Do New Product Development Managers in Large or High-Market-Share Firms Perceive Marketing-R&D Interface Principles Differently?

In the quest for successful innovation, the importance of the R&Dlmarketing interface is virtually unquestioned. For many organizations, however, effective integration of technical and marketing functions is difficult, if not impossible. Despite seemingly widespread understanding of fundamental new product principles, some companies still manage to gain a larger share of the market than their competitors. This raises the question of whether managers in more successful companies have special insights into R&D'/'marketing interface principles that give them an edge over their competitors. To gain a better understanding of managers' perceptions of new product principles defined in the academic literature, Ted Haggblom, Roger J. Calantone, and C. Anthony Di Benedetto conducted a survey of 687 nonacademic members of the Product Development and Management Association. The basis for the survey was a set of 78 product management principles compiled from a search of more than 500 books and articles from various disciplines. From this survey, 14 of the 78 principles were selected as relevant to the study reported in this article. The principles discussed in this article involve such issues as resistance to change, short-term orientation, communication and trust between marketing and technical people, the effect of centralized decision-making on innovation, the importance of open communication flows, senior management's role in the R&D I marketing interface, and the necessity of a product champion. The primary quesstion addressed in this study is whether managers from successful companies perceive these principles differently from managers of less successful firms. The study provides partial support for the proposition that managers' perceptions of these new product principles depend on their company's success. In other words, the survey results suggest that managers in companies with higher market shares tend to agree more strongly with these principles than their counterparts in less successful firms. The study also explores the relationship between firm size and agreement with these principles of new product success. Specifically, the study assesses whether the perceptions of managers from smaller, more entrepreneurial companies differ from those of managers in larger companies. Although managers from small and large firms may view these principles from different perspectives, there were no statistically significant differences in the perceptions of managers from small and large firms.     

Mapping managers' market orientations regarding new product success

Research shows that managers' cognitive structures influence their decisions and firm outcomes, and that managers' shared understanding is critical to new product success. Yet, little is known about the content and structure of managers' knowledge regarding their business's market orientation (MO) and how such orientation relates to new product development. By drawing from research on managerial cognition, we suggest that an examination of managers' cognitive maps of their business's MO can provide valuable insights. First, cognitive maps provide information regarding the relative ranking of concepts that managers consider important to new product success. Second, they offer insights about the relationship among concepts by illustrating the causal logic flow, centrality, and strength of the association between concepts. Finally, cognitive maps reveal a gestalt or pattern of managers' understandings. This pattern provides an overall view of their perceptions of their firms' MO. Accordingly, the purpose of this article is to begin developing theory to explain the nature and extent of the sharing of managers' understanding of their business's MO across a company within the context of new product development. We develop several theoretical propositions using established research on market orientation and an exploratory investigation of the cognitive maps of a stratified sample of thirty managers of a highly successful frozen food division of a multinational company. We argue that managers of innovative companies with a history of successful new products in moderately dynamic industries will have established market orientations, as reflected in cognitive maps, which emphasize customer orientations more than competitor or technological orientations. Moreover, we suggest that managers will consistently recognize the importance of interfunctional coordination because it influences the firm's orientations towards customers, competitors, and technology by facilitating sharing of important market information necessary for successful new product development. Furthermore, we propose that the division of labor and functional specialization in a company will result in predictable differences across cognitive maps of managers in different functions and levels of the organization. For example, senior managers are likely to have a more balanced and integrated MO than junior managers, due to their knowledge of organization wide issues. The article also proposes an agenda for scholars interested in investigating the relationship between managers' cognitive maps of their company's market orientation and new product success. We note the importance of studying managers' cognitive structures in different types of industries over time, and how managers' cognitive structures may relate to their company's ability to learn. Managers could use cognitive mapping to recognize and evaluate beliefs that inhibit the sharing and interpretation of information between managers, departments, and levels and could design appropriate interventions.     

Interdepartmental Integration: A Definition with Implications for Product Development Performance

Improved interdepartmental integration yields improved product development performance. But what do we mean by interdepartmental integration? Is it increased interaction between the various departments involved in product development—in other words, more meetings and other formal information flows between R&D marketing and manufacturing? Or is the term integration another way of saying collaboration—that is, various departments working collectively toward common goals? Or are collaboration and interaction both important elements of interdepartmental integration? Kenneth B. Kahn presents the results of a study exploring how collaboration and interaction affect product development performance and product management (post-launch) performance. Survey respondents are marketing, manufacturing, and R&D department managers working for firms in the electronics industry. It is hypothesized that both collaboration and interaction between departments will positively influence product development performance and product management performance. It is further hypothesized that collaboration will have a stronger effect than interaction. The survey responses indicate that collaboration has a strong, positive effect on performance. (The only exception is the effect of manufacturing managers' collaboration with marketing on product development success; the effect of this variable is not statistically significant). However, interaction does not have a significant effect on product development performance or product management performance. In fact, the responses indicate negative effects for meetings and the exchange of documented information. The results support increased emphasis on company policies that facilitate collaboration between departments as opposed to those that only stress meetings and documented information exchange. Although a certain level of interaction is necessary throughout the product development process, such interaction doesn't lead to success; collaboration makes the difference between success and failure. To best manage interdepartmental integration, managers should first assess their firm's levels of interdepartmental collaboration and interaction. The scales presented in this study can be used for this benchmarking effort. The results of this assessment can be used for developing and implementing an action plan for improving interdepartmental integration. For example, a manager faced with a prevailing interaction philosophy might seek to reduce the number of meetings or the amount of paperwork flowing between departments.     

Marketing–Industrial Design Integration in New Product Development: The Case of China*

Despite the acknowledgement of functional integration as an important driver of new product development (NPD) success and the growing recognition of the significance of industrial design (ID), the integration between industrial design and other functional units in NPD has been rarely researched. In this article, we examine the marketing and ID integration in NPD in the context of China. Mainly based on Cooper's (1994) stage‐gate phases of NPD process and Gupta, Raj, and Wilemon's (1985) categorization of NPD activities, we develop a conceptual framework that identifies 29 areas that might require integration or where integration might occur between marketing and ID. Specifically, we investigate and compare the current and the ideal integration between marketing and ID perceived by the two functions. An analysis of data from 113 companies reveals that the current level of integration fell short of the ideal level of integration in all the phases of NPD. Both managers believed in the descending trend of integration along the stage‐gate NPD phases and were dissatisfied with the current level of integration in all the NPD phases. Except for a few areas of agreement, marketing and ID managers showed significant differences with each other in their perceptions of the current and the ideal integration in most of the 29 areas. Despite the disagreements however, the two functions agreed with each other on the most important areas that require integration and achieved the highest level of marketing–ID integration. These findings suggest that firms should improve the marketing–ID integration in all the NPD phases and that management could improve the effectiveness of marketing–ID integration by prioritizing and focusing on the most important areas. Research and managerial implications, limitations, and future research directions are presented in the paper.     

Environmental Uncertainty, Organizational Integration, and New Product Development Effectiveness: A Test of Contingency Theory

R&D/marketing integration clearly improves new-product development (NPD) effectiveness. However, achieving this integration increases the costs of NPD efforts. If technical and market uncertainty moderate the effects of integration on NPD effectiveness, perhaps a firm can achieve NPD success in a more cost-effective manner by seeking the appropriate level of integration, based on the perceived level of uncertainty. In a study of 101 NPD projects at high-tech firms in the U.S. and the U.K., William E. Souder, J. Daniel Sherman, and Rachel Davies-Cooper explore the interplay between technical and market uncertainty, integration, and NPD effectiveness. Their study examines two types of integration: R&D/marketing integration and direct R&D/customer integration. The study measures NPD effectiveness in terms of such indicators as NPD cycle time, prototype development proficiency, design change frequency (a negative performance indicator), and product launch proficiency. The responses from both the U.S. and the U.K. firms provide balanced samples of high and low uncertainty projects, as well as successful and unsuccessful projects. The results of this study support previous research regarding the positive effects of both R&D/marketing integration and direct R&D/customer integration on NPD effectiveness. However, only one measure of NPD effectiveness—R&D comercialization effectiveness—was affected by both R&D/marketing integration and direct R&D/customer integration. This result suggests that the two types of integration are distinct from one another and that managers need to emphasize different types of integration, depending on which aspects of NPD effectiveness their firms need to improve. The results also suggest that technical and market uncertainty influence some aspects of NPD effectiveness. For example, the perceived level of technical uncertainty was found to influence prototype development proficiency and to moderate design change frequency. In other words, these results support the idea that a high level of technical uncertainty warrants paying extra attention to increasing prototype development proficiency in the interest of reducing design change frequency. However, the results also reinforce the idea that NPD activities generally involve high levels of technical and market uncertainty, which means that the high cost of integration may be a requirement for NPD success.     

Product quality alignment and business unit performance

Over the past decade, new strategic approaches to the management of product quality have become prime drivers of product and process innovation and change in many firms. However, many firm's product quality improvement efforts have failed to deliver anticipated business performance benefits. Implementation problems are generally viewed as significant factors in explaining such failures. Further, the literature suggests that firms' views of product quality are often very different from those of their customers. However, to date this issue has received little empirical attention. The objective of this research was to examine the causes and performance outcomes of product quality alignment ‐ differences between firms' views of the product quality they deliver and customer views of the product quality delivered to them. We conducted exploratory interviews with quality and marketing managers aimed at developing a grounded understanding of the nature, antecedents and consequences of product quality alignment. These fieldwork insights were combined with the existing literature to delineate the central product quality alignment construct and develop specific hypotheses concerning the antecedents and performance consequences of product quality alignment at the SBU‐level. Using data from a mail survey of multiple key informants (general managers, quality managers and marketing managers), we tested hypothesized relationships using a structural equation model methodology. Our quantitative findings provide empirical evidence that product quality alignment positively affects business unit performance. Our data also suggest that the degree to which quality goals spanning customer‐focused and internally‐oriented criteria influence decision‐making and actions taken is positively associated with product quality alignment. Further, our data indicate that while the use of marketing tools in developing and executing product quality improvement efforts is positively associated with product quality alignment, no such association is observed with more commonly recommended TQM tools. Our results also suggest that effective interfunctlonal interactions between quality and marketing functions (higher levels of interfunctional connectedness and lower levels of interfunctional conflict) are positively associated with product quality alignment. Overall, our results suggest that product quality alignment is an important concept in understanding product quality improvement‐performance linkages at the SBU level and that minimizing mis‐alignment may be an appropriate focus for management attention.     

Integrating Customer Requirements into Product Designs

Despite all best efforts, the design process often leads to the introduction of products that do not meet customer expectations. Although the design team typically applies customer-related information from several sources, the product design somehow fails to satisfy customer requirements. Clearly, we need to develop a better understanding of the process by which designers in large development organizations transform information about customer requirements into the final design specification. To improve our understanding of this process, Antonio J. Bailetti and Paul F. Litva examine design managers' perspectives on the sources of customer requirement information. During the evolution of a product design, the design team applies information that is endorsed by marketing and product management. Common sources of such information include commercial specifications, inferences from existing products and services, deployment studies, and external standards. When this management-endorsed information is deemed inadequate, designers supplement it by creating and sharing their own customer-related information. This local information includes the results of benchmarking function and performance, the designers' perceptions of a service provider's installed base of equipment, and validations of intermediate designs. Marketing and product management cannot easily review the local information that designers create and share in evolving a final design. This article highlights the importance of creating mechanisms for ensuring that customer requirement information from various sources is internally consistent. To meet this goal of consistency, organizations must ensure that customer requirements information produced by marketing satisfies the information processing requirements of the design community. In addition, the knowledge that designers actually apply to produce a design must incorporate customer requirement information endorsed by marketing and product management at all stages of product development.     

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.     

Micro-foundations of market orientation: Influencing non-marketing managers' customer information processing

This study examines how organisational context influences search, integration, and use of customer information at the level of an individual manager. Drawing upon research on market orientation, market-information utilisation, organisational learning, and marketing organisation, a theoretical framework is set up and tested by using structural equation modelling and a dataset consisting of 228 manufacturing and R&D managers in large industrial firms. Results demonstrate that integration of customer information enhances use of information in decision making. Organisational context influences the use of customer information indirectly by affecting information search and integration. Resource inadequacy and physical distance from sales and marketing contact persons decrease information integration, whereas supervisor customer emphasis increases the search scope of information. Wide search scope of customer information increases information integration but has no direct impact on use.     

Effects of inter-organizational compatibility on supply chain capabilities: Exploring the mediating role of inter-organizational information systems (IOIS) integration

Growing globalization and environmental uncertainty have increased the challenges managers face in delivering services or products to the customer. Integration of information systems across partnering organizations has become the backbone of supply chain management, as amalgamation facilitates the sharing of information required to enhance organizational flexibility and responsiveness while minimizing risk and inventory costs. Using data from the Australian retailing sectors, this study investigates the mediating role of inter-organizational information system (IOIS) integration on the relationships between inter-organizational compatibility and supply chain capabilities. The results indicate that inter-organizational compatibility of technical, strategic, and cultural inter-organizational dimensions facilitate IOIS integration and supply chain capabilities. To maximize benefits for all chain members, IOIS integration needs to be embedded in the strategies and goals of partnering organizations. Business-to-business and industrial marketing managers need to be aware that IOIS integration processes require support of top managers of the partnering organizations and should be embedded in the organizations' strategic goals.     

The Role of Market Information in New Product Success/Failure

Although no single variable holds the key to new product performance, many of the widely recognized success factors share a common thread: the processing of market information. Understanding customer wants and needs ultimately comes down to a company's capabilities for gathering and using market information. And another well-acknowledged success factor the integration of marketing, R&D, and manufacturing focuses on the sharing of information. In other words, a firm's effectiveness in market information processing—the gathering, sharing, and use of market information—plays a pivotal role in determining the success or failure of its new products. Brian D. Ottum and William L. Moore describe the results of a study that examines the relationship between market information processing and new product success. They also explore the organizational factors that facilitate successful processing of market information, and thus offer ideas for better managing the development of new products. The respondents—marketing, R&D, and manufacturing managers from Utah-based computer and medical device manufacturers—provided information about 58 new products, including equal numbers of successes and failures. The survey responses reveal strong relationships between product success and market information processing, with success most closely linked to information use. In other words, the gathering and sharing of information are important, but only if the information is used effectively. In 80 percent of the product successes studied, the respondents ultimately possessed and used a greater than average amount of market information. And in 75 percent of the failures, the respondents knew less than average about the market at project inception, and gathered or used less than the average amount of market information during the project. For the projects in this study, the integration of marketing, R&D, and manufacturing contributed not only to the sharing and use of information, but also to overall project success. However, the results of the study suggest that the way in which a project is organized plays only an indirect role in determining new product success—most likely by improving the processing of market information. From a managerial perspective, the most important variables identified in the study are market information shared, market information used, and financial success.     

The Credibility–Cooperation Connection at the R&D-Marketing Interface

Research and development (R&D) managers' perceptions of both marketing information and marketing managers are analyzed using an information and source credibility framework. The findings are based on a study of R&D directors in 80 technology-intensive companies and focus on activities and interactions during the new product development process. The authors found that the R&D managers' perceptions differed significantly in high and low integration companies. These perceptions also were influenced by various organizational practices. The R&D-marketing cooperation was highest where organizational practices were conducive to cooperation and R&D perceived marketing input as credible. Several implications for creating a corporate climate conducive to interfunctional cooperation are developed.     

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.     

Is all communication created equal?: an investigation into the effects of communication mode on perceived information quality

Enhancing communication between functions is crucial to successful product development and management. Previous work in the product innovation management literature has made two implicit assumptions. First, that increasing the frequency of information dissemination from one function to the other always improves the perceived quality of the information received. The second assumption is that all types of interfunctional communication carry equal weight in the decision‐making process of the target of that communication. The current study develops a typology of communication modes, which suggests a rationale for why these assumptions may not be true. The empirical findings of the study, based on a survey of 504 nonmarketing managers indicate that the relationship between total communication frequency and perceived information quality (PIQ) is nonlinear. Specifically, the study finds that marketing managers can either communicate too little or too much with nonmarketing managers. If they interact too infrequently, they run the risk of not understanding the way to most effectively communicate market information. If they communicate too much, they may overload the manager with too much information and erode the overall quality of the information sent. In addition, some modes of communication are more effective in improving perceptions of the quality of market information. For instance, regular e‐mail sent by marketing managers seems to have no effect on perceived information quality. On the other hand, e‐mail sent with supporting documentation can have a strong positive effect on perceived information quality. Impromptu phone calls by marketing have less positive effects than scheduled phone calls. Interestingly, too much of the wrong types of communication actually seem to reduce perceptions of perceived information quality, and consequently the likelihood that market information will be used. The study also suggests that certain kinds of communication are better for manufacturing managers and others more effective in sharing information with R&D managers. For instance, disseminating information through written reports seems to reduce perceived information quality. This is particularly true for R&D managers. On the other hand too many meetings can reduce perceptions of PIQ, particularly on the part of manufacturing managers. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.     

Changing Patterns in Industrial R&D Management

A successful R&D manager is, in many ways, an agent of change. R&D managers must respond effectively to changes in domestic and global competition, product and process technologies, customer requirements, regulatory matters, and senior management's perception of the role R&D plays in a firm. The responses to these changes flow downstream from R&D to other parts of the organization, in the form of new materials, methods, processes, and products. To help us understand the changes facing R&D management, Ashok K. Gupta and David Wilemon present the results of a study that examines the ideas and experiences of 120 R&D directors from technology-based companies. The study explores the major changes that R&D management has undergone in recent years, the changes R&D managers expect to encounter during the next few years, and the causes of those changes. The respondents also identify the skills and knowledge they view as necessary for effective R&D management, and they assess their organizations' capabilities in those areas. According to the respondents, major changes that R&D has encountered include increased emphasis on such issues as cross-functional teamwork, R&D's contribution to both short- and long-term business results, R&D's capability to quickly bring to market new products that customers value, efficient use of R&D resources, and R&D alliances. Other changes noted by respondents include greater pressure to find new markets, increased attention on the effective management of technical personnel, and increased regulations and sensitivity to environmental issues. The knowledge domains that the respondents highlighted as having the greatest effect on R&D performance include such capabilities as understanding customer needs, monitoring market developments, commercializing new technologies, building cross-functional teams, managing multiple R&D projects, and accelerating new product development. According to the respondents, the largest gaps between required and current capabilities exist in several of the areas listed as being most important to effective R&D management, including monitoring market developments that can affect R&D activities and overall business performance, maintaining a spirit of inquiry while ensuring that R&D contributes to overall corporate performance, developing technology commercialization capabilities, fostering mutually profitable strategic alliances, and accelerating the development and commercialization of new products.     

Perspectives on social media ant its use by key account managers

Social media has recently received increased attention from practitioners and academics. Although social media helps build relationships, no academic study to date has investigated the use of social media by key account managers, although building and developing relationships with key customers are at the core of these managers' expertise. This research contributes to building the first level of understanding of how key account managers use social media and the major issues. To address this topic, we perform a qualitative research study using the grounded theory methodology. We present a model of key account managers' use of social media derived from our empirical data and relate it to a key customer engagement model.     

The Decision to Exploit an R&D Project: Divergent Thinking across Middle and Senior Managers

Research and development (R&D) generates projects, but the question often remains: which projects should be exploited? Building on the innovation, strategy, and managerial cognition literatures, we use a conjoint field experiment to collect data on 4032 decisions made by 126 R&D managers to test how project attributes, strategic context, and managers' characteristics influence innovation exploitation decisions. Using hierarchical linear modeling, we find that (1) experience impacts project exploitation decision policies of middle managers more than senior managers, (2) divergent thinking across middle and senior managers increases with experience, and (3) experienced middle managers diverge from experienced senior managers in their decisions to exploit opportunities by placing greater emphasis on strategic context (relative to competitors and fit within the portfolio) and lesser emphasis on uncertainty (technological and demand). These findings have implications for the strategy and innovation literature.     

R & D and marketing dialogue in high-tech firms

Based on an empirical study of more than 200 R & D and marketing managers from high-technology companies, we conclude that (1) there is a great deal of consensus between R & D and marketing managers on the relative importance of the areas requiring integrated efforts; (2) companies successful in their new product program achieve a significantly greater degree of R & D marketing integration; (3) company size does not affect the level of integration achieved; and (4) the companies that achieve a high degree of R & D/ marketing integration do so by concentrating on all 19 areas proposed in the article and do not merely focus on a few key areas.     

Understanding the role of marketing-purchasing collaboration in industrial markets: The case of Russia

This study aims to investigate the role of interfunctional collaboration between marketing and purchasing functions in industrial companies. Interfunctional collaboration is considered as a measure of the internal alignment and partnership between departments in the firm, which in turn contributes to the creation of sustainable advantages via improved external partnerships and facilitating demand chain integration. We test the impact of customer orientation as well as the interactions between departments (specifically marketing and purchasing) as collaboration antecedents, and analyze the direct impact of marketing-purchasing collaboration on business performance. The model is tested on a sample of 148 industrial companies in Russia with two key respondents in each firm, incorporating the purchasing as well as the marketing perspective. The results show that marketing-purchasing collaboration mediates the effects of interfunctional interaction as well as customer orientation on business performance. Alternative model testing shows that the direct effects of these antecedent constructs on performance are non-significant in the context of Russian industrial companies.     

The Impact of Cross-Functional Joint Involvement Across Product Development Stages: An Exploratory Study

Cross-functional integration offers numerous, well-documented benefits for new-product development (NPD), but it also can carry significant costs. Joint involvement of R&D, manufacturing, and marketing personnel can increase the quality, the manufacturability, and the marketability of the final product. However, building consensus among these groups, with their differing perspectives and goals, may require time-consuming meetings as well as tremendous finesse from the managers who guide the NPD effort. Those managers require an approach to cross-functional integration that strikes a balance between efficiency and effectiveness. X. Michael Song, R. Jeffrey Thieme, and Jinhong Xie propose that the right mix of cross-functional involvement may differ depending on the stage in the NPD process. They also suggest that blindly promoting the involvement of all functional areas in all stages of the NPD process may actually decrease NPD performance. They test these propositions in a study that examines the relationships between new product performance and cross-functional joint involvement between R&D, manufacturing, and marketing in five major stages of the NPD process: market opportunity analysis, planning, development, pretesting, and launch. Their objective in this study is to identify patterns of effective cross-functional involvement in different NPD stages. The study uses data collected from 236 managers working in the R&D, manufacturing, and marketing departments of 16 Fortune 500 firms. Their findings suggest that new-product success may be more likely when a firm employs function-specific and stage-specific patterns of cross-functional integration than it is when the firm attempts to integrate all functions during all NPD stages. For example, during the market opportunity analysis stage, the findings suggest that joint involvement between R&D and marketing may be productive, but joint involvement between R&D and manufacturing and among all three functions may be counterproductive. The results also indicate that joint involvement among all three functions either does not have a significant effect on new product success or may be counterproductive in all stages of the NPD process. For the firms in this study, the three functions seem to take turns playing the central role in cross-functional activities. During the product planning, development, and testing phases, the role of the focal function, or communication hub, shifts from manufacturing to R&D and then to marketing. (c) 1998 Elsevier Science Inc.