Creative Thinking Ability, Cognitive Type and R&D Performance

The purpose of this study was to investigate the contributions of creative thinking ability and cognitive type to research and development (R&D) performance. One hundred and six researchers in an R&D institute of a petroleum company in Taiwan were given the Circle Test of the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator . Their R&D performance was measured in terms of assigned technical reports, completed service projects, published papers, and a supervisor's performance rating. Results showed that there was a low but positive correlation between creativity and the first-authored paper and the technical report. The cognitive type was on the other hand associated with the performance rating and the first-authored service project assignment. Implications for R&D management are discussed.     

Stakeholder analysis for R&D project management

R&D projects affect the interests of different stakeholders in different ways. Understanding the stakeholders and analysing their interests helps in the better management of R&D projects. In this paper we discuss a methodology to systematically analyse the stakeholders of R&D projects. This methodology includes Freeman's (1984) three levels of analysis: rational, process and transactional. Based on these three levels, the stakeholder management capability of an R&D project is determined. The final stage is based on Mitchell et al . (1997) approach to analysing the dynamics of stakeholders. This methodology is illustrated using a New Zealand case relating to a road pricing R&D project.     

Scale and performance in publicly funded collaborative research and development

This paper reports the results of an extensive empirical investigation on the role of project scale (reflected in consortium size and in project budget) on various performance dimensions of publicly funded collaborative research and development (R&D) projects. Recent trends in European research policy are founded on the premise that such scale economies do exist, hence the emphasis placed on the critical mass of R&D projects. We argue that large scale in collaborative R&D confers both positive and negative effects, and thus we hypothesize an inverse U‐shaped relation between scale and performance. We only find an inverse U‐shaped effect of consortium size on networking impacts and a U‐shaped effect of project budget on goal achievement. No other statistically significant relationships were found for the remaining performance dimensions (i.e. scientific outputs, technological outputs, and research capacity impacts). More generally, and consistent with recent work on the relation between quality and quantity in academic research, our analyses offer little evidence to support the idea that increasing scale generally improves collaborative R&D performance. It appears that the simple assumption ‘bigger is better’ in European Union‐financed collaborative R&D may need to be reconsidered.     

R&D projects in the science sector

The purpose of this research was to determine and analyse diversity in various features of R&D projects implemented in the science sector in Poland, financed mostly from public funds. More exactly, the following aspects of R&D projects implemented in the science sector in Poland were examined: the relation between the actually achieved and the initially set goal, the project management methodologies and project time management methods used, features of the project team, the relation between the plan and the actual project realisation and management difficulties encountered in practice. These aspects and their diversity were examined in the context of the whole country, of various fields of science and various research units implementing pure research (the ‘R’ area) or applied research and experimental development (the ‘D’ area). The research was conducted by means of survey methodology covering a sample of participants of R&D projects in the science sector in Poland. The results were analysed by means of statistical methods (which constitutes a clear novelty with respect to the existing literature on R&D projects) and statistically significant phenomena gave rise to several important conclusions on how R&D projects implemented in the science sector are managed and what their realisation looks like in various fields of science and various institutions, in a relatively new EU members state and a former communist country like Poland. These conclusions may be the basis for important hypotheses (which require further research) on the project management quality in the science sector in Poland and in similar countries, which is closely linked to the problem of public money allocation, its efficient spending and control. Also, practical suggestions on improvement measures in the science sector with respect to R&D projects, limited not only to countries like Poland, but of a more general nature, are formulated.     

The roles of R&D team leaders in Korea: a contingent approach

This study empirically examines the relationship between the role of R&D project leaders and their team performance using data from 87 project teams in 6 R&D organizations in Korea. The results reveal that:
(1) R&D project leaders played five different roles in performing their jobs – strategic planner, team builder, gatekeeper, technical expert, and champion;
(2) All but the champion role of a leader is positively related with project team performance;
(3) However, this relationship between the role of leader and project team performance varies according to the characteristics of R&D project teams and their tasks.
Specifically, it becomes important for a leader to focus less on the team building role as the team gets older. The team building role of a leader, however, is more important for higher performance of relatively certain R&D projects, while for uncertain R&D projects, the strategic planning role appears to be more crucial. Based on these results, this study discusses several managerial and theoretical issues related to the role of a leader in R&D project teams.     

The Role of Departmental Thought Worlds in Shaping Escalation of Commitment in New Product Development Projects

The debate over whether and how thought worlds of different departments (especially marketing and research and development [R&D]) affect managers' decision-making behavior in new product development (NPD) is ongoing. A key challenge of these decisions is to deal with deteriorating NPD projects, which are often subject to escalation of commitment (EoC), with many firms wasting billions of dollars by throwing good money after bad NPD projects. However, understanding departmental thought worlds and their role for EoC in NPD could help firms stop this profusion. Thus, this research provides answers to the question of how thought worlds affect managers' tendency toward EoC in NPD decision-making—both in general and under certain project characteristics. To do so, we conducted four studies based on real-life scenarios with 460 highly experienced NPD managers from marketing and R&D, thus ensuring high validity and reliability. Our research is the first to explore the impact of thought worlds on EoC, thereby detecting that the importance of managers' thought worlds for shaping EoC varies with the NPD project's characteristics. Thus, depending on the specific project situation, different types of managers may be more or less capable of making proper NPD decisions. Moreover, results show that belief updating serves as a respective key mediator. Doing so enriches the theory by showing that managers' thought worlds can substantially influence a major mechanism (i.e., belief updating) of coping with cognitive dissonance. Finally, post hoc tests reveal departmental differences in EoC behavior between marketing and R&D that vary with a project's characteristics. These results imply that firms need to carefully consider who is in charge of making decisions on NPD project continuance in different project situations.     

A portfolio–evaluation framework for selecting R&D projects

This study aims to form the basis for constructing a framework for evaluating alternative portfolios of R&D projects. This study provides an extensive literature review on portfolio selection. Most of the existing studies deal with the portfolio selection problem by evaluating individual projects and then seeking ways to combine them for an R&D portfolio. However, the combination of individually good projects unnecessarily constitutes the optimal portfolio. In particular, this study discusses three portfolio effects: (1) the difference between the preference for the portfolio as a whole and the preference for the projects, (2) the interrelation among projects, (3) the size of portfolio selection problems. This study develops a three–phase framework for evaluating R&D portfolios and proposes a new taxonomy of the portfolio attributes (i.e. independent, interrelated, and synergistic). This study concludes with a discussion of future research, directed toward increasing the applicability of portfolio–selection approaches for managing R&D portfolios.     

When Research Meets Development: Antecedents and Implications of Transfer Speed

This paper focuses on the organization of new product development in large, R&D‐intensive firms. In these firms, research and development activities are often separated. Research is conducted in dedicated research projects at specialized research labs. Once research results are achieved by research projects, they are transferred to business units for further development and commercialization. We investigate the speed whereby research projects transfer their first research results to business units (hereafter: transfer speed). In particular, we analyze the antecedents and performance implications of transfer speed. Based on data of 503 research projects from a European R&D intensive manufacturing firm, our results suggest that a fast transfer speed (as measured by the time it takes for a research project to develop and transfer its first research result to business units) is associated with a better research performance (as measured by the total number of transfers the research project generates). Moreover, we find that different types of external R&D partners—science‐based and market‐based partners—play distinct roles in speeding up project first research transfers. While market‐based partnerships (i.e., customers and suppliers) generally contribute to a faster transfer of first research results, science‐based partnerships (i.e., universities and research institutions) only speed up first research transfers of technologically very complex projects. Our results also show that early patent filings by research projects accelerate first research transfers.     

Technology analysis and R&D management

Technology analysis is a new field of knowledge aimed at creating a fuller understanding of the technological setting within which business operates. It provides a macro-discipline and is specifically aimed at improving the effectiveness of management of technology. As such it is of direct relevance to R&D management.
The essential tools of technology analysis constitute a set of analytical frameworks covering aspects such as: (i) a common approach to describing individual technological artefacts, (ii) a taxonomy of technologies, (iii) a classification of technological trends, (iv) a chart of technological limits, and (v) a socio-technical preference profile.
These frameworks help the R&D manager to dissect and debate typical R&D management problems such as: (i) selecting R&D projects, (ii) setting broad R&D objectives in the case of a given project and (iii) setting specific R&D goals to meet the said objectives. The frameworks also help the R&D manager to portray and present research achievements within a simple and intuitively appealing framework.     

Strategies for Linking Vertical Cooperative R&D to Commercialization in Korea

Since 1982, the government of Korea has actively promoted vertical cooperative R&D programs between government-sponsored research institutes (GRIs) and private firms. A number affirms participated in the programs because cooperative R&D could lower the risk and could contribute to rapid commercialization of many technologies. In this article, Chulwon Lee, Zong-Tae Bae, and Jinjoo Lee examine the effectiveness of participant firms' strategies for commercial utilization of cooperative R&D results, from the viewpoint of technology sourcing at the project level. The data have been obtained from 162 cases of vertical cooperative R&D projects from a diverse group of industries in Korea. Three different commercialization strategies are empirically derived through cluster analysis of the relative usage rates of cooperative R&D and of other supplementary technology acquisition methods. They find that the effectiveness of these strategy clusters varies significantly according to the types of innovation, that is, project-business relatedness. If the project belongs to an existing business area, in-house development augmented cooperative R&D strategy is the most effective. On the other hand, licensing-in supplemented cooperative R&D strategy is the most successful, if the project belongs to a new business area. Findings suggest that firms participating in cooperative R&D projects should try to utilize other supplementary technology acquisition methods in order to achieve commercial utilization of cooperative R&D results.     

Managing Relations Between R&D and Marketing in New Product Development Projects

This article examines the R&D/marketing interface conditions found within an extensive data base of new product development innovation projects. The incidence of different types of problems between these two important functions are analyzed and the effects of these observations on project outcomes are discussed. The article contains a number of recommendations for increasing the success rates of innovation projects by using a model that improves conditions at the R&D/marketing interface.     

How entrepreneurial orientation can leverage innovation project portfolio management

Innovation project portfolio management (IPPM) is a key task in R&D management because this decision‐making process determines which R&D projects should be undertaken and how R&D resources are allocated. Previous research has developed a good understanding of the role of IPPM in R&D strategy implementation and of successful IPPM practices. But the fundamental orientations that drive the strategy formation and implementation process have never been investigated in the context of IPPM, and it is unclear whether successful practices are equally valid for different strategic orientations. This study, therefore, investigates the moderating impact of a firm’s entrepreneurial orientation on the relationship between strategic portfolio management practices and portfolio success. An empirical analysis of 257 firms shows that both innovativeness and risk taking as entrepreneurial orientation’s dimensions positively moderate the relationship between managerial practices and performance. Specifically, we find that firms high in innovativeness profit more from stakeholder engagement compared to firms low in innovativeness. Firms high in risk‐taking profit more from a clearly formulated strategy. With increasing innovativeness and risk‐taking propensity, firms also profit more from business case monitoring and agility in portfolio steering. The results suggest that a firm’s entrepreneurial orientation can leverage the effect of IPPM practices. Vice versa, a lacking entrepreneurial orientation can render these practices ineffective. Strategic orientation and IPPM practices should, therefore, be aligned with each other to enable firms to better implement their strategy and generate competitive advantage.     

The value of a ‘failed’ R&D project: an emerging evaluation framework for building innovative capabilities1

In literature and R&D organizations alike, project success consists in minimizing the deviations from set targets in terms of quality, cost and time. The main management task is to execute and monitor progress to reduce risks – assuming that project attributes are known, necessary resources can be estimated and a reasonable time table can be agreed upon. In such a context, evaluating project success is easy. However, in an innovative context, setting project targets initially is difficult and the contributions of the projects sometimes are of an unexpected nature. This paper investigates if projects can be evaluated in terms of how they contribute to the building of innovative capabilities of the firm instead of independently. Based on a case study at the Régie Autonome des Transports Parisians and the theoretical framework of innovation fields, a framework for evaluating projects from an additional perspective is proposed. Based on the following four criteria: financial resources, the development of a structured, refined and expanded strategic vision, developed competences (with related suppliers) and identification of knowledge gaps (occasionally with related partners for knowledge production), this framework shows how seemingly failed R&D projects can instead be considered as invaluable to the overall innovation process.     

Principal researcher and project manager: who should drive R&D projects?

In this paper, it is analyzed the hypothesis that in R&D the principal researcher (PR) is accepted as the coordinator or project manager (PM), carrying out the search for financing and to manage contracts, resources, cost, time, scope, risk and uncertainty, communication, stakeholders and so on, in addition to internal research activities. Thus, this study tries to verify this hypothesis through a major literature review in different types of projects developed by university, but also with a look to industry and industry-university cooperation. Two case studies are also analyzed, centered in its R&D project management maturity level. It is concluded that there is an important issue in projects’ success and in the time spent by PR in management, work for which they are under trained; while at the industry there is a greater approach to project management by the proximity of the innovation projects to other industrial projects. Following these initial findings and according to the case study results, it is proposed that R&D Projects in universities would be separated into two synergistic knowledge areas: R&D Management and Project Management. It is also recommended to allocate them to two distinct roles, where they could add value to R&D through their better knowledge and skills.     

The lasting qualities of PERT: Preferences and perceptions of R&D project managers

This survey was conducted on the perceived popularity of PERT and PERT-type management systems; whether PERT'S applications were static, increasing, or decreasing, and whether its use was by choice or imposition. The extent of applications of PERT for managing various types of research and development (R&D) was examined with the view to ascertaining its individual popularity when applied to (a) basic research, (b) applied research, or (c) development projects. In addition, an inquiry was made into the estimated expense of PERT systems to plan and control projects as a percentage of the budget. The results of the survey are presented and discussed relative to various sizes of R&D organizations.     

Development and application of a new methodology of evaluating industrial R&D projects

This paper proposes a new methodology of evaluating industrial R&D projects to assess the effectiveness of future R&D in terms of financial credibility, to prioritize them efficiently by clear criteria to reduce the time and burden consumed by both project leaders and management staffs. A new methodology has been developed and applied to all Sumitomo Electric Industries (SEI) R&D projects, and is recognized as a useful system for evaluating many R&D projects in a short period, such as 150 projects per month.     

Problem‐formulation and problem‐solving in self‐organized communities: How modes of communication shape project behaviors in the free open‐source software community

Research summary: Building on the problem‐solving perspective, we study behaviors related to projects and the communication‐based antecedents of such behaviors in the free open‐source software (FOSS) community. We examine two kinds of problem/project‐behaviors: Individuals can set up projects around the formulation of new problems or join existing projects and define and/or work on subproblems within an existing problem. The choice between these two behaviors is influenced by the mode of communication. A communication mode with little a priori structure is the best mode for communicating about new problems (i.e., formulating a problem); empirically, it is associated with project launching behaviors. In contrast, more structured communication fits subproblems better and is related to project joining behaviors. Our hypotheses derive support from data from the FOSS community. Managerial summary: We study how the way in which individuals communicate influence the project‐behaviors they engage in. We find that relatively unstructured communication is associated with the setting up new projects, while communication that is structured around an artifact is associated with joining projects. Our findings hold implications for understanding how management may influence project behaviors and problem‐solving: Firms that need to concentrate on more incremental problem‐solving efforts (e.g., because a sufficient number of attractive problems have already been defined) should create environments in which interaction is undertaken mainly via artifacts. On the other hand, if firms seek to generate new problems (e.g., new strategic opportunities), they should create environments in which open‐ended, verbal conversation is relatively more important than artifact‐based communication. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

R&D–Marketing Integration Mechanisms, Communication Flows, and Innovation Success

Rudy Moenaert, William Souder, Arnoud De Meyer, and Dirk Deschoolmeester report the results of their study of forty technologically innovative Belgian companies to examine the interaction between marketing and R&D. They studied one commercially successful and one commercially unsuccessful technological product innovation project in each participating company and collected data from one marketing and one R&D respondent per project. Communication flows between marketing and R&D are increased under conditions involving formalization of projects, decentralization, positive interfunctional climate, and role flexibility.     

An extension to a DEA support system used for assessing R&D projects

This paper describes an extension to the data envelopment analysis (DEA) support system that has been used for the assessment, rating, and ranking of diverse portfolios of research and development (R&D) projects at Lucent Technologies. The approach is illustrated through its application to a large portfolio of R&D projects considered by Lucent's Advanced Technologies Group. The method proceeds by first stratifying the portfolio into comparably efficient groups of projects through the construction of a series of efficient DEA frontiers, and then by lexicographically ranking each project within these groups relative to DEA-based contextual attractiveness measures calculated from the different partitions. The advantages to this approach are provided not only from the perspective of the specific project rankings that are produced but also from the broader managerial insights that can be derived from any resulting differences between officially sanctioned, quantitative decision-making procedures, and the quality of the decisions that have actually been made by managers.     

The Effects of Cognitive Problem-Solving Orientation and Technological Familiarity on Faster New Product Development

This study examines the relationships between speed of development and the cognitive problemsolving orientations of both members of the team and the project leader when they work with more familiar or less familiar technologies. Edward McDonough and Gloria Barczak collected data from 32 new product development projects in 12 British companies. They report that technological familiarity moderates the relationship between speed of development and the cognitive problem-solving orientation of both project leaders and project teams and they explore implications of these results for R&D managers.