Benchmarking the Firm's Critical Success Factors in New Product Development

Managing new product development (NPD) is, to a great extent, a process of separating the winners from the losers. At the project level, tough go/no-go decisions must be made throughout each development effort to ensure that resources are being allocated appropriately. At the company level, benchmarking is helpful for identifying the critical success factors that set the most successful firms apart from their competitors. This company- or macro-level analysis also has the potential for uncovering success factors that are not readily apparent through examination of specific projects. To improve our understanding of the company-level drivers of NPD success, Robert Cooper and Elko Kleinschmidt describe the results of a multi-firm benchmarking study. They propose that a company's overall new product performance depends on the following elements: the NPD process and the specific activities within this process; the organization of the NPD program; the firm's NPD strategy; the firm's culture and climate for innovation; and senior management commitment to NPD. Given the multidimensional nature of NPD performance, the study involves 10 performance measures of a company's new product program: success rate, percent of sales, profitability relative to spending, technical success rating, sales impact, profit impact, success in meeting sales objectives, success in meeting profit objectives, profitability relative to competitors, and overall success. The 10 performance metrics are reduced to two underlying dimensions: program profitability and program impact. These performance factors become theX-and Y-ax.es of a performance map, a visual summary of the relative performance of the 135 companies responding to the survey. The performance map further breaks down the respondents into four groups: solid performers, high-impact technical winners, low-impact performers, and dogs. Again, the objective of this analysis is to determine what separates the solid performers from the companies in the other groups. The analysis identifies nine constructs that drive performance. In rank order of their impact on performance, the main performance drivers that separate the solid performers from the dogs are: a high-quality new product process; a clear, well-communicated new product strategy for the company; adequate resources for new products; senior management commitment to new products; an entrepreneurial climate for product innovation; senior management accountability; strategic focus and synergy (i.e., new products close to the firm's existing markets and leveraging existing technologies); high-quality development teams; and cross-functional teams.     

Tying the pieces together: A normative framework for integrating sales and project operations

Synchronizing sales efforts with project operations, such that (1) there is a steady flow of work that can be completed in a non-chaotic project environment, (2) resources maintain high utilization, and (3) desired deliverables reach customers within the promised lead-time, is extremely difficult. This paper proposes a normative approach to uniting the sales process with project operations capacity by coordinating movement of potential customers through the sales funnel with the company's internal project capacity. It also addresses contingencies with respect to company throughput as a result of changes in managing the market, the sales funnel, and project operations, while taking into consideration variation in scheduling as well as in managing project task and duration uncertainty.     

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

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

增值税转型对石化建设项目经济效益测算影响初探

增值税转型是指增值税由现行的生产型转为消费型。两类增值税的区别就在于是否允许销项税额抵扣固定资产进项税额。增值税转型将对石化建设项目经济效益测算的方法、结果产生重要影响。在测算方法上，项目建成后，无论管理模式如何设置，增值税转型带来的经济效益应在项目测算中得到完全体现；抵扣项目固定资产进项税额起始时间为项目投产年。在测算结果上，增值税转型后，无论是否扩大增值税征收范围，石化建设项目的经济效益都将有所提高。     

An Empirical Study of Platform and Derivative Product Development Projects

Many firms now realize the importance of planning product families and product platforms. However, little research addresses planning and execution of different types of projects within a product family platform series. This study investigates project characteristics, development challenges, typical outcomes, and success factors for product development projects at different locations in the product family spectrum. “Platform” projects result in products that initiate a new product family platform for a company. “Derivative” projects result in products consisting of extensions to an existing product family platform. Data on 108 new product development projects from a variety of assembled products industries were collected via a detailed survey and analyzed. Findings indicate that: (1) platform and derivative projects differ in project task characteristics (including the amount of new technology development undertaken and project complexity) and market newness; (2) platform and derivative projects generally do not differ in terms of project success (achievement of project objectives, level of company satisfaction, and perceived customer satisfaction) or smoothness of project execution; (3) both platform and derivative projects generally are executed in similar ways; (4) certain managerial approaches (including contingency planning, project-based evaluation of personnel, and overlap of design and manufacturing engineering) are associated with higher project execution success for both platform and derivative projects; and (5) use of interdependent technologies and novel project objectives are associated with project execution failure for platform projects. The results suggest that firms can continue to employ a single product development management process for both platform and derivative projects, as long as modest customization of the process is made for the given project type. Completely different management processes are not required. In all, the results presented in this article suggest specific managerial actions companies can take to significantly improve product development success. © 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.     

How Ideation Portfolio Management Influences Front‐End Success

The front end of innovation is recognized as an important driver for successful new products and business prosperity. On the one hand, companies must generate a sufficient number and variety of high‐quality ideas to obtain a well‐balanced portfolio of potentially successful innovation projects. On the other hand, companies must strictly select and prioritize promising ideas and concepts because resource constraints do not allow for the pursuit of every idea. Therefore, companies must practice ideation portfolio management to simultaneously support the variety and selection of ideas and concepts before they enter the innovation project portfolio. To date, there is no research on how ideation portfolio management affects the performance of the front end and of the eventual project portfolio. The current study addresses this research gap in an empirical cross‐industry investigation of 175 medium‐sized and large firms in Germany using a double‐informant design. Ideation portfolio management is conceptualized with three elements: ideation strategy, process formalization, and creative encouragement. We find that all three elements independently and significantly contribute to front‐end success. The results also show that front‐end success mediates the relationship between the elements of ideation portfolio management and project portfolio success. More importantly, we find significant interaction effects between creative encouragement and process formalization and between creative encouragement and ideation strategy. The findings suggest that these elements of ideation portfolio management are complementary and should be balanced to maximize the performance of the front end and the eventual innovation project portfolio.     

Planning and uncertainty in new product development

The domain of New Product Development (NPD) is subject to considerable uncertainties. Aside from market‐related sources of uncertainty, the degree of innovativeness of the underlying product concept is a significant source of uncertainty, as unclear goals and specifications like, e.g. product specifications may lead to substantial delays in the project. However, companies are required to manage the innovation process as efficiently as possible. The resulting conflicting demands often leave companies struggling to achieve both efficiency as well as flexibility due to their often opposing implications for organizing and managing NPD projects. In this context, planning plays a central role; however, its usefulness for NPD project success is perceived quite differently. While there are reports about a positive influence of initial planning on various success measures, others have questioned the effectiveness of elaborated initial planning and contend that the ability to rapidly react to changes later in the process and to improvise may lead to success in NPD. This study aims at achieving a better understanding of planning in NPD by investigating a sample of 475 Research & Development projects in Japanese electrical and mechanical engineering companies. Regression analysis is used to shed more light on the interplay of planning intensity, changes, and the degree of technological newness of the NPD project and their influence on project success. Our results indicate planning to be of value for different types of innovation projects. Furthermore, the influences of the variables in question vary with the success measures that are taken into account, indicating that a more detailed and contingent understanding of planning in NPD needs to be developed.     

基于全过程委托代建模式的项目管理公司建设问题研究

随着政府投资项目代建制的实施,建立和培育一个完善的项目管理市场是很有必要的。我国的项目管理市场总体上是不完善的,其中关键的问题就是项目管理市场主体一项目管理公司的缺乏,这极大地影响了项目管理的推行。文章基于全过程项目管理代建模式对项目管理公司的建设问题进行了研究,并对各专业公司如何实现向项目管理公司的过渡提供了一些建议。     

Measuring Development Performance in the Electronics Industry

Within a year or so, the computer you purchased last month will probably be obsolete. For a manufacturer faced with such short product life-cycles, the performance of the new product development (NPD) function can determine whether the firm itself is relegated to the scrap heap. With such a close link between NPD performance and a firm's overall success, we need to do more than simply ensure that individual projects are well managed; we need to assess NPD's overall contribution to the company's business performance. Christoph Loch, Lothar Stein, and Christian Terwiesch develop a two-step model for measuring the performance of the NPD function. In this model, development output performance is the direct driver of business success. In other words, the output and the productivity of the NPD function directly affect a company's profitability and sales growth. Development output performance is driven by development process performance—that is, the operational management of development projects. Using data from the “Excellence in Electronics” project (a joint research effort of Stanford University, the University of Augsburg, and McKinsey & Co.), the two-step model is applied to a sample of 95 business units operating in three international electronics industries: consumer/small products, computers/communications, and industrial measurement/large systems. This analysis has two main objectives: identifying the key measures of development output performance and their contribution to business success; and identifying the important measures of development process performance and their contributions to development output performance. Development productivity, measured by development expense intensity, is the clearest predictor of business success. In other words, you can't buy a competitive advantage by pouring more money into R&D. Success comes from more efficient NPD, not simply outspending the competition. In the computer industry, design-to-cost has a positive effect on profitability growth, and design quality has a positive influence on sales growth. The factors underlying development process performance are much more dependent on the nature of competition in each industry. For example, because competition in the large systems industry still focuses primarily on technical competence, design-to-cost efforts in this industry lag behind those of the computer industry. Important measures of development process performance for all industry segments examined in the study include supplier involvement in the design, early prototyping, a team-based development organization, the use of team rewards, and value engineering.     

Decision making at the front end of innovation: the hidden influence of knowledge and decision criteria

Decision making at the front end of innovation is critical for the success of companies. This paper presents a method, called decision making based on knowledge (DeBK), which was created to analyze the decision‐making process at the front end. The method evaluates the knowledge of project information and the importance of decision criteria, compiling a measure that indicates whether decisions are founded on available knowledge and what criteria are in fact being considered to delineate them. The potential contribution of DeBK is corroborated through two projects that faced decision‐making issues at the front end of innovation.     

PERSPECTIVE: Trends and Drivers of Success in NPD Practices: Results of the 2003 PDMA Best Practices Study*

Since 1990, the Product Development & Management Association (PDMA) has sponsored best practice research projects to identify trends in new product development (NPD) management practices and to discern which practices are associated with higher degrees of success. The objective of this ongoing research is to assist managers in determining how to improve their own product development methods and practices. This paper presents results, recommendations, and implications for NPD practice stemming from PDMA's third best practices study, which was conducted in 2003. In the eight years since the previous best practices study was conducted, firms have become slightly more conservative in the portfolio of projects, with lower percentages of the total number of projects in the new‐to‐the‐world and new‐to‐the‐firm categories. Although success rates and development efficiencies have remained stable, this more conservative approach to NPD seems to have negatively impacted the sales and profits impact of the new products that have been commercialized. As formal processes for NPD are now the norm, attention is moving to managing the multiple projects across the portfolio in a more orchestrated manner. Finally, firms are implementing a wide variety of software support tools for various aspects of NPD. NPD areas still seriously in need of improved management include idea management, project leadership and training, cross‐functional training and team communication support, and innovation support and leadership by management. In terms of aspects of NPD management that differentiate the “best from the rest,” the findings indicate that the best firms emphasize and integrate their innovation strategy across all the levels of the firm, better support their people and team communications, conduct extensive experimentation, and use numerous kinds of new methods and techniques to support NPD. All companies appear to continue to struggle with the recording of ideas and making them readily available to others in the organization, even the best. What remains unclear is whether there is a preferable approach for organizing the NPD endeavor, as no one organizational approach distinguished top NPD performers.     

Building Dynamic Capabilities in New Product Development through Intertemporal Integration

Although successful development of a given product may help explain the current success of a firm, creating longer‐term competitive advantage demands significantly more attention to developing and nurturing dynamic integration capabilities. These capabilities propel product development activities in ways that build on and develop technological and marketing capabilities for future product development efforts and create platforms for future product development. In this article, we develop a conceptual model of a dynamic integration process in product development, which we call intertemporal integration (ITI). In its most general form ITI is defined as the process of collecting, interpreting, and internalizing technological and marketing capabilities from past new product development projects and incorporating that knowledge in a systematic and purposeful manner into the development of future new products. Research propositions outlining the relationship of ITI to performance are presented. We provide specific examples of managerial mechanisms to be used in implementing ITI. We conclude with implications for research and practice. Effective management of ITI can increase new product development success and long‐term competitive advantage. This implies that management needs to engage in activities that gather and transform information and knowledge from prior development projects so that it can be used in future development projects. Project audits, design databases in computer‐aided design (CAD) systems, engineering notebooks, collections of test and experimental results, market research and test market results, project management databases, and other activities will all be important in the acquisition of knowledge from prior new product development (NPD) projects. Managers also should initiate the creation and maintenance of databases of technical and marketing information from prior projects, job performance reports, seminars and workshops related to technological issues and advances, and publication of technical journals to assist in the process of knowledge acquisition. Similarly, techniques such as assigning project managers from earlier development projects, reusing key components and technologies, and developing a company‐wide methodology for managing projects can be used to boost the application and use of knowledge.     

建管分离模式下的管道工程质量管理问题探讨

分析了中国石油天然气集团公司实行建管分离的管理模式,通过一些工程项目具体实践,指出该模式下的工程项目质量管理需要进一步优化和完善的地方,例如,项目质量目标构建不全面、没有充分考虑运行单位的质量诉求、运行单位在工程建设期间的质量监督地位和权责模糊、注重结果检验而弱化全过程检验等问题。如何解决这些问题,将影响建管分离模式下的质量管理体系构建和运行的有效性。结合工程实际对建管分离模式下的管道工程项目质量管理相关问题展开讨论和探索。     

R&D Project Selection Strategy: an empirical study in Spain

The author has investigated the role played by project selection methods in defining a firm's technology strategy, as exemplified by a sample of innovative companies in Spain. The information was collected by a combination of questionnaire and interview with key personnel.
The author was able to classify strategies into four groups: (1) a planning strategy, essentially a negotiation comprising top-down and bottom-up elements; (2) an economic strategy in which a large number of economic criteria set in advance by top management are used to evaluate projects; (3) a market strategy in which R&D is seen more or less as an adjunct to the Marketing function, which defines the products needed and negotiates the programme with top management; (4) a technical strategy, used in circumstances in which technological innovation is essential and in which, therefore, economic factors take a subsidiary place.
The author's data show that in companies operating a planning strategy project selection methods of various, perhaps ad hoc kinds play a key role in reaching a company consensus. For those using an economic strategy the selection criteria are predetermined and selection methods inflexible. In the case of the market strategy, evaluation methods are used solely to help to rank projects prior to selection. Firms employing the technical strategy clearly base their decisions purely on the technical merit of the various projects put up for implementation.
The paper includes information on the types of selection method used, broken down by company size and other similar criteria, and comparisons with practice in the USA, France and some other countries.     

A Causal Model of the Impact of Skills, Synergy, and Design Sensitivity on New Product Performance

Notwithstanding the best efforts of outstanding managers, project team members, researchers, and consultants, no product development plan can guarantee success. Every new products organization will experience its fair share of failures, but a firm can take steps to ensure that its failures do not outweigh its successes. By benchmarking the competition, a firm can gain insight into best practices–the factors that lead most directly to new product success. To help identify these best practices, X. Michael Song, William E. Souder, and Barbara Dyer develop and test a causal model of the relationships among the key variables leading to new product performance. The proposed model identifies five factors that lead to marketing and technical proficiency: process skills, project management skills, alignment of skills with needs, team skills, and design sensitivity. According to the model, marketing and technical proficiency directly determine product quality, and ultimately lead to new product success or failure. The causal model was tested using information on 65 completed projects–34 successes and 31 failures–from 17 large, multi-divisional Japanese firms. The study participants develop, manufacture, and market high-technology consumer and industrial products. These firms judged the success or failure of the projects in this study by using seven criteria: return on investment, profit, market share, sales, opportunities for technical leadership, market dominance, and customer satisfaction. These firms generally assigned the greatest importance to customer satisfaction, opportunity creation, and long-term growth. For the most part, the responses from these firms support the relationships presented in the causal model. According to the respondents, marketing proficiency and product quality have a strong, positive influence on their new product performance, as do process skills, project management skills, and alignment of skills and needs. The responses highlight the importance to these firms of responsiveness to customer wants and needs, as well as ensuring a close fit between project needs and the firm's skills in marketing, R&D, engineering, and manufacturing. Somewhat surprisingly, the responses do not support the model's suggested relationships between skills/needs alignment and technical proficiency or between technical proficiency and product quality.     

Beating the odds in the innovation arena: The role of market and technology signals classification and noise

Innovation is a risky business. Notwithstanding the attention in research on the determinants of innovation success, the estimates of the extremely high failure rates (ranging from 40% to 90%) have not come down. As a result, new approaches have to be found to address the issues that prevent organizations from reaching innovation success over a longer period of time. In this study, Signal Detection Theory (SDT) is introduced to show that it may be less important to improve innovation practices in companies, than it is to change the nature of the projects that enter the corporate innovation funnel. In our empirical study of 44 innovation projects in the pharmaceutical and electronics industry, we show that pursuing more noisy signals (uncertain technological and market opportunities) is currently beneficial for innovation success. In general, companies allocate too few resources to noisy innovation opportunities. Interestingly, we find a positive, and not an inverted U-shaped, relationship between noise/signal ratios and innovation success. This indicates that there are almost no companies that take too much risk in the current competitive environment and that many can gain from increasing their noise tolerance. The implications from this study are quite counter-intuitive in a sense that ‘risk’ is not the cause of the innovation problems, but may be a solution.     

The role of intermediaries in cross‐industry innovation processes

In this article, we investigate the role intermediaries play in the cross‐industry innovation process. Intermediaries are external institutions that support companies in their innovative activities. They are frequently used to bridge gaps between different industries. Our research focuses on the question of which capabilities an intermediary should have in order to achieve success in initiating a cross‐industry innovation. Our empirical base consists of a survey of 107 European manufacturing companies and an analysis of six collaborative cross‐industry innovation projects. The company survey is used to identify the capabilities an intermediary should have during each of the three phases of the innovation process. The cross‐industry projects, each of which involves a Swiss or a German industrial company and an intermediary, provide us with analyzable data. We conclude our study by identifying three types of intermediary: the innovation broadener, the innovation leverager, and the innovation multiplier.     

New Product Management Practices of Small High Technology Firms

Various methods exist for managing the planning, cost estimating, scheduling and statusing of new product development projects. David Boag and Brenda Rinholm investigate whether the use of formal management procedures and structured frameworks are the most effective methods for achieving control over new product development activities. This article describes the new product development management practices of 33 small and medium-sized high technology companies. The authors employ a judgmental procedure to group the firms into three stages of development for their management of new products. Findings indicate that success at new product development is greater for more formalized companies than for companies which are less formalized or which use informal methods.     

Definition of innovation projects in small firms: A Spanish study

Small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) are the main holders of the European economy and innovation projects are essential tools for SMEs to ensure their growth. A high percentage of innovation projects implemented by SMEs lacks planning and initial management, which causes the appearance of important problems for the SMEs survival. The authors have confirmed with a field study of 72 Spanish small firms that a lot of these problems arise from an incomplete project definition, so it is necessary to help SMEs to have a specific methodology that is appropriate to their own characteristics and projects. The statistical analysis shows how the project management knowledge helps to a better project definition, contributing to the project alignment with the company strategy. Also, it reveals other problems related to the project definition as planning, budget, market and financing. Of this analysis, it concludes that the definition phase supports the other phases and is essential in order to achieve project success. This paper presents an ‘integration model of factors’ that helps SMEs in the management of the definition phase of their innovation projects. This model relates the various areas of analysis needed to ensure their integration at the project definition. The relationships between the different model areas have been defined, showing the way to integrate the technical, economic and strategic outlooks of project objectives management in the definition phase of the project. This model has been implemented in 21 new innovation project definitions. The users' valuation has been very positive with a 90.4% of success and all of the model users are interested in implementing the model again in next projects. The main advantages highlighted were user‐friendliness, intuitive model and easy application.     

卓越绩效模式在管道施工管理中的应用

针对管道三公司在南昌-上海支干线4标段项目实施卓越绩效模式,介绍了管道施工项目管理的价值创造过程的识别、过程设计、实施与改进。通过实施卓越绩效模式,推进项目管理方式转变,扎扎实实提高项目管理科学化水平。