation. The study reported in this article was done in order to cast more light on these two constructs in an industry with low R&D expenditures, but where product development is nevertheless considered to be strategically important. That industry is the food processing industry. The results of a series of case studies indicate that constructs other than R&D and market orientation may be more appropriate for understanding innovation and explaining innovation success in the case material. A new set of constructs focusing on what causes specific innovation activities to occur is proposed and a revised framework is developed.     

Investigating the Drivers of Innovation and New Product Success: A Comparison of Strategic Orientations*

The notion of producing innovations and achieving new product success has received a great deal of attention. Though many have investigated these effects in marketing and various fields within management, there has been little cross‐fertilization between fields of study to explain the basis for this superior performance. Though research has examined the resource‐based view (RBV) and market orientation individually, none has evaluated and compared their effect on firm innovation and new product success in one study. Furthermore, although empirical work has been conducted between market orientation and organizational learning, comparatively less research has been conducted to evaluate the relationship between organizational learning and the RBV to examine their combined effects on a firm's ability to innovate and succeed. Subsequently, the purpose of the present article is to investigate whether a focus on the customer (i.e., market orientation) or the firm (i.e., RBV) will drive the ability to (1) innovate within the firm and (2) succeed in terms of new product success, financial performance, market share, and customer value. The present article examines the relationship between organizational learning and the RBV and market orientation. It presents an empirically testable framework that investigates the relationship that RBV and market orientation have with performance outcomes. Data were collected from 249 senior executives. LISREL was applied to evaluate the relationships. Confirmatory factor analysis and related techniques were applied to assess the robustness of the measures used. Findings show that organizational learning is strongly associated with market orientation, which in turn impacts various performance outcomes including customer value. The RBV had a significant relationship with new product success. These results suggest that managers seeking innovation and new product success should focus less on the provision of customer value. Instead they should look toward developing their resources within the firm, including investing in human resources, to ultimately provide value to the firm. Findings indicate that this unique offering—innovations—will have an indirect effect on customer value and financial performance. In contrast, those in pursuit of positive financial performance and customer value should focus on the development of market orientation. Even though this will not necessarily lead to the development of innovative processes and new product success according to the present study, this approach may lead to a greater market share in the long term. This article reviews theoretical and managerial implications in more depth, providing an impetus for further research.     

The Determinants of Innovation: R & D,Technology Transfer and Networking Effects

The traditional analysis of innovation has focused on the Schumpeterian hypothesis of a positive link between market power and innovation. This often includes an implicitly linear view of the innovation process, with R & D as a necessary first step. This paper widens the determinants of innovation beyond R & D to include technology transfer and networking effects, thus extending the standard Schumpeterian analysis. When tested on a dataset of c. 1300 UK manufacturing plants, R & D, technology transfer and networking are found to be substitutes in the innovation process, with the two latter intensities especially important in increasing the extent of innovation. There is no evidence that (actual) monopoly power increases the extent of innovation, but there are significant plant and sectoral effects on innovation.     

Consumer Research to Focus R&D Projects

R&D occurs early in the design stage of a telecommunications product that will be aimed at an unfulfilled market need. New technologies offer some exciting possibilities but the R&D team needs guidance in focusing their technologies on the right set of user benefits. In this article, John R. Hauser uses a case study to show how consumer theory and models for evaluating new product concepts can be used to provide R&D management with diagnostic information to improve the chances of innovation success. It's a good example of how management science can be applied to management problems.     

A Note on Endogenous Spillovers in a Non-Tournament R & D Duopoly

The paper analyzes a simple non-tournament model of R & D where firms are engaged in cost-reducing innovation. It is shown that when spillovers of information are treated as endogenous firms never disclose any of their information when choosing their R & D non-cooperatively. Under cooperative R & D, firms will always choose to fully share their information, i.e., a research joint venture will operate with a maximal spillover value.     

Internal vs. external learning in new product development: effects on speed, costs and competitive advantage

The purpose of this study was to investigate how different technology sourcing strategies throughout the new product development process influenced innovation speed, development costs, and competitive advantage. We studied 75 new product development projects from ten large, U.S.-based companies in several industries. Results indicated that: (1) more external sourcing during the early (i.e., idea generation) stage was related with lower competitive success; (2) more external sourcing during the later (i.e., technological development stage was related with slower innovation speed; and (3) development costs tended to rise with greater reliance on external sources of technology, but this result was not statistically significant.     

Proactive/Responsive Market Orientation and Marketing—Research and Development Integration

The level of integration between the marketing and research and development (R&D) functions may be gauged by degree of communication, information sharing, and collaboration between the functions during the new product development process. This article examines how a firm's strategic choice regarding market orientation may influence the relationship between marketing and R&D personnel, and how this relationship may affect organizational success. Under examination are both the responsive form of market orientation, in which a firm focuses on immediate customer needs and tends to be market driven, and the proactive form, in which the firm focuses on future market needs and tends to be invention driven. It is theorized that responsive market orientation will be more positively related to marketing‐R&D integration due to the market‐driven nature of the orientation. Conversely, it is theorized proactive market orientation will be more positively related to organizational success than responsive market orientation due to the innovation‐driven nature of the orientation. The study was implemented via a Web‐based survey and data analysis was performed using structural equation modeling techniques. The results of this study provide empirical evidence that both proactive and responsive market orientation exhibit a positive relationship with marketing–R&D integration, indicating that both forms of market orientation may lead to closer collaboration between the marketing and R&D functions. Despite the assumption that a proactive orientation is driven by innovation and technology in which R&D may play a more significant role, there is evidence that a high degree of synergy is developed between the groups when the focus is on future market needs. A market‐driven responsive orientation by necessity requires high integration between departments to commercialize products in a timely manner to meet current market needs. Proactive market orientation exhibits a positive relationship with market performance, whereas responsive market orientation does not. The result may show evidence of the “new product paradox," whereby developing products to address immediate market needs may result in lower market performance because the new products may be replacements for obsolete offerings or are actually cannibalizing sales of existing products.     

Variety in the innovation process of UK research and development service firms

Research and development service firms (RDSFs) are a particular type of technology-based knowledge-intensive business services (KIBS). RDSFs provide clients with R&D services on a contract basis, and operate as knowledge intermediaries linking research and market. They are innovative in their own right, as well as supporting innovation efforts by their clients; they rely on their own innovation efforts to be competitive and to develop new value propositions for their clients. The present paper explores the innovation process in RDSFs, drawing on semi-structured interviews with founders and senior managers of 32 companies in the United Kingdom. Our findings suggest that RDSFs vary considerably in terms of their primary innovation drivers (i.e. whether they are mainly driven by market demands or by technological opportunities) and the outcomes they pursue (i.e. whether their outputs are mainly services to clients or a mixture of services and products and/or intellectual property). Four major orientations of RDSFs were identified: (i) technology-based innovation exploiters; (ii) science-focused innovation explorers; (iii) client-driven innovation integrators; and (iv) open innovation translators. This variety among firms normally belonging to the same, small subsector of KIBS, suggests the need for caution in generalising about behaviour in terms of such statistical groupings.     

What contributes to the enhanced use of customer, competition and technology knowledge for product innovation performance? : A survey of multinational industrial companies' subsidiaries operating in China

This study extends an emerging research area in knowledge management to new product development by empirically examining the factors associated with the use of different types of knowledge flows from various sources and product innovation performance (i.e., market success of new products) in the multinational companies' subsidiaries in China. The findings seem to indicate the vitality of considering a broad spectrum of knowledge management related variables such as a subsidiary's product development strategy, market conditions it faces, its knowledge capacity and knowledge support structure. Furthermore, we found that subsidiaries with better performance are generally excel in the use of competition knowledge flow, the development of moderate innovative products, communication among different functional departments or product development groups, the codification of knowledge, and a supportive culture.     

Analyzing the Effects of Market and Resource Orientations on Innovative Outcomes in Times of Turbulence*

Innovation and new product success are often a core precursor to superior performance. Although research has examined the resource‐based view (RBV) and market orientation (MO) individually, limited research has evaluated and compared their effect on innovation and new product success in one study. Furthermore, relative to MO, comparatively less research has been conducted to evaluate the relationship between organizational learning (OL) and the RBV to examine their effects on a firm's ability to innovate and succeed. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the role of environmental variables (i.e., market turbulence and technological turbulence) on the relationship between two strategic orientations and performance and to extend a previous study. Specifically, it aims to evaluate whether a focus on the customer or the firm will impact innovation, product quality, new product success, financial performance, and customer value in settings of varying environmental turbulence. Data were collected from more than 200 senior executives. LISREL was applied to evaluate the relationships under examination. Interaction effects were assessed using a nested goodness‐of‐fit strategy using a multiple‐group solution. Results depicted significant relationships between organizational learning and both resource and market orientations. Significant relationships also emerged between each strategic orientation and various performance indicators. Interaction effects were observed for market turbulence on customer value and market orientation as well as for resource orientation (RO) on innovation in times of high technological turbulence. The paper concludes with a review of theoretical and managerial implications to stimulate further debate. These results suggest that managers seeking innovation and new product success cannot afford to ignore the environment and do so at their peril. The provision of customer value is essential for positive financial performance. Thus, management needs to monitor environmental contexts so that they are able to adjust their investment in market orientation and the requisite processes that enable its implementation. Conversely, the effects of RO on performance are more robust across industry conditions, presenting an alternative avenue for management to achieve market superiority. The paper concludes with a review of theoretical and managerial implications to stimulate further debate.     

Product Innovation,Process Innovation,and Size

We test the hypothesis that large firms devote a higher proportion of their research and development (R & D) expenditure on process innovation thansmaller firms. According to the estimates, process- and product R & D expenditure rise less than in proportion to size. The size effect is somewhat stronger for process R & D but the difference to product R & D is in no way dramatic. This difference with regard to size elasticity of process- and product R & D is somewhat more pronounced when accounting for possible interrelationships between expenditure on process- and product R & D but remains statistically non-significant.     

Creating value while avoiding its destruction through R&D management and innovation

Value creation and capture remain a key but quite a challenging objective for many organizations. R&D and innovation management have to operate in a context of increasing complexity, particularly enriched by emerging technologies, new opportunities for transformation of business models, and multidimensional changes in market demands. This special section proposes new options to deal with this challenge. One paper contributes to the adoption of open business models by studying their antecedents and casual relationships. The three other papers propose using a different focus on value, avoiding its destruction by adopting different unusual mindsets; i.e. learning through failure, learning by deviating and investigating motivations for not participating in innovation communities.     

New Product Success: Is It Really Controllable by Managers in Highly Turbulent Environments?

This research proposes and tests a model of direct and indirect effects linking four antecedents to new product success: (1) a proactive strategic orientation along with enabling (2) organic organizational structures should lead to more (3) innovativeness and (4) market intelligence. Innovativeness and market intelligence should in turn lead to greater new product success. The relationships among the four antecedents are not hypothesized to be moderated by environmental turbulence because their domain is intraorganizational. However, the relationships from intraorganizational constructs to new product success are hypothesized to be moderated by environmental turbulence because success depends in part on the environment in which the new product must compete. The model was tested using a sample composed of 202 small business units of manufacturers on the Fortune 500. The sample was heavily involved in new product development: Their average annual research and development budget was $360.4 million, and approximately 8.2% of sales came from products introduced in the last five years. A two-group structural equation model analysis supports the moderation model overall and reveals the pattern of direct, indirect, and total effects. The results show that innovativeness (but not market intelligence) directly predicts new product success when turbulence is high, whereas market intelligence (but not innovativeness) directly engenders new product success in low turbulence. Environmental turbulence also affects the total indirect impact of strategy proactiveness and organizational organicity on new product success. These indirect effects operate through innovativeness and market intelligence as complete mediators.     

PDMA Success Measurement Project: Recommended Measures for Product Development Success and Failure

Success is not just elusive; it is also multifaceted and difficult to measure. A firm can assess the success or failure of a development project in any (or all) of many terms, including customer satisfaction, financial return, and technical advantage. To complicate matters, success may be measured not only at the level of the individual project, but also at the program level. With so many variables to consider and so many stakeholders involved, managers face a difficult challenge just deciding which measures are useful for measuring product development success. Recognizing that no single measure suffices for gauging the success of every product development project, Abbie Griffin and Albert L. Page hypothesize that the most appropriate set of measures for assessing project-level success depends on the project strategy. For example, the objectives (and thus, the success criteria) for a new product that creates an entirely new market will differ from those of a project that extends an existing product line. Similarly, they hypothesize that the appropriate measures of a product development program's overall success depend on the firm's innovation strategy. For example, a firm that values being first to market will measure success in different terms from those used by a firm that focuses on maintaining a secure market niche. To test these hypotheses, product development professionals were presented with six project strategy scenarios and four business strategy scenarios. For each project strategy scenario, participants were asked to select the four most useful measures of project success. For each business strategy scenario, participants were asked to choose the set of four measures that would provide the most useful overall assessment of product development success. The responses strongly support the idea that the most appropriate measures of project-level and program-level success depend on the firm's project strategy and business strategy, respectively. For example, customer satisfaction and customer acceptance were among the most useful customer-based measures of success for several project strategies, but market share was cited as the most useful customer-based measure for projects involving new-to-the-company products or line extensions. At the program level, firms with a business strategy that places little emphasis on innovation need to focus on measuring the efficiency of their product development program, while innovative firms need to assess the program's contribution to company growth.     

Reconciling the paradox of supply-side and demand-side strategies in industrial innovation

Abernathy and Utterback [Abernathy, W.J. & Utterback, J.M., (1978). Patterns of industrial innovation. In Burgelman, R.A., Maidique, M.A. and Wheelwright, S.C., Strategic management of technology and innovation: 149-155. McGraw Hill.] argued that successful firms seek a functional product performance strategy in the early stage of industrial innovation and seek a cost reduction strategy in the late stage. However, Adner and Levinthal [Adner, R. & Levinthal, D., (2001). Demand heterogeneity and technology evolution: Implications for product and process. Management Science, 47(5), 611-628.] argued firms enhance functionality or reduce prices to a level that corresponds to consumer willingness to pay in the early stage, and increase performance at a relatively stable product price (i.e. new strategy they claimed) in the late stage. This study reconciles this paradox of choosing strategies using an integrative framework for theory development. Generated from the framework, a numerical indicator of performance/cost ratio directs firm strategy choices in industrial innovation when an environment changes. This study justifies the popular use of performance/cost ratio in practices as primary criteria to predict the winning dominant standard from a value creation perspective and elucidates an evolution of industrial innovations by using a three-year field study.     

Empirical Evidence on the Success of R&;D Cooperation—Happy Together?

In this paper we analyse the effect of past R&D cooperation on current firms’ innovation performance. Success measures are: sales of innovative products, distinguishing between products new to the firm and new to the market, and cost reductions due to innovative processes. Particular attention is paid to the impact of different cooperation partners. The analysis rests on firm-level data of the annual German innovation survey. We find that R&D cooperation with competitors leads to greater cost reductions that are attributable to innovative processes. R&D cooperation with research institutes has a positive influence on a firm’s economic success with market novelties.      

Consumer Response to Product Form in Technology‐Based Industries

Product design is a key driver of competitive advantage and new product success. Relative to its importance, product design remains an underresearched area. The authors address this issue by examining the moderating effects of consumer innovativeness and design acumen on consumer response to product form—i.e., the product's visual appearance. Using subjects from the United Kingdom, these effects were tested with a technology‐based product that is expected to be introduced to market in the near future. A technological innovation was chosen because such products are often characterized by an accelerating pace of innovation and shortening life cycles. In such contexts, the product's visual appearance is often critical to success because it drives inferences about the technical capabilities and functional novelty. Our findings indicate that for more innovative consumers, an innovative product form can further enhance perceived value, product liking, and purchase intention. Furthermore, for consumers who possess more design acumen, an innovative product form can increase perceived value and product liking. An innovative product form was not found to enhance purchase intention for consumers with higher levels of design acumen. A primary implication of the study is to consider target market characteristics such as consumer innovativeness and design acumen when selecting a product form strategy. Additional implications include involving consumer innovators in the development and evaluation of product forms and involving consumers with greater design acumen early in the product's introduction so that they may influence other buyers.     

The contribution of Design Thinking to the R of R&D in technological innovation

Literature on Design Thinking has mainly focused on whether its key principles enhance performance in the development phase (the D of R&D) of the technological innovation process. However, it has dedicated scant attention to the earlier research phase (the R of R&D). This aspect is surprising, given that many innovations fail as a result of early research actions and decisions. This article examines how it is possible and desirable to apply Design Thinking to the research phase of the technological innovation process. How can Design Thinking support innovation, even when advanced breakthrough technologies are at stake, the market is distant, and product applications and specific user needs have not been identified yet? To respond to this question, we investigate the research work of the design center of a global electronics company that uses a design approach called Proxemics to envision future interactions between bodies (people), objects (technology), and spaces (context). Although Proxemics is consistent with and implements the human centeredness and experimentation principles of Design Thinking, results of this study show that its logics and tools are different from those used in Design Thinking in the D of R&D due to the more abstract nature of the tasks in the R of R&D.     

The Impact of Organizational Integration and Product Development Proficiency on Market Success

This research investigates three major hypotheses important to new product market success: the greater organizational integration during the development of new products, the greater the market success; the greater organizational integration during the development of new products, the greater new product development proficiency; and the greater new product development proficiency, the greater the market success. “Organizational integration” is defined as the degree of cooperation and communication between internal and external NPD “support” groups and NPD teams. “NPD process proficiency” is defined as how well new product development stages and the new product development process as a whole is performed. “New product market success” is represented by four measures: the degree to which profits and sales exceeded or fell short of what was expected, and the degree to which the new product was perceived to exceed or fall short of expectations related to entering existing and new markets. Information was obtained concerning the most and least successful new products of U.S. firms in the medical instruments, the electrical equipment, and the heavy construction equipment industries. The field survey approach was utilized in which surveys were mailed to recipients such as new product development managers who already had been designated by executives of the sample firms. Several important findings were uncovered during this research. Overall organizational integration was found to be significantly associated with new product market success. Internal integration, the coordination between new product development teams and functional departments, was found to be significantly related to product market success. A significant relationship between new product development proficiency during the NPD “post-launch stage” and the degree of integration between an NPD team and external NPD organizations, such as customers and suppliers, was detected. During the post-launch stage, new product development proficiency also was found to be significantly related to new product market success. These findings suggest several important implications for new product development managers and scholars.