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

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

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.     

When do we really need interpersonal trust in globally dispersed new product development teams?

Interpersonal trust refers to the willingness to make oneself vulnerable to the actions of another party. Trust is generally acknowledged as fostering knowledge exchange and thus contributing to new product development (NPD) team effectiveness. However, the conditions under which NPD teams come to rely more heavily on trust to facilitate effectiveness remain unclear. With burgeoning global collaboration on new product development, we analyze how the characteristics of global NPD teams, i.e., geographic dispersion, computer‐mediated communication (e.g., e‐mail, video‐conferencing), team membership flexibility, and national diversity moderate the trust–effectiveness relationship. Our results show that trust is more important under the condition of geographic dispersion, computer‐mediated communication, and national diversity. By specifying when trust influences NPD team effectiveness in globally dispersed teams, we discuss the theoretical implications and provide recommendations for management.     

Governance of supplier collaboration in technologically uncertain NPD projects

Firms that are searching for new technologies from suppliers through collaborative new product development (NPD) need to devise effective approaches for governing the supplier relationship. Based on in-depth case studies of four collaborative NPD projects, this paper shows that in projects with a high degree of uncertainty (1) firms achieve governance by simultaneously limiting supplier involvement and allowing for high levels of collaboration, (2) transactional and relational governance have distinct roles in achieving limited supplier involvement and establishing high levels of collaboration, and (3) transactional and relational governance are organizationally separated. These findings have implications for the complementary use of relational and transactional governance, as well as for the role of purchasing and R&D in technologically uncertain NPD projects.     

Performance of Global New Product Development Programs: A Resource-Based View

Gaining a competitive edge in today's turbulent business environment calls for a commitment by firms to two highly interrelated strategies: globalization and new product development (NPD). Although much research has focused on how companies achieve NPD success, little of this deals with NPD in the global setting. The authors use resource‐based theory (RBT)—a model emphasizing the resources and capabilities of the firm as primary determinants of competitive advantage—to explain how companies involved in international NPD realize superior performance. The capabilities RBT model is used to test how firms achieve superior performance by deploying organizational capabilities to take advantage of key organizational resources relevant for developing new products for global markets. Specifically, the study evaluates (1) organizational NPD resources (i.e., the firm's global innovation culture, attitude to resource commitment, top‐management involvement, and NPD process formality); (2) NPD process capabilities or routines for identifying and exploiting new product opportunities (i.e., global knowledge integration, NPD homework activities, and launch preparation); and (3) global NPD program performance. Based on data from 387 global NPD programs (North America and Europe, business‐to‐business), a structural model testing for the hypothesized mediation effects of NPD process capabilities on organizational NPD resources was largely supported. The findings indicate that all four resources considered relevant for effective deployment of global NPD process capabilities play a significant role. Specifically, a positive attitude toward resource commitment as well as NPD process formality is essential for the effective deployment of the three NPD process routines linked to achieving superior global NPD program performance; a strong global innovation culture is needed for ensuring effective global knowledge integration; and top‐management involvement plays a key role in deploying both knowledge integration and launch preparation. Of the three NPD process capabilities, global knowledge integration is the most important, whereas homework and launch preparation also play a significant role in bringing about global NPD program success. Tests for partial mediation suggest that too much process formality may be negative and that top‐management involvement requires careful focus.     

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.     

Factors Affecting the Process of Collaborative Product Development: A Study of UK Manufacturers of Information and Communications Technology Products

Product development is inherently risky, particularly when new technology is involved. Although collaborative product development is promoted as a means for reducing or at least sharing risk, such partnerships present their own challenges. Collaboration can also accentuate many of the risks inherent in product development. For example, any product development project requires effective communication among development team members. In a collaborative effort, this challenge is even greater because the development team spans organizational as well as functional boundaries. Dale Littler, Fiona Leverick, and Margaret Bruce describe the results of a survey that was conducted to identify the risks and benefits of collaborative product development as well as the key success factors for such relationships. The main reasons cited for collaborating on product development projects include satisfying customer requirements, taking advantage of market opportunities for which the firm lacks necessary skills and technical expertise, and responding to changes in technology. Other reasons for collaboration include reducing the cost and risk of product R&D, improving time to market, and gaining access to new markets. In addition to the risks associated with product development by a single company, the partners in a collaborative effort face several other challenges. For example, one company might gain inside knowledge of its partner's unique skills and expertise. Despite the cost and time involved in managing the collaboration, such a relationship usually results in less direct control over product development. Of particular concern are the difficulties of coordinating the divergent management styles and budgeting processes of the collaborating firms. Collaboration requires frequent communication among all involved parties. The likelihood of success is greatly enhanced by the presence of a product or collaboration champion. Other success factors include ensuring that partners contribute as expected, creating the perception of equal benefits among partners, and building trust between partners. Firms that are more experienced with collaboration also cite the importance of flexibility in corporate systems and management style, fit with existing businesses, and the choice of a partner.     

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.     

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.     

Open Innovation in Practice: Goal Complementarity and Closed NPD Networks to Explain Differences in Innovation Performance for SMEs in the Medical Devices Sector

Cooperation with other organizations increases the innovation performance of organization, especially for small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) as they encounter liabilities of “smallness” (e.g., limited financial resources, and manpower). In the medical devices sector, collaboration with external partners for NPD becomes increasingly important due to the complexity of the products and the development process. About 80% of companies in this sector are SMEs. These companies operate in a highly regulated sector, which affects the organization of the external network required for the new product development (NPD) process. SMEs are practicing extensively open innovation activities, but in practice face a number of barriers in trying to apply open innovation. This paper examines multiple network characteristics simultaneously in relation to innovation performance and thereby aligns with and builds further on configuration theory. Configuration theory posits that for each set of network characteristics, there exists an ideal set of organizational characteristics that yields superior performance. In this research, the systems approach to fit is used. Fit is high to the extent that an organization is similar to an ideal profile along multiple dimensions. This ideal profile represents the network profile that the 15% highest performing companies use. It is argued that the smaller the distance between the ideal profile and the network profile that is used, the higher the performance. The objective of this research is (1) to examine the relation between the ideal profile and innovation performance and (2) to examine which organization of the network profile is related to high innovation performance. Quantitative survey data (n = 60, response rate 61.9%) form the core of this research. The quantitative results are clarified and have been triangulated with qualitative interview data (n = 50). Our findings suggest the presence of an “ideal” NPD network profile (in terms of goal complementarity, resource complementarity, fairness trust, reliability trust, and network position strength): the more a company's NPD network profile differs from this ideal profile, the lower the innovation performance. In addition, the results of our study indicate that the NPD network profiles of successful and less successful SMEs in the medical devices sector significantly differ in terms of “goal complementarity,” while this is less the case for trust and resource complementarity labeled distinctive by previous research. Finally, results show that a relatively closed, focused, and consistent “business‐like” NPD networking approach, which is characterized by result orientation and professionalism, is related to high innovation performance. It is recommended that SMEs in the medical devices sector aiming to distinguish themselves from competitors in terms of innovation performance focus on goal complementarity while adopting such a business‐like attitude toward their NPD network partners.     

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.     

The Formation of Tie Strength in a Strategic Alliance's First New Product Development Project: The Influence of Project and Partners' Characteristics

This paper draws on theories of interorganizational learning, social networks, and transaction cost economics to investigate the formation of tie strength between first‐time alliance partners. It focuses on a strategic alliance's first new product development (NPD) project, which is characterized by a lack of prior experience and insufficient trust between partners and explores how the interaction between (1) interorganizational learning (the “degree” [amount of knowledge shared] and “type” [tacit or explicit nature of the knowledge]); (2) the required communication (“frequency level” and “degree of media‐richness”) to transfer and exchange knowledge; and (3) economic transaction considerations (reducing cost and avoiding opportunism), in highly uncertain and dynamic environments, and, in the absence of an assumption of trust, will determine the future strength of the ties between partners. We argue that the “degree” and “type” of interorganizational learning that are required to efficiently develop an alliance's first NPD project determine the strength of the ties between the partners. Each “degree and type” of learning has a different impact on the frequency and media richness of the partners' communication, and consequently each leads to a different level of social tie strength between the partners. This relationship is moderated by the partners' market overlap. We suggest that the required “degree and type” of interorganizational learning is contingent on the project characteristics (degree of innovation; “radical versus incremental,” and the mode of development; “modular versus integrated”). This relationship, however, is moderated by the partners' technical skills (complementary versus similar).     

Friend or foe? The effects of managerial politics on NPD team communication,collaboration and project success

Much existing work on new product development (NPD) team integration takes an economically rational perspective, specifying appropriate systems, structures and interactions. Few studies however have explored the effects of politics on working relationships between technically trained managers (TTMs; e.g., research and development managers) and marketing managers (MMs) during NPD. Our results reveal that intra-team politics has positive and negative effects on TTM/MM communication. This is important because communication positively influences collaboration and NPD success. Moreover, the effects of communication variables on these two outcome variables differ depending on whether one is a TTM or MM.     

Mindful management of relationships during periods of crises: A model of trust,doubt and relational adjustments

This paper identifies practices of business-to-business relationship management that lead to building resilience during crisis. Business relationships play a significant role when firms face turbulence and disruption. Crises create resource limitations that businesses need to manage by the rapid formation of new relationships to access resources and build adequate capabilities. Mindfully managing such relationships requires a combination of trust, doubt and control mechanisms to enable exchange while safeguarding against relational vulnerabilities. Drawing on data from 33 firms operating within highly turbulent and uncertain environments, and crisis management literature, we apply the concept of mindfulness and introduce a model of mindful management of relationships as a process that combines the cognitive and behavioural capabilities of trusting, doubting, verifying, and adjusting relational exposure. This process enables a rapid acquisition of resources and building capabilities while enabling businesses dealing with issues before relational failure manifests. The mindful process supports ongoing and highly interactive relationships that adjust to changing circumstances fostering collaboration to deal with crises. Results encourage managers to rapidly develop relationships and trust new partners, whilst practicing suspicious thinking, enacting continuous interaction, empowering experienced boundary personnel, enabling frequent informal communication, and supporting the development of diverse social bonds.     

Trust formation in Korean new product alliances: How important are pre-existing social ties?

The focus of this study is on the nature and influence of social connections versus other relational mechanisms on trust formation in an emerging Asian economy. We examine the role of communication quality, perceived fairness, and pre-existing social relationships for the formation of trust in 47 vertical new product development alliances in South Korea. The empirical results indicate a relatively minor importance of pre-existing social ties vis-à-vis communication quality and fairness for the development of trust. Contrary to widespread perceptions, pre-existing social ties do not appear to directly contribute to establishing trust with external alliance partners in Korea. Multiple explanations are offered for this unexpected finding. Instead, existing social relationships moderate the importance of fairness for trust formation. When conducting partnerships with Korean firms, managers should focus more on a quality communication and fair behavior when trust formation is the objective, than on social connections.     

Communication,interactivity, and satisfaction in B2B relationships

This study examines how traditional and new communication media impact satisfaction in business-to-business (B2B) relationships. We develop a conceptual model and empirically investigate hypotheses linking personal face-to-face (F2F), digital, and impersonal communication to buyer and supplier contacts, rationality, social interaction, and reciprocal feedback, and these interactivity dimensions to relationship satisfaction. Structural equation models are estimated with data from the commercial printing and graphic design industry. The findings indicate that personal has a stronger positive association than digital communication with dyadic contact (buyer and supplier contacts), social interaction, and reciprocal feedback, but a weaker positive association than digital with rationality. Digital has a stronger positive association than impersonal communication with dyadic contact, rationality, and reciprocal feedback, but a weaker positive association than impersonal with social interaction. Only rationality and reciprocal feedback have positive associations with satisfaction. Dyadic contact, however, has a negative association with satisfaction that is stronger for personal than digital communication.     

Trust as Networking Knowledge: Precedents from Australia

Trust, rather than being simply a resource for establishing collaborative relationships between organizations, is an essential component of their constitution. At base, trust involves interpersonal relations of a specific type. These are relations where there is sufficient probability that a person or organization with whom one is in contact will perform an action that is beneficial, or at least not detrimental, for one to consider engaging in some form of cooperation with this person or organization in the future. Trust establishes situations in which participants in collaboration have a long-term and recurrent relationship. Where trust exists, organizations are more willing to collaborate with other organizations on a more reciprocal basis. Trust is especially important when collaboration takes place between competitors because the risk of opportunistic behaviour is higher. Where organizations share resources and information openly with other participants they will seek to reduce opportunistic behaviour through the mutual understanding and goodwill of parties. However, trust is not static; it is a dynamic process that evolves according to the development of the relationship, as one in which the more long-term the relationship, the greater the trust. In this paper, we will present the impact of trust on business networks and examine how their members developed knowledge through networking.     

Interaction Orientation and Product Development Performance for Taiwanese Electronics Firms: The Mediating Role of Market‐Relating Capabilities

While academics and practitioners are increasingly aware of the value of including the customer in new product development (NPD), processes for doing so effectively remain unclear. Therefore, this study explores the process through which a firm's interaction orientation (the ability to effectively interact with customers) influences product development performance. Drawing on the resource‐based view, this study develops a research model in which two market‐relating capabilities—market‐linking and marketing capabilities—mediate the effect of interaction orientation on product development performance. The validity of this model is examined by analyzing primary data gathered from 167 Taiwanese electronics companies. The model results provide support for a process link between interaction orientation, market‐relating capabilities, and product development performance, such that a firm's capabilities enable the conversion of customer‐based resources into productive new product outcomes. More specifically, the interaction orientation–product development speed relationship is mediated by both marketing and market‐linking capabilities, while the interaction orientation–product innovativeness relationship is partially mediated by marketing capability. That is, interaction orientation has indirect effects on product innovativeness and product development speed by strengthening both marketing and market‐linking capabilities that in turn improve product development performance. In addition, the results suggest that a firm's interactive rationality moderates the relationship between interaction orientation and marketing capability. Overall, this study enhances our understanding of how firms achieve superior product development performance by developing effective customer interaction. The findings of this study provide important strategic insights into NPD.     

Do resource differences between manufacturers and suppliers help or hinder product innovation of manufacturers? The moderating role of trust and contracts

It is a common practice of manufacturers to involve suppliers in new product development (NPD). Extant literature indicates that supplier integration has mixed effects on manufacturers' NPD and the contradicting findings result from either the external contingent factors or the tactical integration practices. We argue instead that the mixed effects are rooted in resource differences between manufacturers and suppliers. Further, we examine the functions of trust and contracts as the resource integration and coordination mechanisms to manage the effects of resource differences on product innovation of manufacturers. Based on a survey among 189 manufacturing firms, our research shows that resource differences follow an inverted U-shaped effect on product innovation of manufacturers and that trust strengthens while contract complexity attenuates the curvilinear relationship. As such, our research extends the existing body of literature to account for the divergent outcomes of supplier integration from the perspective of resource differences. Moreover, it demonstrates the double-edged effects of trust and contracts as devices of resource integration and coordination. Our research offers useful research and managerial implications.     

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.