Determinants of R&D–Marketing Integration in High-Tech Japanese Firms

Although the R&D/marketing interface has been extensively studied in U.S. firms, this article reports the results of a study of this important relationship in Japanese high-tech firms. Based on published studies of U.S. firms, Mark Parry and Michael Song hypothesize that Japanese R&D managers' perceptions of the ideal level of R&D/marketing integration will reflect perceptions of both their firm's strategy and environmental uncertainty. They also hypothesize that perceptions of the level of achieved R&D/marketing integration are related to perceptions of organizational structure and climate. To test these hypotheses, they examine the survey responses of 274 Japanese R&D managers. Their analysis suggests that R&D managers' perceptions of firm strategy and the level of environmental uncertainty are significantly correlated with the perceived need for integration. Findings also indicate that R&D managers' perceptions of achieved integration reflect perceptions of the quality of R&D/marketing relations, the value placed on integration by senior management, the business background of R&D personnel and the risk-orientation of senior management.     

The R&D–Marketing Interface in Japanese High-Technology Firms

Gupta, Raj and Wilemon [11,12] have examined the R&D–marketing interface in US high-technology firms. X. Michael Song and Mark E. Parry explore the generalizability of those findings to Japanese high-tech firms, specifically, comparing the perceptions of 223 Japanese R&D and marketing managers regarding activities that require R&D–marketing integration, the level of achieved integration in Japanese firms and the types of integration related to variations in new product success rates. Their analyses reveal a number of consistencies between the perceptions of US and Japanese managers.     

Improving R&D/Marketing relations: R&D's perspective

Abstract
Successful product innovation hinges on close R&D/marketing relationships, especially in technology-based organizations. However, there is evidence that linkage problems are common and when they are not overcome failure is the usual result.
R&D's perspective on what R&D, marketing and senior management can do to improve their relationship with marketing is presented. The recommendations are based on suggestions from R&D directors involved in new product development efforts in 83 technology-based companies. Also presented is how the need for integration has changed over time and where it is going in the future.     

Marketing/R&D Interaction in New Product Development: Implications for New Product Success Rates

A growing body of literature has evolved which deals with the interaction between marketing and R&D in new product development. Much of this research, unfortunately, fails to associate various variables with new product success levels. Thus, it cannot suggest consensus guidelines for marketing's involvement to increase the performance levels of new products in the market place. Richard Hise, Larry O'Neal, A. Parasuraman and James McNeal report results of their analysis of the new product development procedures of 252 large manufacturing companies. The authors conclude that collaborative efforts between marketing and R&D during the actual designing of new products appear to be a key factor in explaining the success levels of new products, that management effort should focus on the design stage of the new product development process rather than on the earlier and later stages and that R&D's contributions cannot be ignored while decisions are made about marketing's role in developing new consumer and industrial products.     

R&D Project Termination Decisions: Processes, Communication, and Personnel Changes

The decision to terminate a project can demoralize project managers and team members, and increase concerns about job security. For these reasons, managers tend to delay project termination decisions. However, delaying project termination diverts scarce R&D resources from higher potential projects. Ramaiya Balachandra, Klaus K. Brockhoff, and Alan W. Pearson describe the results of a study that explores the manner in which managers inform staff of the decision to terminate or continue a project. Survey respondents are the highest ranking R&D managers in 78 large German, British, and U.S. companies. Respondents were asked to describe the procedures they use for monitoring R&D projects and deciding whether to continue a project. Underlying this research is the belief that more effective management of these processes can improve project team effectiveness, employee relations, and morale. All survey respondents use project monitoring procedures. Most use formal procedures, often supplemented with informal procedures. More than one person usually monitors projects. Project managers, their immediate superiors, and project staff typically have these responsibilities, but respondents also indicate that marketing managers often monitor projects. Compared to U.S. companies, European firms typically involve fewer people in project monitoring. U.S. firms involve more non-R&D personnel in these tasks. Most firms focus on monitoring such variables as time, technical success, and probability of technical success. Staff motivation is the least used monitoring variable. Cost control was mentioned more frequently by German respondents than by respondents from other countries. Decisions regarding the fate of a project usually come from individuals not directly involved with the project. Termination decisions are typically communicated in writing; no respondents use staff meetings to relate such decisions. Following the decision to terminate a project, management faces the difficult task of finding suitable jobs for project team members. Rather than assign an entire team to a new project, management typically disbands a team and assigns its members to other teams. The inherently uneven progress of R&D projects complicates these scheduling problems, and thus compounds the career uncertainty caused by project termination decisions.     

Innovation and productivity in R&D: associated individual and organizational variables

The relationships of organizational variables with innovation and productivity of scientists and engineers in R&D laboratories were explored. Peer ratings of innovation (original and useful output) and productivity (quantity of output) were utilized as criteria. Information was obtained on 154 scientists/engineers in 35 work groups in three Air Force R&D laboratories, Significant relationships found between organizational variables and innovation and productivity included: rewards for innovation, communication on technical matters with other scientists/engineers within the work group, and an age-education demographic group of variables. Level of participation in goal setting and group leader's level of empathy were also consistently related to level of productivity.     

Innovation strategies for successful product and process commercialization in Government R&D

This study examines the rate at which product and process innovations emerging from Government R&D have been commercialized by the Irish dairy industry. Success rates for both product and process commercialization, which are high by international standards, were found. The study identifies two criteria which appear to influence success and failure. Some product and process differences were found and the data suggest that a user dominated innovation strategy may be best for products, while a technology dominated strategy appears to be best for process innovations. Remarkably high rates for product success can be achieved in Government R&D provided industry activates the R&D. On the other hand R&D activation by research staff, without any industry involvement in the conduct of the R&D, appears to have a very poor chance of success. However, research staff can activate and achieve high success rates, particularly for process innovations, provided industry involvement in the R&D is secured.     

How Canon and Sony Drive Product Innovation Through Networking and Application-Focused R&D

To ensure the ongoing vitality of a company's product offerings, R&D professionals must play a daunting array of roles. The already rapid, yet still accelerating, pace of technological change may lead some companies to devote more resources to intensive internal research efforts. However, the shift toward global competition demands a more market-oriented focus from R&D; clear understanding of current and potential markets must drive R&D efforts. And efficient, cost-effective manufacturing of new products requires an R&D organization that understands and interacts effectively with the production department. How does a company create an environment in which its R&D organization comprises market-savvy, production-friendly experts in diverse technologies? With case studies of R&D efforts at Canon and Sony, Sigvald Harryson identifies and illustrates the key mechanisms that these companies use to foster product innovation. His examples show how Canon and Sony use a combination of external and internal networking mechanisms to identify and acquire key technologies and related skills, gain market knowledge, improve the results of internal R&D efforts, and ensure the successful transfer of these results to efficient production processes. He identifies four key mechanisms underlying successful product innovation at Canon and Sony: strategic training and job rotation for engineers, application-driven R&D, direct transfer of development teams from R&D to production, and extensive networking with external centers of excellence and key suppliers. At Canon, the initial training program for all researchers and engineers begins with three months of work on a production line. Sony's new researchers and development engineers spend one month in production. Both companies also give their new R&D professionals three months of training in sales and marketing. The emphasis on market-driven research at both companies means that researchers have identified some commercial application for almost every initial research proposal that gains approval. Neither company treats research as a long-term assignment; almost all engineers at both companies eventually move from the labs to production. And rather than viewing this job rotation strategy as a drain on the technological expertise in their labs, both companies rely on strong external networks with key suppliers and university-based researchers as important sources for acquiring new technologies and the competencies needed to support them.     

商标创新与市场效应

在商家努力塑造品牌的今天，包装的变化尤为重要。如何使包装更美观、更加具备货架展示魅力，成为包装的新课题。标签自然也承担更重要的使命——增强货柜效应；强烈充分地秀出产品独特靓丽的外表，利用消费者对美好事物的向往，激起其购买欲望，提高商品的市场占有率。因此，必须对商标的作用与特性进行研究。[编者按]     

An Information Transfer Model for Integrating Marketing and R&D Personnel in New Product Development Projects

Marketing and R&D personnel are key actors in the development of new product innovations. Interdependence between the marketing and the R&D functions necessitates integration. Rudy Moenaert and William Souder feel that task specification, structural design and climate orientation are the major integration mechanisms advocated in the literature. Supported by an extensive literature review, they propose a nomological network which interrelates integration mechanisms, interfunctional information transfer, uncertainty reduction and new product innovation success. They develop a causal framework to describe the determinants of successful information transfer between marketing and R&D in the development of technologically new products.     

Teamwork Barriers in Japanese High-Technology Firms: The Sociocultural Differences Between R&D and Marketing Managers

Building and maintaining internal harmony is a fundamental concern for managers in many Japanese firms. Discussions of Japanese management practices often point to the intense socialization of new recruits, the rotation of employees through different functions, and the significant role of seniority in determining salary levels and promotions. Considering this emphasis on harmony, can we reasonably assume that the orientations of Japanese R&D and marketing managers do not differ in any ways that may pose significant barriers to teamwork between their departments? X. Michael Song and Mark E. Parry test this assumption by examining the sociocultural differences between R&D and marketing managers in Japanese high-technology firms. Using responses from both R&D and marketing managers in 223 firms, their study groups the respondents’ employers as either low- or high-integration firms. They examine the sociocultural differences between the R&D and marketing managers in the study along five dimensions: time orientation, bureaucratic orientation, professional orientation, tolerance for ambiguity, and preferences for high-risk, high-return projects. Contrary to expectations, the responses reveal several significant differences between the R&D and marketing managers in this study. Compared to their colleagues in marketing, the Japanese R&D managers in this study generally have a stronger preference for high-risk, high-return investments. The R&D managers in the study also have a longer time orientation than the Japanese marketing managers. However, marketing managers from the high-integration firms in the study have a longer time orientation than their counterparts in low-integration firms. Compared to the R&D managers, Japanese marketing managers in the high-integration firms studied have a greater tolerance for ambiguity. And relative to managers in low-integration firms, marketing and R&D managers in the high-integration firms in this study typically have a more bureaucratic organization. Perhaps most important, a significant number of R&D managers in this study perceive the marketing managers in their firms to have higher organizational status. Specifically, responses from R&D managers indicate that they perceive their marketing colleagues to have higher salaries, more power, and brighter career prospects. Such perceptions may foster morale problems among R&D professionals in these Japanese firms, and thus require management intervention to ensure that R&D performance does not suffer.     

Innovation, Rent Extraction, and Integration in Systems Markets

We consider innovation incentives in markets where final goods are systems comprising two strictly complementary components, one of which is monopolized. We focus on the case in which the complementary component is competitively supplied and innovation is important. We explore ways in which the monopoly may have incentives to extract efficiency rents in the competitive sector, thus weakening or destroying incentives for independent innovation. We discuss how these problems are affected if the monopolist integrates into supply of the complement.     

Business Strategy, R&D Management and Environmental Imperatives

Abstract
Environmental imperatives are seen by many business leaders to represent a major issue for the 1990's and beyond. The debate about the environmental sustainability of economic activity has important implications for the development of business and places considerable emphasis on the need for planned corporate change. The strategic significance of the environment is particularly critical to R&D as this is characterised by long planning horizons and provides the setting for the development of future products and processes.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the connections between environmental imperatives, strategic change and R&D management. To this end the paper reviews the strategic nature of environmental pressures on business. From this base, consideration is given to the responses required by business, in meeting these pressures. The paper concludes by suggesting that the application of management techniques in concert with organisational change is needed for R&D management to build environmental considerations effectively into innovation. These suggestions can be used to gauge how far individual businesses have developed the systems and structures to enable them to move towards sustainability. The implication of the paper is that R&D management will not only need to apply new management techniques but will have to play a leading role in innovative organisational structures in order to fulfil the full potential of environmentally sensitive products and processes.