Research and development (R&D) beyond manufacturing: the strange case of services R&D

The share of business research and development (R&D) expenditure stemming from the services sector of the economy has been growing rapidly in many (though not all) OECD countries, according to official statistics. The same data sources also indicate, however, that services contribute less to R&D than would be expected given their large shares of employment and output in national economies. In part, incomplete sampling of services in R&D surveys may lead to some underestimation of their R&D activity, but this is unlikely to account for their apparently poor performance. This paper draws on an analysis of existing statistical sources, and on interviews and workshops with service firms' managers. It finds difficulties associated with the ways in which R&D has been operationalised in survey questions. Examination of survey questionnaires suggests that the formulation of these questions, focusing on technological R&D and ruling out much social scientific R&D, disproportionately reduces the reporting of R&D by service firms. But beyond this, the R&D concept itself has some problematic features where it comes to documenting innovation in service firms. This was investigated through a programme of interviews and workshops with service firms, where a lack of familiarity with the R&D concept and R&D management practices was found to be commonplace. R&D performance and innovation activities vary across services of different sorts, even though most service subsectors appear to be low R&D investors. It is thus important to examine services' innovation patterns and processes, to establish what types of R&D‐like activity are underway in these subsectors. While some modification in R&D measurement would be desirable to capture services' activities, effort to understand the non‐R&D elements of services innovation is also important – for management and for policy (given that governments are seeking to create R&D incentives and targets for services and other sectors). There are grounds for expecting (a) services' share of business R&D to continue to grow; (b) this share to continue to be well below what would be expected from the prevalence of services in economic activity, and (c) for many services' innovation to continue to rely heavily on sources that are not directly associated with R&D.     

Mechanisms for improving the effectiveness of R&D: How many mechanisms are enough?

The author proposes and explains a method of rating the effectiveness of an R&D organisation without attempting to measure its output. He postulates that the basic reason that an R&D organisation does not do the right R&D or get it used effectively is that it is working in isolation. In other words the interfaces between R&D and the outside world are not being managed. To achieve effective interface management requires an organisational change. Hence the problem of increasing R&D effectiveness is transformed to a problem of developing strategies to bring about this change. The author proposes a strategy which first requires the company to define objectives for interface management. The next question is to find out why the interfaces need to be managed; for the present business, for improving the people involved or for creating new opportunities for the future? This is a sequence of increasing refinement. Each phase of the R&D process is then looked at to determine the current state of interface management and take action to bring it to the next more refined stage. The author gives examples of what he means and discusses how his system can help the practising R&D director.     

Architectural Redesign, Interpersonal Communication, and Learning in R&D

An effective R&D organization needs information from a complex web of sources, including customers, suppliers, sales and marketing, and company management. Within the R&D organization, information must flow into and among numerous teams. This network of interpersonal communications can go a long way toward determining the success of a company's innovation efforts. In an exploratory study of a Belgian company operating in the telecommunications industry, Rudy K. Moenaert and Filip Caeldries examine the effects of interpersonal communication on market and technological learning in R&D. Trying to improve the flow of information into and within its R&D organization, this company designed its new R&D facility with an eye toward improving both market and technological learning throughout the organization. By locating R&D personnel in closer proximity to one another, management hoped to provide them with improved access to market and technological information, and thus increase their innovativeness. Contrary to expectations, placing R&D professionals in closer proximity to one another did not increase technological learning in this organization. In fact, technological learning actually decreased slightly during the period studied, though the change is not statistically significant. On the other hand, market learning and product innovativeness improved significantly during the period studied. For an R&D professional in this company, members of other R&D teams seem to be more important as sources of market information than as sources of technological information. Surprisingly, the relocation of R&D personnel also did not increase the amount of communication that takes place, either within a project team, between members of different teams, or between R&D professionals and the management steering committee. However, the architectural redesign does appear to have improved the quality of communication. R&D team leaders report that since the relocation, the information flowing into R&D has been more customer focused. This is attributed to the company's ongoing efforts to provide the tools and structures necessary for supporting the objectives of the architectural redesign. For example, implementation of quality function deployment (QFD) has helped innovation team members to focus more clearly on relevant information. The success of the architectural design required approaching this effort as a complex, ongoing process, rather than a quick-fix solution.     

研发补助影响企业价值的规模差异

研发补助通过两种路径影响企业价值,不同规模企业融资实力、财务约束的差异导致补助影响企业价值效果的差异。本文利用上市公司2007～2009年的数据,以股票回报率、财务业绩和市场价值作为企业价值的代理,对研发补助影响企业价值的效果及其规模差异进行了检验。发现补助并不能显著增加企业价值,但中小企业的研发补助显著增加了企业价值,对补助的负作用有显著抑制作用。本文的结论为评价和改进我国补助政策、设立中小企业创新基金提供了重要证据。     

Department Status: An Exploratory Investigation of Direct and Indirect Effects on Product Development Performance

To date only a limited number of product development studies have examined the construct of department status. These studies mostly report that departments can reflect different levels of status among themselves during product development activities and that often the marketing department reflects greater status. These studies do not clarify the role that department status may pose for product development performance and product management performance. Some research would suggest that department status has a direct effect on performance, while other research would suggest that department status has an indirect effect on performance. The present study investigates whether the bestowing of department status is important to product development performance and product management performance, and, if so, how? Based on empirical results from a cross‐industry study involving 668 marketing, manufacturing, and R&D managers, department status is found to have a significant indirect effect on product development and product management performance. Results further show that equal status among the three departments of marketing, manufacturing, and R&D correlates with higher levels of interdepartmental collaboration, which in turn manifests the benefits of higher levels of performance. Interdepartmental collaboration is therefore shown to be a mediating variable between department status and performance. The empirical results of this study suggest that no one department should dominate the product development effort and/or product management effort. While study data tend to correspond with prior studies in that the marketing department tends to reflect higher status compared to R&D and manufacturing, simply bestowing more status to marketing (or to another department for that matter) does not appear to be a proper course for facilitating interdepartmental collaboration nor for manifesting higher product development performance. Rather, equal status across marketing, manufacturing, and R&D departments appears to represent the proper course of action to establish collaboration between these three departments and subsequently to reap the benefits of higher performance. Given the exploratory nature of this study, subsequent study is warranted. Avenues for future research along with tentative managerial implications 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.     

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.     

Top management roles in R&D projects

The work described in the paper is aimed at a better understanding of decision processes in ‘directed’ R&D. Specifically it focusses on the questions: What aspects of innovation does top management influence significantly?, and What are the effects of this influence? The kinds of influences looked at include technological, financial. marketing, timeliness and personnel factors as well as company characteristics. The overall hypothesis was that top management would be interested not only in ultimate objectives but also in intermediate objectives of shorter timespan. The research material consisted of answers to a 29-item questionnaire given by 107 management-level respondents in 13 sites. The questionnaires related to data on 154 projects including the degree of success data achieved. The results were analyzed to bring out main-effect factors on success and intercorrelations between factors. Overall the results supported the initial hypothesis that top management is concerned with shorter-term R&D matters as well as with the effects of R&D on long-term strategy. The influence appears to be more marked during early some stages the of factors projects than later. Interestingly of correlated with economic success are not correlated with top management support, although support is correlated directly with succes. On the whole, top management intervention appears to be operational rather than primarily strategic. The authors interpret observations as meaning that top management intervenes at irreversible decision points and on matters that affect other functions of the company but keeps out of some important issues that are beyond their control.     

Three-dimensional representation of company business and investigational activities

This paper describes a management aid devised to illustrate the inter-relationships between present company business activities and the investigational activities of the various company R&D functions. It is based on the- construction of a three-dimensional model in which the raw material, process and market parameters are the axes. Use of the model can facilitate project definition and selection in R and D departments and can be extended as a management aid in studies of R & D resource allocation and acquisition studies.     

“营改增”后高校科技产业财务工作的变化与对策——以西安科技大学为例

为了解决"营改增"税制改革后高校科技产业财务工作面临的业务范围、纳税义务、税负变化以及会计核算科目变更、会计核算变复杂、财务工作量增大等问题,指出涉及高校科技产业业务变化的主要是"研发和技术服务"和"信息技术服务"。以西安科技大学及其科技产业公司为例,定性、定量分析了"营改增"前后的税负变化情况,分析表明,"营改增"的实施更有利于促进学校横向科研项目发展,同时增加了产业公司利润总额。为了进一步推行"营改增"改革,提出合理增加会计人员配备、规范发票管理、完善财务管理制度、密切关注最新减免优惠政策、全面打通增值税链条等建议,为高校科技产业的进一步发展提供参考。     

研发投入与企业业绩相关性研究——基于中国制造业上市公司的实证分析

研发投入是企业增强核心竞争力和实现可持续发展的关键因素。我国企业的研发投入主要集中在制造业。本文以制造业71家上市公司为研究对象,通过对样本公司R&D投入与企业业绩及企业价值的相关性分析,揭示企业R&D投入对企业业绩的影响作用及对公司价值提升的促进作用。研究结果表明,我国制造业上市公司的R&D投入强度偏低,R&D投入明显不足,但R&D投入强度在2007~2009年3年中逐年上升。企业当期R&D投入与企业当期营业毛利率有显著的正相关关系,滞后一期R&D投入与企业当期营业毛利率仍然存在较为显著的正相关关系,但滞后两期R&D投入与企业当期营业毛利率不存在显著的正相关关系。表明企业R&D投入对企业业绩有一定的影响,且存在一年的滞后性,滞后期较短。同时,企业的R&D投入与托宾Q值存在显著的正相关关系,说明企业的R&D投入与企业价值相关,R&D投入通过对企业业绩的影响来提升公司价值。     

Re-charging the costs of R&D: when is it appropriate?

A scheme of recharging the costs of individual R&D projects to internal ‘customers’ in a company is described and its possible advantages discussed. A particular case, recharging in a nationalized industry, is examined and it is concluded that most of the advantages would be difficult to realize; other measures, more suited to individual circumstances, are likely to improve the effectiveness of such corporate R&D. The discussion is generalized to consider which methods of R&D funding are appropriate to different contexts.     

Making real options work for practitioners: a generic model for valuing R&D projects

We propose a generic valuation framework for the appraisal of R&D projects based on real option theory. The added value of this approach is the presentation of a model that was implemented in a manner that allows corporate decision makers to use real options in an intuitive and standardized way. The project valuation procedure is separated into three main phases: project modeling, data and input collection, and result generation and analysis. The project model represents the structure of the real world R&D project with its investments, expected results, and decisions that need to be taken conditionally on the outcomes of research activities. The project model is represented in the form of a decision tree, where different research results or taken decisions lead to new branches. In this way, every possible situation the project can pass through can be represented. Uncertainties are separated into market uncertainties (e.g., market prices) and project specific, private uncertainties (e.g. uncertainty of research results). For both uncertainties, event trees are constructed which are then combined and merged with the above mentioned decision tree in order to represent the value evolution of the R&D project under given decisions and uncertainties. For every possible state of the project the real option value is calculated. By creating multidimensional trees, a multitude of decision steps and various kinds of real options (e.g., continue, expansion, switch, abandonment) can be modeled. The calculation complexity for the decision trees is given. From the tree structure we can calculate the real option value of starting an R&D project, i.e., the value of undertaking the first investment and thus acquiring the subsequent decision opportunities given by the completion of the first research effort. Furthermore, the optimal exercise strategy is derived from the decision tree. The exercise strategy gives the manager the possibility to have an a priori overview of where an R&D project may lead to, which decisions need to be taken in which circumstances, and when the project needs to be stopped in order not to generate losses. In an in‐depth case study we use an illustrative R&D project to set up and discuss the three phases of project modeling in the real options framework: building the multidimensional decision tree, input generation, and calculation of the real option value as well as the optimal strategy for the R&D project.     

Reconfiguring supplier relationships between local and global: History matters

Small and medium-sized companies are increasingly facing international markets as part of their processes of growth and development. A great deal of literature deals with different patterns of growth and international development that are specific to SMEs with respect to large companies. Fewer studies have been conducted on the reconfiguration of company supplier relationships involved in these processes. This paper focuses on the role played by the consolidated set of company supplier relationships when the firm faces some critical stages in its process of development, i.e., growth from small to mid-sized and the implementation of new ventures abroad accessing new business relationships with international suppliers. A multiple and longitudinal case study shows how the local set of supplier relationships of four mid-sized Italian mechanical companies acting in industrial districts has played an important role in shaping the emerging set of supplier relationships and addressing companies' actions in their growth and internationalization processes.     

Strategizing in industrial networks

This paper provides an overview of the implications for strategizing offered by an industrial network perspective and a comparison of this view with strategic management thinking. We argue that it is crucial for a company to relate its activities to those of other firms in order to enhance its performance, and it is through the continuous combining and recombining of existing resources that new resource dimensions are identified and further developed within business relationships. From the standpoint of a single company, strategizing from an industrial network perspective implies that the heterogeneity of resources and interdependencies between activities across company boundaries, as well as the organized collaboration among the companies involved, must be considered simultaneously.     

The effects of privatization on corporate R&D units: evidence from Italy and France

Over the last two decades privatization programmes in a variety of different countries have radically reduced the role of the state as a major owner of productive assets. While there is empirical evidence to show that the switch in ownership generally improves productive efficiency and profitability at company level, its effects on research and development (R&D) activities, which can impact strongly on long–term performance, have been largely ignored in the literature.
In this paper we address this issue by analyzing seven cases of privatization that have recently occurred in Italy and France in order to gauge how R&D activities may be affected by privatization in terms of objectives and organization. The organizations studied show that R&D units within privatized companies are subject to profound restructuring actions, generally designed to boost efficiency and to strengthen integration with the goals of the business units and of the final customers. A new role for R&D thus emerges: the aim is no longer to generate new knowledge in the broad national interest, but rather more directly to create value for the company and its clients, by emphasizing the assessment and integration of external knowledge.     

FROM EXPERIENCE: Creating Synergy between Marketing and Research and Development*

The tensions between marketing and research and development (R&D) are so common that we have come to accept them as the way organizations are. If we remain resigned like this, how will we ever reap some of the benefits that can accrue from these groups working better together? If we can improve the working relationships between marketing and R&D, researchers promise a variety of desirable organizational outcomes, such as cycle‐time reduction and new product success. This article describes in detail the changes that a Fortune 500 company made to its product development process to foster synergy between marketing and R&D. The modified process formalized the roles of marketing and R&D at both the front and back ends of the product development process, increasing productive interaction between the groups. The company found that at the front end, marketing and R&D needed to work together (1) to clarify the market requirements implicit in the market attack plan and (2) to develop a technical strategy that responded to the market requirements and that consequently implemented the market attack plan. At the back end, the groups needed to work together (3) to formulate the value messages used to market the company's products. The synergy created between marketing and R&D through the new process is credited for enabling the company to compete successfully in a market it never before had entered.     

行善的内裤

PantstoPoverty创新的商业模式告诉我们,时尚可以成为改变世界的美丽工具。 作为不能像超人一样将内裤穿在外面的普罗大众,一条内裤就是基本生活必需品而已,其基本属性是舒适和私密,还会有什么其他的意义吗？     

研发支出中作业动因合并模型的构建——以高端装备制造业为例

随着中国经济增长方式的转变和建立创新型国家目标的确立,企业的研发支出存在着上升的趋势。但是在会计实务中,企业获取的研发成本信息有限,不能有效地对研发支出进行管理,对研发决策的支持力度不足。将战略成本管理理论和作业成本动因合并方法应用于高端装备制造业研发支出的管理中,能够加强企业研发管理,提高研发决策能力,为顺利实现产品价值提供有力支持。     

“一带一路”沿线省域高技术产业R&D效率提升研究

“一带一路”战略的深入推进为沿线各省高技术产业发展带来重大机遇,紧抓机遇提升R&D 效率是关键。本文以2009~2015 年“一带一路”沿线15 省高技术产业R&D 活动为研究对象,采用DEA-Malmquist 指数法对其R&D 效率进行测度分析。结果显示：“一带一路”沿线省份高技术产业整体R&D 效率有待提升;技术进步指数基本呈现下降趋势,而全要素生产率变动与技术进步指数变动情况趋于一致;不同省份推动或阻碍高技术产业R&D 效率提升的原因各异。最后,根据研究结论,结合“一带一路”战略,给出有助于R&D 效率提升的政策建议。