Improving Supplier New Product Development Performance: The Role of Supplier Development

Suppliers play an increasingly central role in helping firms achieve their new product development (NPD) goals. The literature implicitly assumes that suppliers are able to meet or exceed the quality standards and technological expectations of the firm, and yet, in practice, suppliers often lack the technological capabilities needed to undertake collaborative NPD. In such situations, a firm may choose to intervene and actively develop the supplier's technological and product development capabilities. We develop a theoretical framework that conceptualizes supplier development activities within interorganizational NPD projects as part of a bilateral knowledge‐sharing process: design recommendations, technical specifications, and new technology flow from supplier to the firm, and in turn, the firm can implement supplier development activities to upgrade the supplier's technological capabilities. Antecedents (supplier responsibility, skills similarity, single sourcing strategy) and consequences of supplier development activities (on supplier, product, and project performance) are examined using a sample of 153 interorganizational NPD projects within UK manufacturers. We find broad support for our hypotheses. In particular, we show that the relational rents (in the form of improved product and project performance) attained from supplier development activities in new product development are not achieved directly, but rather indirectly, via improvements in the supplier's creative and technological capabilities. Our results emphasize the importance of adopting a strategic view of the potential returns available from investing in the NPD capabilities of key suppliers, and provide clues about underlying reasons for the suboptimal experiences of many companies' collaborative NPD projects.     

Effects of Collaborative Communication on NPD Collaboration Results: Two Routes of Influence

Although NPD collaboration with external partners has become the next generation in NPD practice, the discussion concerning how to organize collaboration so as to obtain better results is far from over. Since communication is the most important element in successful interfirm exchange, this study focuses on the impact of collaborative communication and its facets—frequency, formality, reciprocal feedback, and rationality—on NPD collaboration results. In order to explain how collaborative communication can best be managed to enhance NPD collaboration results, this research combines the relational and resource‐based views, proposing the existence of two routes of influence: the direct resource‐based route and the indirect relational route mediated by trust. Using a sample of 207 NPD collaboration projects of innovative firms, empirical findings indicate that reciprocal feedback–rationality and frequency play an important role in product quality and adherence to budget and schedule, respectively, even without trust. Moreover, the trust between partners substantially reinforces the positive influence of reciprocal feedback–rationality on NPD collaboration results and makes the effect of formality significant. Therefore, the two alternative routes are confirmed as important paths to new product success, which provides relevant managerial implications.     

Connecting Interfirm and Intrafirm Collaboration in NPD Projects: Does Innovation Context Matter?

Interfirm collaboration is an important strategy for firms to generate new products and services. Whereas existing research emphasizes the importance of interfirm collaboration engagement to realize synergistic benefits in interfirm NPD projects, it remains surprisingly silent on the potential impact of intrafirm relational processes and how they can impact the interfirm setting. In this article, we therefore explore the impact of intrafirm collaboration engagement on the relationship between interfirm collaboration engagement and new product development (NPD) performance in interfirm NPD projects. Relying on insights from information processing theory, the authors hypothesize that intrafirm collaboration engagement increases firms' capacity to process complex information flows in the case of extensive interfirm collaboration engagement. Moreover, it is expect that the added value of extensive intrafirm collaboration engagement depends on the innovation objective (i.e., incremental versus radical new product development) of the interfirm NPD project. In particular, we hypothesize that the positive moderating impact of intrafirm collaboration engagement on the relationship between interfirm collaboration engagement and NPD performance is stronger for radical interfirm projects than incremental interfirm projects. Analyzing 195 interfirm NPD projects, a negative interaction effect between interfirm and intrafirm collaboration engagement is observed in radical interfirm NPD projects, whereas significant interactions between them remain absent in incremental interfirm NPD projects. Jointly, these findings provide first evidence that intrafirm relational processes can substantially impact partners' ability to realize relational rents in interfirm settings. Moreover, the negative interaction effect between interfirm and intrafirm collaboration engagement points to potential trade‐offs between inward‐looking and outward‐looking absorptive capacity.     

A Model of Supplier Integration into New Product Development*

In many industries, firms are looking for ways to cut concept‐to‐customer development time, to improve quality, and to reduce the cost of new products. One approach shown to be successful in Japanese organizations involves the integration of material suppliers early in the new product development cycle. This involvement may range from simple consultation with suppliers on design ideas to making suppliers fully responsible for the design of components or systems they will supply. While prior research shows the benefit of using this approach, execution remains a problem. The processes for identifying and integrating suppliers into the new product development (NPD) process in North American organizations are not understood well. This problem is compounded by the fact that design team members often are reluctant to listen to the technology and cost ideas made by suppliers in new product development efforts. We suggest a model of the key activities required for successful supplier integration into NPD projects, based on case studies with 17 Japanese and American manufacturing organizations. The model is validated using data from a survey of purchasing executives in global corporations with at least one successful and one unsuccessful supplier integration experience. The results suggest that (1) increased knowledge of a supplier is more likely to result in greater information sharing and involvement of the supplier in the product development process; (2) sharing of technology information results in higher levels of supplier involvement and improved outcomes; (3) supplier involvement on teams generally results in a higher achievement of NPD team goals; (4) in cases when technology uncertainty is present, suppliers and buyers are more likely to share information on NPD teams; and (5) the problems associated with technology uncertainty can be mitigated by greater use of technology sharing and direct supplier participation on new product development teams. A supplier's participation as a true member of a new product development team seems to result in the highest level of benefits, especially in cases when a technology is in its formative stages.     

Selecting Influential Business-to-Business Customers in New Product Development: Relational Embeddedness and Knowledge Heterogeneity Considerations

This study examines how the most influential business‐to‐business (B2B) customers, both existing and potential, involved in providing input to a new product development (NPD) project influence new product advantage. As the relational literature suggests, involving customers who have had close and embedded relationships with a firm's new product organization, such as a firm's largest customers, and customers who have been involved in past collaborative activities, should lead to the development of superior products. To the contrary, the innovation literature suggests that a firm may become too close to its large, embedded customers resulting in less innovation and in lower performing products. Also, the relationship between the heterogeneity of the knowledge of the most influential customers and new product advantage is examined. A contingency perspective is hypothesized such that the degree of product newness sought in the project moderates the effects of both relational embeddedness and knowledge heterogeneity on new product advantage. Empirical findings from a sample of 137 NPD projects support this contingency view. For projects seeking to develop incremental products, where the product being developed is an extension or an enhancement to an existing product, new product advantage tended to be higher in projects using embedded or homogeneous customers. For incremental projects, projects using less‐embedded or heterogeneous customers tended to have lower product performance. For projects following a highly innovative product strategy, new product advantage tended to be higher in projects that involved heterogeneous customers. These heterogeneous customers provided NPD projects with a diversity of perspectives, competencies, and experiences that fostered significant product innovations. The study contributes to the literature by empirically testing relational and innovation theories in NPD projects and by providing evidence on the importance of relational embeddedness and knowledge heterogeneity in selecting influential customers in NPD projects.     

Involving suppliers in product development: Insights from R&D directors and project managers

While there is increasing evidence that involving suppliers in new product development (NPD) is important, and for many firms even inevitable, there is also evidence that not all such efforts are successful. Firms aiming at implementing this strategy effectively have to pay close attention to several contingency factors on the organizational level and properly manage supplier involvement on the project level. The exploratory case study research underlying this article explores key issues to be considered when involving suppliers in NPD and the counter measures they can take. Our research shows that companies differentiate between so-called “know-how” and “capacity” projects, and that they manage them differently. Furthermore, this research shows that firms outside the automotive and high-tech manufacturing industries are likely to intensify supplier involvement in the future.     

Help or Hindrance? Causal Ambiguity and Supplier Involvement in New Product Development Teams

Suppliers are increasingly being involved in interorganizational new product development (NPD) teams. Successful management of this involvement is critical both to the performance of the new product and to meeting the project's goals. Yet the transfer of knowledge between buyer and supplier may be subject to varying degrees of causal ambiguity, potentially limiting the effect of supplier involvement on performance. Understanding the dynamics of causal ambiguity within interorganizational product development is thus an important unanswered empirical question. A theoretical model is developed exploring the effect of supplier involvement practices (supplier involvement orientation, relationship commitment, and involvement depth) on the level of causal ambiguity experienced within interorganizational NPD teams, and the subsequent impact on time to competitor imitation, new product advantage, and project performance. The model also serves as a test of the paradox that causal ambiguity both inhibits imitation by competitors, but adversely affects organizational outcomes. Survey data collected from 119 research and development‐intensive manufacturing firms in the United Kingdom largely support these hypotheses. Results from structural equation modeling show that supplier involvement orientation and long‐term relationship commitment lower causal ambiguity within interorganizational NPD teams. The results also shed light on the causal ambiguity paradox showing that causal ambiguity during interorganizational NPD decreases both product and project performance, but has no significant effect on time to competitor imitation. Instead, competitor imitation is delayed by the extent to which the firm develops a new product advantage within the market. A product development strategy based upon maintaining interfirm causal ambiguity to delay competitor imitation is thus unlikely to result in a sustainable competitive advantage. Instead, managers are encouraged to undertake supplier involvement practices aimed at minimizing the level of knowledge ambiguity in the NPD project, and in doing so, improve product and project‐related performance.     

Intermediaries in power-laden retail supply chains: An opportunity to improve buyer–supplier relationships and collaboration

Despite the benefits of buyer and seller collaboration and hence relationships extolled in extensive studies, issues of relationship power inhibit implementation of collaborative and relational approaches, particularly in some parts of the retail sector. Further, most research regards buyer–supplier collaboration and relations as dyadic or focal relationships, or perhaps in a network context, and typically investigates buyer–supplier collaboration and relations from a power-dependency perspective; and within vertical supply integration. Little attention has been given to the potential role of supply chain intermediaries, such as logistics service providers, in objectively and independently determining and managing the course of buyer–supplier collaboration and relations in a business-to-business context. This article appraises the potential role of buyer–supplier collaboration and relations and their relevant opportunities in the power-laden, contentious environment of the retail grocery sector. With an interdisciplinary approach, drawn from supply management, relationship management, and logistics and supply chain management, this article emphasises the importance of horizontal collaboration using fourth-party logistics structures as horizontal intermediary conduits, who act independently between retailers and suppliers to facilitate collaborative and relational activity.     

Product innovation through coopetition in alliances: Singular or plural governance?

This study researches how firms can improve their product innovation in coopetition alliances through alliance governance. Our survey-based study of 372 vertical alliances in the medical device industry contributes to a clarification of prior studies' contrasting findings on product innovation when coopetition is present in alliances. Our results show that the singular use of relational governance improves product innovativeness in vertical alliances that experience growing levels of coopetition. In contrast, the singular use of transactional governance reduces product innovativeness with growing coopetition. When firms apply both relational and transactional governance as plural governance, vertical coopetition alliances get access to new ways to improve their product innovativeness.     

A Comparison of New Service versus New Product Development: Configurations of Collaborative Intensity as Predictors of Performance

Collaboration among firms for innovation has received considerable attention. However, little is known about how firm‐to‐firm collaboration is configured in new service development (NSD) versus new product development (NPD). This study takes a multidimensional approach and measures firm‐to‐firm collaboration on different intensity dimensions of (1) processes (mutual communication, joint engagement, sharing responsibilities) and (2) ownership (relationship commitment and mutual trust). By showing that the phenomenon of collaboration is multifaceted, this study is able to knit a more comprehensive and cohesive understanding of the differences between NSD and NPD success as the result of different patterns of collaboration. Specifically, it utilizes survey data collected from 194 alliances to substantiate how NSD and NPD differ on these collaborative dimensions and then explores their impact on NSD versus NPD performance. The findings suggest that collaboration between firms in NSD is configured and works differently than collaboration between firms in NPD. The results further show that there is a stronger, positive relationship of intensity levels of joint engagement among firms involved in product development and performance than when a new service is developed. However, the intensity of mutual trust has a stronger, positive relationship with development performance when a new service is developed than when a new product is developed. Implications are discussed, and suggestions for future research are given.     

Customer involvement in new product development in B2B: The role of sales

Developing new products, and customer involvement in the process, have been frequent topics in the management literature. Focusing on the benefits and risks of customer involvement, prior research mostly black-boxed the process through which customers are involved. Little has been reported on the activities and timing related to customer involvement in new product development (NPD), and the literature provides limited guidance for how to orchestrate customers' involvement. Building on a longitudinal case study of the development of a new product over five years, we offer a comprehensive model of customer involvement in the NPD process, and elaborate on the role of sales in customer involvement. The contribution of this paper is threefold: first, we develop the concept of customer involvement as a pattern of interactions at the interface of the customer and supplier organizations. Second, we posit that NPD in a B2B context is an iterative process consisting of various parallel sub-processes. Third, we demonstrate that in a B2B context, sales function plays a central part in interfacing the supplier and customer organizations. Based on our findings we identify organizational capabilities critical for developing an effective customer-supplier interface.     

Building mutual trust in collaborative green NPD: Evidence from China's digital infrastructure

The increasing green NPD (new product development) efforts in Asian markets gains increasing popularity among academic research and managerial practice. Given the prevailing knowledge about NPD collaboration drawing on traditional Western culture-centric approach, this study sets up a new analytical framework and investigates the dynamic trust-building mechanisms among multiple stakeholders in the collaborative green NPD process in China's national cultural context. Based on qualitative research using a longitudinal case study of China's digital infrastructure, three distinct collaborative green NPD phases including “innovation in peripheral components, incremental innovation in core components and radical innovation in core components” are identified. Besides, summaries of trust measures among suppliers, buying firms, and regulators are presented to open the black box of the antecedences and dynamics to facilitate the understanding of the truly complex nature of trust-building. During the phased collaborative green NPD processes, the role of China's national culture including “high degrees of power distance, low degrees of individualism, low degrees of uncertainty avoidance, high degrees of long-term orientation and high degrees of masculinity” is also discussed.     

Collaborating for New Product Development: Selecting the Partner with Maximum Potential to Create Value

The partner selection process in the formation stages of collaborative new product development (NPD) is a neglected topic. The present study investigated the partner selection processes to ascertain the potential of creating competitively advantageous products through collaboration. The goal was to develop a process theory of partner selection for collaborative NPD alliances using a theory development approach. The literatures on NPD, interfirm knowledge transfer and generation, and interorganizational relationships were tapped. These literatures motivated the approach and the research questions. Parallel with the analysis of the literature, a series of case study interviews were conducted with managers currently in collaborative dyads. Managers' inputs were used (1) to guide the theory development process and (2) to validate the relevance of the literature-based assertions. The method of narrative analysis for building theory from case studies was adopted: Multiple indicators were collapsed into single constructs, and recurring sequences or divergences were analyzed. This resulted in the unveiling of phases in the partner selection process. The study's findings suggest that technological alignment of the partners triggered the partner-evaluation process. This phase was followed, in order, by the strategic alignment and relational alignment phases. These later phases were as important as the initial phase in ensuring the transfer and integration of critical know-how and in creating product value through collaboration. In addition to clarifying the definition of codevelopment alliances, this study reveals a comprehensive theoretical model of the technological, strategic, and relational aspects of partner selection in codevelopment alliances, as well as the order in which these aspects are practiced.     

A buyer's perspective on collaborative versus transactional relationships

This research examines collaborative and transactional relationships in buying firms to determine whether collaborative relationships offer greater benefits than transactional relationships, and to ascertain which relational factors drive satisfaction and performance for both collaborative and transactional relationship types. Factor analysis, t-tests and step-wise regression were used to analyze data from a survey of buying firms. Results show that collaborative relationships offer higher levels of satisfaction and performance than transactional relationships. Satisfaction factored into two separate constructs: satisfaction with the relationship and satisfaction with the results. Of the relational factors examined, trust is the most important predictor of performance and satisfaction with the relationship regardless of the type of relationship examined.     

Decomposing the effect of supplier development on relationship benefits: The role of relational capital

Buyers invest considerably in developing their suppliers, yet the performance effects of such investments are not universal. Drawing on social capital theory, this research investigates whether the relationship between supplier development and relationship benefits may be facilitated by the generation of relational capital. The authors examine mediating and moderating roles of relational capital in the relationship between two aspects of supplier development (capability development, supplier governance) and two dimensions of relationship benefits (supplier benefits, buyer benefits), using survey data collected from 185 suppliers of a large manufacturing firm. Investment in supplier development does not automatically result in benefits for the supplier or reciprocated benefits for the buyer. Rather, relational capital “bridges” supplier development and relationship benefits. Without relational capital, benefits from capability development do not accrue, and the impact of a supplier governance regime can be even detrimental. In conditions of high relational capital, capability development results in lower perceived buyer benefits. The results can help managers ensure that the benefits from their supplier development efforts fully materialize.     

Exploring the Nonlinear Impact of Organizational Integration on New Product Market Success

This article explores the nonlinear relationship between organizational integration and new product market success (NPMS). The concept of organizational integration was measured by assessing the degree of integration among various groups of people involved in the development of new products including new product development (NPD) teams that are typically the focal points of NPD efforts. New product market success was measured by examining four often‐used measures of NPD success. The mail survey research approach was used to gather empirical data from NPD managers in three major industries. The data gathered from this survey process were used as the basis from which to extract information to address this study's major research questions, which include: (1) How is the degree of new product market success related to the nonlinear degree to which groups of people (including NPD teams) integrate during NPD processes? and (2) How is the degree of new product market success related to the nonlinear degree to which separate groups of people (e.g., customers, suppliers, and functional departments) integrate during NPD processes? This study found that high levels of organizational integration (overall organizational integration and supplier organizational integration) during NPD processes are associated with high levels of new product market success. Additionally, this study found that the relationship between new product market success and organizational integration (customer organizational integration and functional organization integration) during NPD processes exhibit nonlinear, U‐shaped relationships. Therefore, the first important finding of this study confirms that various forms of organizational integration impact in a positive way the market success of new products. This suggests that management responsible for all NPD projects should consciously integrate important groups of people to support such developments. This study's findings also confirm and imply that new product developers in the studied industries should integrate marketing and research and development (R&D) over the duration of the NPD process. This suggests that new product managers must be proactive to assure that members of NPD teams are actively engaged with groups of supporting people within and outside new‐product–producing organizations. Unlike prior research, a major finding of this study suggests that the association between organizational integration and new product market success does not form inverted U‐shaped relationships. Data from this research imply that new product market success is linearly influenced by overall and supplier organizational integration. However, this study's data suggest that new product market success is nonlinearly influenced by customer and functional organizational integration. This study's data suggest that when customer organizational integration and/or functional organizational integration is increased, new product market success can be increased at a rate which is greater than a linear rate.     

An Examination of Collaboration in High-Technology New Product Development Processes

For more than a decade, researchers have explored the benefits of eliminating organizational boundaries between participants in the new product development (NPD) process. In turn, companies have revamped their NPD processes and organizational structures to deploy cross-functional teams. These efforts toward interfunctional integration have produced a more responsive NPD process, but they don’t represent the endgame in the quest for more effective NPD. What’s next after the interfunctional walls come down?Pointing out that many high-tech firms have already taken such steps as integrating customers and suppliers into the NPD process, Avan Jassawalla and Hemant Sashittal suggest that such firms need to go beyond integration and start thinking in terms of collaboration. Using information from a study of 10 high-tech industrial firms, they identify factors that seem to increase cross-functional collaboration in NPD, and they develop a conceptual framework that relates those factors to the level of cross-functional collaboration achieved in the NPD process.Compared to integration, collaboration is described as a more complex, higher intensity cross-functional linkage. In addition to high levels of integration, their definition of cross-functional collaboration includes the sense of an equal stake in NPD outcomes, the absence of hidden agendas, and a willingness on the part of participants to understand and accept differences while remaining focused on the organization’s common objectives. Collaboration also involves synergy—that is, the NPD outcomes exceed the sum of the capabilities of the individual participants in the NPD process.Their framework suggests that structural mechanisms such as cross-functional teams can provide significant increases in NPD-related interfunctional integration. However, high levels of integration do not necessarily equate to high levels of collaboration. Characteristics of the organization and the participants also affect the level of collaboration. For example, achieving a high level of collaboration depends on participants who contribute an openness to change, a willingness to cooperate, and a high level of trust. Their framework also points to key organizational factors that affect the level of collaboration—for example, the priority that senior management gives to NPD and the level of autonomy afforded to participants in the NPD process.     

Outsourcers’ control mechanisms,vendors’ contract schemas,and project performance in cross-border IT outsourcing: A vendor’s perspective

Relational conflicts are likely to occur in cross-border IT outsourcing between partners with different cultural backgrounds. Extant literature diverges on the role of contract and trust as control mechanisms in managing relational conflicts. Prior studies have examined the effectiveness of the control mechanisms primarily from the outsourcer’s perspective, with little consideration of how vendors interpret outsourcers’ control mechanisms. Based on psychological contract theory, this study addresses the effects of contract-based and trust-based control mechanisms on relational conflicts from the vendor’s perspective and further explores the contingency of the effects on vendors’ psychological contract schemas (transactional contract schema and relational contract schema) towards their relationships with outsourcers. Based on survey data from 180 offshore outsourcing IT projects, the results show that vendors’ transactional contract schema reduces the effect of trust-based control whereas vendors’ relational contract schema strengthens the effect of outsourcers’ contract-based control on relational conflict. Relational conflicts, in turn, exhibit a negative impact on project performance. The findings offer new insights into the role of outsourcers’ contract-based control and trust-based controls in relationship management from a vender’s perspective. The findings also extend the outsourcing governance literature by illustrating the contingency of the control mechanisms on vendors’ psychological contract schemas.     

How businesses should govern knowledge-intensive collaborations with universities: An empirical investigation of university professors

In light of the high relevance of universities as sources of knowledge, university-business collaboration (UBC) offers significant opportunities for businesses with respect to making use of external academic research and innovation support. Unlike knowledge-intensive collaboration with other businesses, UBC has particularities which need to be considered, notably the role of professors as individual decision makers. Additionally, to assign intellectual property rights to knowledge and to reduce the danger of opportunistic behavior, mutually beneficial UBC requires adequate governance mechanisms. As previous research has not investigated the effects of governance mechanisms on knowledge sharing (knowledge combination, learning, and co-poiesis) and the achievement of joint goals in UBC, our empirical study covering 415 German professors examines these relations. We find a positive influence of relational governance and a negative influence of transactional governance on knowledge sharing in UBC. Regarding the influence of knowledge sharing on the achievement of joint goals, we find positive impacts of knowledge combination and co-poiesis and a negative impact of learning on the achievement of joint goals.     

Inter-firm collaboration in new product development in Chinese pharmaceutical companies

High-tech firms increasingly rely on inter-firm collaboration (IFC) in new product development (NPD). While there is a growing research interest in exploring the economic rationale of IFC through the transaction cost economics (TCE) and the resource synergy of IFC through the resource-based view of the firm (RBV), little attention has been given to the institution-based view (IBV) that also has important implications for firms’ choice of IFC. In particular, how national institutional environment affects IFC in the NPD process remains under-researched. This study aims to contribute to the literature by extending our understanding of the role of IFC in firms’ NPD process, taking into account transactional, resource, and institutional factors. Based on a case study of two firms: a state-owned and a private pharmaceutical firm in China, our research identifies three key forms of IFC, which are dynamic at different stages of NPD and contingent upon an array of institutional, resource, and transactional rationales underpinning firms’ choice of different forms of IFC. Our study is the first one that investigates the role of IFC in the NPD process bringing together the IBV, RBV, and TCE perspectives.