工业企业新产品开发供应链管理研究（4）—供应商在新产品开发供应链中的作用研究

通过在企业新产品开发过程中，对供应商与开发企业的关系分析，研究供应商在新产品开发供应链中的作用。指出要缩短项目开发周期、提高新产品技术含量和质量、降低开发成本，供应商对项目的介入是不容忽视的重要因素。     

工业企业新产品开发供应链管理研究（5）—新产品开发供应链营销管理分析

研究分析新产品开发营销管理中顾客与新产品的关系，新产品的定价策略，营销渠道策略和营销策略。     

企业新产品开发的模式创新

新产品开发并不仅仅是一个“导向”的问题,新产品开发是个系统工程,一套科学系统的新产品开发的模式才是这些企业赢得成功的关键所在。     

工业企业新产品开发供应链管理研究(3)——新产品开发费用与开发周期关系

分析新产品开发费用与开发周期的关系 ,研究新产品进入市场的策略。     

高校科技产业开发研究的基本准则

高校科技产业如何在市场经济的大潮站稳脚跟、求得发展,因素诸多,但重要因素是与产品开发研究的方向是否对头,开发研究的产品科技含量高低等因素有关。本文拟就高校科技产业开发研究的几个问题进行研究和探讨,以求得共识。 一、聘任开发研究的人才 高校科技产业得以健康发展,选聘高标准、高质量的科技人才至关重要。科技人才是高校科技产业人才的主体,承担着高新技术研究和新产品开发的重任。选聘高校科技产业开发研究人才要注意选拔以下三     

新产品开发的系统思考

新产品开发是一项系统工程。作为一个复杂的系统,其包含众多子系统。子系统内部以及子系统之间,存在着错综复杂的联系。新产品开发需要运用全方位与全过程的系统思维方法,主要考虑如下问题。 一、顾客需求 调查顾客的需求是新产品开发的起点。顾客需求包括需要与支付能力两方面,要调查清楚并不容易,这主要是由顾客需求的群体性、分散性及隐含性引起。调查研究顾客的需求,首先应确立完整的调查内容系统;其次是建立调查组织体系,如顾客服务网络等,用以收集顾客需求信息;再次是对调查得到的零散数据进行分析整理,使之明晰化、逻辑化,把顾客的需求翻译成对产品的性能要求,并排出这些要求的优先次序。     

程序公平对新产品开发成功的影响——跨职能整合的中介作用

本文通过对中外汽车合资企业的实地调研，提出将程序公平引入现有关于跨职能整合与新产品开发成功的模型中，并进一步提出跨职能整合在合资企业程序公平与新产品开发成功关系中的中介作用。通过对获取数据的分析，发现合资企业程序公平不仅可以直接影响合资企业的新产品开发成功，而且也可以通过跨职能整合间接影响新产品开发成功，而跨职能整合在程序公平与新产品开发成功关系中起中介作用。     

工业企业新产品开发供应链管理研究（3）——新产品开发费用与开发周期 …

分析新产品开发费用与开发周期的关系，研究新产品进入市场的策略。     

供应商参与新产品开发的影响因素研究

本文在国内外供应商参与新产品开发影响因素的相关文献的基础之上,总结出了供应商参与新产品开发的四方面维度以及各个维度下的具体因素,构建了影响因素的理论模型,并在此基础上提出了相应的研究假设.希望通过本文的研究,能够为我国制造企业的供应商参与新产品开发提供一定的理论和实践指导.     

新产品开发成功因素分析

新产品开发是一个十分复杂的过程。一种新产品要经过预测，可行性分析，决策，科研，设计，生产，销售，广告等许多环节才能走上市场，而上市的新产品能否为市场所接受，还是一个未知数。因此，影响新产品成开发的因素很多，只有在分析的基础上掌握这些因素，在实践中加以应用，新产品开发成功率才能有效地提高。     

Antecedents of Team Intuition and Its Impact on the Success of New Product Development Projects

Research on new product development (NPD) team decision making has identified a number of cognitive mechanisms (e.g., team intelligence, teamwork quality, and charged behavior) that appear to guide NPD teams toward effective decisions. Despite an extensive body of literature on these aspects of NPD team decisions, team intuition has yet to be investigated in the context of NPD teams. Intuition is regarded as a form of information processing that differs from cognitive processes, and is associated with gut feelings, hunches, and mystical insights. Past research on intuition suggests that many managers and teams embrace intuition as an effective approach in response to situations in a turbulent environment where decisions need to be made immediately. Past research also revealed various benefits of intuition in decision making. These are: to speed up decision‐making process, to improve decision outcomes such as higher product quality, and to solve less structured problems (e.g., new product planning). This research examines the impact of team‐related antecedents (e.g., team member experience) and decision‐specific antecedents (e.g., decision importance) on intuition in NPD teams. The moderating impact of environmental turbulence between antecedent variables and intuition, as well as between intuition and team performance, is investigated. To test hypotheses, data were collected from 155 NPD projects in Turkey. The results showed that past team member experience, transactive memory systems (TMS), team empowerment, decision importance, and decision motives are significantly related to team intuition. The results also revealed that team intuition is significantly related to product success and speed‐to‐market, with both high and low levels of market turbulence. The findings of this study present some interesting practical implications to managers in order to improve intuitive skills of NPD teams. First, managers should make sure that team members have the relevant expertise to facilitate effective intuition. Second, managers should encourage and enhance TMS for effective intuition. If team members are not able to gain timely and unhindered access to others who have the needed experience and knowledge, past team member experience becomes idle in order to make effective intuitive judgments. Third, managers concerned with achieving successfully developed products and helping teams to make immediate but accurate decisions during NPD process should assign more power to team members so that they can rely on their intuitive skills.     

The Effects of Decentralization in Strategy‐Making and National Culture on NPD Portfolio Planning

Traditionally, the understanding among scholars and practitioners has been that a portfolio of NPD projects is the expression of a firm's strategy and thus it must support the strategy. In keeping with this view, the current study focuses on new product development (NPD) portfolio planning, which is defined as a firm's effort to formulate portfolio decisions using a defined innovation strategy. Connecting portfolio decisions to a defined innovation strategy has been associated with higher innovation success. Surprisingly, empirical research indicates that portfolio decisions do not always support the company's innovation strategy. Furthermore, during recent years, an increasing number of authors underscore the importance of responsiveness and adaptability in portfolio decision‐making. The current study addresses these two issues by examining a direct effect of decentralization in strategy‐making on NPD portfolio planning, and a moderating effect of decentralization in strategy‐making on the relationship between NPD portfolio planning and NPD program success. The study also examines the influence of national culture on the proposed relationships. The theoretical model was tested using data from the 2012 PDMA Comparative Performance Assessment Study. Findings indicate that NPD portfolio planning positively influences NPD program success. Also, results revealed inverted U‐shaped direct and moderating effects, respectively, of decentralization in strategy‐making on NPD portfolio planning, and of decentralization in strategy‐making on the relationship between NPD portfolio planning and NPD program success. With regard to the moderating effect of national culture, results indicate that uncertainty avoidance does not moderate the relationship between NPD portfolio planning and NPD program success. Nonetheless, we found significant moderating effects of individualism and power distance on the curvilinear relationship between decentralization in strategy‐making and NPD portfolio planning.     

Stage‐to‐Stage Information Dependency in the NPD Process: Effective Learning or a Potential Entrapment of NPD Gates?

The new product development (NPD) process is a sequence of stages and gates. Each stage consists of NPD activities that provide NPD managers with information input about the new product project progression. Information input is used for review decisions at gates. Over the course of an NPD process, managers learn about a new product project as to ensure successful launch. The view is that a new product project is shaped by the path of NPD activities it has traveled. Because learning is assumed to take place over the course of the NPD process, stage‐to‐stage information dependency is an assumption of NPD research. A concern raised is that development activities for each NPD stage are rigorously followed by NPD managers. In other words, stage‐to‐stage information dependency may potentially trap NPD managers rather than create effective learning from end to end of the development process. The purpose of this paper is to explore the assumption of stage‐to‐stage information dependency in NPD. The investigated research questions are whether the selection of NPD activities is linked between stages and whether these information dependencies strengthen NPD gate decisions. For the information dependencies identified in the study, the innovation experience characteristics of NPD managers pursuing them and the influence of information dependencies on NPD gate decisions are analyzed so as to provide insights for a discussion of information dependency versus information independency in the NPD process. The applied research method is an experiential simulation of NPD gate decision‐making—NPDGATES. One hundred thirty‐one NPD managers from international product development strategic business units (SBUs) situated in Denmark participated in the study. Logistic regressions were conducted as the basis for the calculation of stage‐to‐stage information dependency probabilities. Based on the study findings, the assumption about information dependency in the NPD process held by NPD research is found to be flawed. End‐to‐end information paths in the NPD process are rare. Further, market condition changes are found to significantly influence the stage‐to‐stage information dependencies demonstrated by NPD managers. It seems that competition becomes a reassurance of NPD efforts. Also, the results show that NPD experience creates inflexibility in relation to the selection of NPD activities. The need for strict process management is strong among experienced NPD managers. In relation to NPD gates, the results show that information dependencies increase priority given to financial decision criteria at gates and lower priority given to customer and market decision criteria. Overall, stage‐to‐stage information dependency seems to create inflexibility that hinders successful NPD process implementation.     

Identifying and prioritizing critical success factors for conflict management in collaborative new product development

Conflict management is crucial to the success of client-supplier collaborative new product development (NPD). This paper examines the critical success factors of conflict management in collaborative NPD. Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), the importance of 4 categories of success factors, namely relationship management, conflict handling system, new product development process management and communication, totally 13 factors, are prioritized. The results show that communication management, trust and commitment to the collaboration are the most important factors. Based on the factors identified, a hierarchy model of conflict management is proposed, with which clients and suppliers can formulate action plans for better conflict management.     

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.     

Improving the New Product Development Process: A Fractal Paradigm for High-Technology Products

Those professionals who are charged with improving the new product development (NPD) process may well feel as though they have been asked to bring order out of chaos. For every level in the organization, and for every step in the NPD process, they must contend with myriad, often interdependent choices—of products and processes; of tools and technologies; of proven best practices and hypothesized solutions. In turn, each choice may cascade into several additional decisions. With so many issues to address and so many variables to consider, practioners and researchers alike need a clear, but complete, framework for exploring, understanding, and improving the NPD process. To help bring some order to the study and the practice of NPD management, W. Austin Spivey, J. Michael Munson, and John H. Wolcott introduce a new metaphor, or paradigm, for product development: a fractal paradigm. Like some fractal images, their framework for understanding the essence of NPD rests on the concept of self-similarity. In other words, the picture their framework provides for understanding and managing the NPD process consists of the same set of concerns, regardless of the level at which the process is viewed. They developed this fractal paradigm during an empirical study of technology transition in a highly successful federal laboratory organization. Whether the focus is on the organization, the division, the team, or the individual, the essence of the NPD process as viewed through their framework comes down to two sets of factors: management factors and resource factors. In turn, each of these factors cascades into several interrelated sets of concerns. For example, the management factors comprise concerns about leadership and the management system. The resource factors include concerns about information, infrastructure, time, and money. Regardless of the level of detail at which the framework is viewed, improving the NPD process requires attention to all of these factors, by all levels within the organization. For example, visionary leadership on the part of senior management will have little effect if middle management and line supervisors fail to provide the necessary leadership for their respective groups of subordinates. Notwithstanding the complexity of the NPD process, the fractal paradigm focuses attention on those few key factors that must be managed continually, throughout all levels of the organization, to ensure successful commercialization of new products.     

The Effects of Environmental Turbulence on New Product Development Strategy Planning

Managers need guidance on how to cope with turbulent environments in order to improve corporate performance. Research on environmental turbulence has suggested that firms adopt a less centralized, more organic structure in dynamic, uncertain environments. Little work has been done specifically, however, on how environmental turbulence affects strategy planning for new product development (NPD). In this article, we specify a baseline model with firm innovativeness, market orientation and top management risk taking as antecedents to NPD speed and corporate strategic planning; these in turn are modeled as antecedents to NPD program (not project) performance. Two conceptualizations of the role of environmental turbulence are examined: (1) that market turbulence and technological turbulence are additional direct antecedents to NPD program performance; and (2) that the baseline model is moderated by turbulence (that is, that the strengths of the paths differ depending on levels of turbulence). A cross-sectional survey methodology including four diverse industries [automotive, electronics, publishing, and manufacturing/research and development (R&D) laboratories] was used to test the hypotheses. The latter conceptualization is supported. In particular, the paths from innovativeness to strategic planning and from risk taking to NPD speed are significantly greater in highly turbulent environments. A set of managerial recommendations and implications are provided. First, managers must recognize the possible improvements in new product performance by actively including NPD personnel in corporate strategic planning and also by involving corporate planners in NPD activities. Second, managers also should recognize that turbulent environments heighten the need to make risky investments, and sometimes, risky decisions; risk-taking decisions ought to be encouraged in such environments.     

An Empirical Investigation of the Antecedents and Outcomes of NPD Portfolio Success

Managing new product development (NPD) portfolios is difficult and little is known about how successful NPD portfolio management can improve overall firm performance. Despite regular calls in the literature for more research on NPD portfolio management, what successful NPD portfolio management means and how firms can achieve it remains unclear. For this reason, this paper combines theory and previous empirical findings to build a model of the antecedents and outcomes of NPD portfolio success. We generate and test 12 hypotheses with empirical data from 189 paired dyads in Dutch firms. Our results show that all three dimensions of NPD portfolio decision‐making effectiveness (i.e., portfolio mindset, focus, and agility) are associated with achieving the three dimensions of NPD portfolio success (i.e., strategic alignment, maximal NPD portfolio value, and portfolio balance), which in turn influences market performance. While a portfolio mindset and agility are related to all three dimensions of NPD portfolio success, focus is related only to strategic alignment and maximal value. No one dimension of NPD portfolio decision‐making effectiveness or portfolio success is sufficient to achieve overall market performance. We also found several unexpected findings with important implications. For example, portfolio balance, one recommended measure of portfolio success, has no direct link to market performance, but operates through the other two dimensions of NPD portfolio success, i.e., strategic alignment and maximal portfolio value. We conclude our paper with implications for further theory development and testing on successful NPD portfolio decision‐making, and with implications for managerial practice.     

Industrial New Product Launch Strategies and Product Development Performance

Just as reporters must answer a few fundamental questions in every story they write, decision-makers in the new product development (NPD) process must address five key issues: what to launch, where to launch, when to launch, why to launch, and how to launch. These decisions involve significant commitments of time, money, and resources. They also go a long way toward determining the success or failure of any new product. Deeper insight into the tradeoffs these decisions involve may help to increase the likelihood of success for product launch efforts. Erik Jan Hultink, Abbie Griffin, Susan Hart, and Henry Robben present the results of a study that examines the interplay between these product launch decisions and NPD performance. Noting that previous launch studies focus primarily on the tactical decisions (that is, how to launch) rather than on the strategic decisions (what, where, when, and why to launch), they explore not only which decisions are important to success, but also the associations between the two sets of decisions. Because the strategic launch decisions made early in the NPD process affect the tactical decisions made later in the process, their study emphasizes the importance of launch consistency—that is, the alignment of the strategic and tactical decisions made throughout the process. The survey respondents—managers from marketing, product development, or general management in U.K. firms—provided information about 221 industrial new products launched during the previous five years. The responses identify associations between various sets of strategic and tactical decisions. That is, the responses suggest that the strategic decisions managers make regarding product innovativeness, market targeting, the number of competitors, and whether the product is marketing- or technology-driven are associated with subsequent tactical decisions regarding branding, distribution expenditure and intensity, and pricing. The study also suggests that different sets of launch decisions have differing effects on performance of industrial new products. In this study, the greatest success was enjoyed by a small group of respondents categorized as Niche Innovators. Their launch strategy involves a niche focus, targeting innovative products into markets with few competitors. Tactical decisions made by this group include exclusive distribution, a skimming pricing strategy, and a broad product assortment.     

What we will do versus what we can do: The relative effects of unit‐level NPD motivation and capability

Although a firm's innovation performance has been commonly attributed to its innovative capability, in a study of 102 Chinese automobile assemblers, we find that employees' collective motivation for new product development (NPD) is more important than NPD capability in determining firms' innovation performance. This finding suggests that researchers need to simultaneously consider both unit‐level capability and unit‐level motivation in studying the mechanisms that drive innovation. Furthermore, our results indicate that a firm's strategic orientation focusing on NPD affects its employees' collective NPD motivation and NPD capability through relevant, mediating HRM practices. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.