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.     

The Ability to Minimize the Timing of New Product Development and Introduction: An Examination of Antecedent Factors in the North American Automobile Supplier Industry

The importance of overall timing in the new product development and the new product commercialization processes has been widely recognized in the literature. We examined 14 firm-level practices, later reduced to four factors, that influence the ability to minimize new product development and introduction times overall relative to competitors. The factors are (1) human resource management, (2) synergistic integration, (3) supplier closeness, and (4) the design-manufacturing interface. An empirical study of the North American automobile supplier industry found some support for the four-factor model of antecedents to timing ability: synergistic integration and supplier closeness were both significantly related to development and introduction time minimization ability. The implications of these findings for product development managers and academic researchers are discussed.     

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.     

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.     

Small and medium-sized firms' import behavior: The case of Danish industrial purchasers

This paper focuses on the foreign purchase behavior of small and medium-sized industrial firms in a small European country, and is guided by three main research issues: (1) to what extent are small and medium-sized firms involved in international sourcing; (2) how do small and medium-sized firms initially make contact with foreign suppliers, and what are their motives for choosing a supplier; and (3) how do small and medium-sized firms perceive relationships with foreign suppliers in terms of perceived problems and cooperation? Through a survey administered in Denmark, the results show that small and medium-sized industrial firms are highly involved in international purchasing both within the European Union and abroad. Surprisingly, this involvement does not appear to be significantly driven by lack of domestic availability. Instead, the primary drivers for choosing a foreign supplier are price and quality. Finally, product adaptation appears to be a significant element of relationship formation between importers and their suppliers. The paper concludes with a discussion of results, implications, and directions for future research.     

Product and process innovation in biopharmaceuticals: a new perspective on development

Developing new products and processes is increasingly a focal point of competition and often requires the development and successful implementation of novel process technologies. The process development and production of a new biological entity are significantly more complex than those for small molecule drugs. Conventional new product development models in the literature on firm level innovation fail to explain the nature of development projects for biopharmaceuticals. This paper makes the case that a new perspective is required to understand the management of product and process development in biopharmaceuticals. An explanatory model is proposed for this purpose.     

In Chains? An Empirical Study of Antecedents of Supplier Product Development Activity in the Automotive Industry*

In the literature on interorganizational collaboration in product development, considerable attention is given to supplier role classifications. Such classifications often link to a supplier's position in the overall supply chain, but the claim that this position has a substantial impact on its product development activities has seldom been empirically validated. The results from the present survey among Swedish automotive suppliers demonstrate that supplier product development activity is significantly affected by the position of the supplier in the supply chain and the supplier's strategic focus on innovation. While the latter has a stronger impact on product development activities, there is also an interaction effect implying that the effects of a supplier's innovation strategy are contingent on its supply chain position. Contrary to expectations, customer development commitment does not have any significant direct effect on supplier product development activities. Instead, this relation is fully mediated by supplier innovation strategy. These findings imply that, in contrast to conventional wisdom, product development activities are not strictly organized in “chains.” Although supply chains can be useful metaphors for understanding the distribution of regular production activities between firms, they arguably apply less to the distribution of product development activities.     

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.     

Effects of Supplier and Customer Integration on Product Innovation and Performance: Empirical Evidence in Hong Kong Manufacturers

While the beneficial impacts of supplier and customer integration are generally acknowledged, very few empirical research studies have examined how an organization can achieve better product performance through product innovation enhanced by such integration. This paper thus examines the impact of key supplier and customer integration processes (i.e., information sharing and product codevelopment with supplier and customer, respectively) on product innovation as well as their impact on product performance. It contributes to existing literature by asking how such integration activities affect product innovation and performance in both direct and indirect ways. After surveying 251 manufacturers in Hong Kong, this study tested the relationships among information sharing, product codevelopment, product innovativeness, and performance with three control variables (i.e., company size, type of industry, and market certainty). Structural equation modeling with correlation and t‐tests was used to test the hypothesized research model. The findings indicate a direct, positive relationship between supplier and customer integration and product performance. In particular, this study verifies that sharing information with suppliers and product codevelopment with customers directly improves product performance. In addition, this study empirically examines the indirect effects of supplier and customer integration processes on product performance, mediated by innovation. This has seldom been attempted in previous research. The empirical findings show that product codevelopment with suppliers improves performance, mediated by innovation. However, the sampled firms cannot improve their product innovation by sharing information with their current customers and suppliers as well as codeveloping new products with the customers. If the adoption of supplier and customer integration is not cost free, the findings of this study may suggest firms work on particular supplier and customer integration processes (i.e., product codevelopment with suppliers) to improve their product innovation. The study also suggests that companies codevelop new products only with new customers and lead users instead of current ones for product innovation. For managers, this study has demonstrated that both information sharing and product codevelopment affect performance directly and indirectly. Managers should put more emphasis on these key processes, especially when linked with product innovation. Managers should consider involving their suppliers and customers in the early stages of design. Information sharing with suppliers is also important in product development. As suggested by this study, extensive effort on supplier and customer integration should be made to directly augment current product performance and product innovation at the same time.     

A dynamic model of supplier–customer product development collaboration strategies

This study examines transitions between different types of product development collaboration in supplier–customer settings, the events that trigger such transitions, and the emerging requirements for suppliers. The current study contributes to the literature regarding supplier and customer involvement by combining previously discovered types of collaboration into a dynamic model that describes these different types as alternative modes of collaboration that can be implemented in a relationship. Transitions between different types of collaboration are identified in a longitudinal case study. Three of the four transitions identified took place in the same dyad, which demonstrates that it is possible to change the type of collaboration without losing the advantages of a long-term relationship with a customer. The most radical change in collaboration—the change from supplier involvement to customer involvement—involved temporarily discontinuing the original relationship, which indicates that this transition incorporates the highest risk of relationship termination. By offering a dynamic model for product development collaboration, this study is the first to analyze changes between different types of customer–supplier product development collaboration from a supplier's perspective. The dynamic view is important for companies seeking to take advantage of their long-term relationships instead of starting new ones when new requirements for product development collaboration emerge.     

Managing Supplier Involvement in New Product Development: A Multiple‐Case Study*

Existing studies of supplier involvement in new product development have mainly focused on project‐related short‐term processes and success factors. This study validates and extends an existing exploratory framework, which comprises both long‐term strategic processes and short‐term operational processes that are related to supplier involvement. The empirical validation is based on a multiple‐case study of supplier collaborations at a manufacturer in the copier and printer industry. The analysis of eight cases of supplier involvement reveals that the results of supplier–manufacturer collaborations and the associated issues and problems can best be explained by the patterns in the extent to which the manufacturer manages supplier involvement in the short term and the long term. The results of this study reveal that the initial framework is helpful in understanding why certain collaborations are not effectively managed yet conclude that the existing analytical distinction among four different management areas does not sufficiently reflect empirical reality. This leads to the reconceptualization and further detailing of the framework. Instead of four managerial areas, this study proposes to distinguish between the strategic management arena and the operational management arena. The strategic management arena contains processes that together provide long‐term, strategic direction and operational support for project teams adopting supplier involvement. These processes also contribute to building up a supplier base that can meet current and future technology and capability needs. The operational management arena contains processes that are aimed at planning, managing, and evaluating the actual collaborations in a specific development project. The results of this study suggest that success of involving suppliers in product development is reflected by the firm's ability to capture both short‐ and long‐term benefits. If companies spend most of their time on operational management in development projects, they will fail to use the leverage effect of planning and preparing such involvement through strategic management activities. Also, they will not be sufficiently able to capture possible long‐term technology and learning benefits that may spin off from individual projects. Long‐term collaboration benefits can only be captured if a company can build long‐term relationships with key suppliers, with which it builds learning routines and ensures that the capability sets of both parties are aligned and remain useful for future joint projects.     

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.     

Supplier Development Responsibility and NPD Project Outcomes: The Roles of Monetary Quantification of Differences and Supporting‐Detail Gathering

Firms increasingly rely on suppliers to perform tasks in new product development (NPD). Research has only recently begun to focus on the processes to manage this supplier development responsibility, and has hardly investigated how firms collect and analyze information regarding the cost and performance of alternative supplier offerings. Our study addresses this gap, through a field survey among 144 paired samples of project leaders and cost analysts involved in the same NPD projects. On the basis of literature and qualitative research, we conceptualize a substantive model. We first use a substantive validity assessment to vet the measures for the proposed constructs. We then test the substantive model with structural equation modeling using a multiple‐sample analysis. The results strongly show that monetary quantification of differences and detail gathering play significant roles in successfully leveraging supplier development responsibility. The findings support the hypothesis that the extent of development responsibility that suppliers have leads the development team to a more focused monetary quantification of the differences in alternative supplier offerings. Monetary quantification of differences has a significant, positive effect on the extent of supporting‐detail gathering and on the development speed of the project, whereas supporting‐detail gathering has a significant, positive effect on the product advantage of the new product as well as development speed. These findings are robust across the two functional perspectives. Our study complements the literature on interfirm control and monitoring by demonstrating the effects of selective and focused output controls.     

Information systems in fast cycle development: identifying user needs in integrated automotive component development

Product development literature strongly emphasizes the need for open communication between suppliers and Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs). There is a widespread expectation that computer-aided communication networks will enable organizational members to work more flexibly, to share knowledge and competencies, and to span functional and company boundaries. However, few studies merge the possibilities of new information technologies and the operational needs of specific groups of users, for example product development engineers. The research reported in this paper aims to fill that gap. Through in-depth case studies of two development projects involving one auto OEM, one of its systems suppliers (working directly with the OEM) and five medium-sized expert suppliers (working either directly with the OEM or through the systems supplier), we identify three groups of user needs that are not currently satisfied by existing information system solutions: improvement of coordination and communication; enhancement of the access to new technological information; and support for the development of an organizational memory. We then explore what kind of information systems might help satisfy the above-mentioned needs. Potential barriers to efficient implementation of information systems in terms of the motivation of people using the systems, the reliability of the information, and the willingness to render information more transparent are discussed. It is concluded that when implementing information systems to support operational development work, it is essential to ground the system specification in clearly identified user needs that reflect the double nature of product engineering, namely the continuous interplay between routines and cognitive processes.     

Supplier involvement in new product development in the food industry

Purchasing and supplier involvement as one possible explanatory factor of product development success has been gathering growing attention from both managers and researchers. This paper presents the results of a Dutch benchmark study into supplier involvement in product development, and discusses the topic more specifically in the context of the food industry. Regarding supplier involvement, this industry has not been studied intensively, although its specific characteristics make continuous development of new products imperative and the amount of outsourcing of production and development has increased substantially. The benchmark was conducted by means of an existing framework which has not yet been applied to the food industry. The food company in the benchmark study performs consistently better than companies from other industries. At the same time, the results of a similar case study carried out at a Scandinavian food company show contradictory results. By comparing the Dutch and the Scandinavian case, we illustrate that our analytical framework can explain these different results in terms of the underlying processes and pre-conditions, thereby validating its application to the food industry.     

Organizational antecedents of environmental responsiveness in industrial new product development

The greening of new product development process has been under scrutiny by researchers, but the attention has been limited to consumer products. Based on a survey, this paper investigates the environmental responsiveness in industrial new product development in 82 industrial firms. In comparison to traditional NPD process in the extant literature, the findings revealed additional activities in the greening of industrial NPD. These activities fall under the broader scope of life cycle assessment (LCA) for environmental impact including supplier evaluation and design for environment issues. The paper also investigates the relative impact of organizational antecedents on greening of industrial NPD activities. Organizational antecedents include functional interface of environmental specialists with design and product managers, environmental product policy, and top management support.     

Strategic Suppliers' Technical Contributions to New Product Advantage: Substitution and Configuration Options

Current theory lacks clarity on how different kinds of resources contribute to new product advantage, or how firms can combine different resources to achieve a new product advantage. While several studies have identified different firm‐specific resources that influence new product advantage, comparatively little research has explored the contribution of strategic supplier resources. Combining resource‐based and relational perspectives, this study develops a theoretical model investigating how a strategic supplier's technical capabilities impact focal firm new product advantage and how firms combine different resources to gain this advantage. The model is tested using detailed survey data collected from 153 interorganizational new product development projects in the United Kingdom within which a strategic supplier had been extensively involved. Empirical results support our research hypotheses. First, supplier technical performance is shown to have a significant positive impact on new product advantage. Next, we show that while supplier technical capabilities have a positive influence on supplier technical performance, the a priori nature of the supplier's task moderates the relationship. Finally, our data support our hypotheses related to the positive relationship between relationship‐specific absorptive capacity and new product advantage, and the proposed negative moderation of supplier technical capabilities on this relationship. Based upon these findings, we encourage managers to recognize that strategic suppliers' with greater technical capabilities perform better regardless of the degree of creativity required by their task; but that strategic suppliers with lower technical capabilities may partially compensate (substitute) for their lack of technical capabilities, if they are able to respond to high problem‐solving task requirements. Furthermore, we suggest that the firm's development of relationship‐specific absorptive capacity is much more important when a strategic supplier is less technically capable. A buying firm's relationship‐specific absorptive capacity can, according to our data, substitute for low supplier technical capabilities. On the other hand, where the supplier has strong technical capabilities, investments in relationship‐specific absorptive capacity have no effect on new product advantage. Our findings reinforce recent calls for research on how firms can combine different resources and capabilities to achieve superior performance.     

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.     

Exploring purchasing integration in product development

With increasing outsourcing and the growing importance of product innovation as a means for creating competitive advantage, the integration of purchasing and product development processes has become a key issue for many firms. Although, consequently, the integration of purchasing and suppliers in product development has attracted growing attention from practitioners and researchers, most research on the topic remains limited to the context of single development projects. The integration with long-term issues such as technological alignment between supplier and manufacturer is often neglected. This limited conception and the lack of a coherent definition of what purchasing integration in product involvement is form a major impediment to the advancement of knowledge in this field. Therefore, this article develops a framework encompassing various activities across different management levels, which embody the alignment and integration of purchasing and product development processes.     

New Product Development Practices and Early‐Stage Firms: Two In‐Depth Case Studies

New product development practices (NPD) have been well studied for decades in large, established companies. Implementation of best practices such as predevelopment market planning and cross‐functional teams have been positively correlated with product and project success over a variety of measures. However, for small new ventures, field research into ground‐level adoption of NPD practices is lacking. Because of the risks associated with missteps in new product development and the potential for firm failure, understanding NPD within the new venture context is critical. Through in‐depth case research, this paper investigates two successful physical product‐based early‐stage firms' development processes versus large established firm norms. The research focuses on the start‐up adoption of commonly prescribed management processes to improve NPD, such as cross‐functional teams, use of market planning during innovation development, and the use of structured processes to guide the development team. This research has several theoretical implications. The first finding is that in comparing the innovation processes of these firms to large, established firms, the study found several key differences from the large firm paradigm. These differences in development approach from what is prescribed for large, established firms are driven by necessity from a scarcity of resources. These new firms simply did not have the resources (financial or human) to create multi‐ or cross‐functional teams or organizations in the traditional sense for their first product. Use of virtual resources was pervasive. Founders also played multiple roles concurrently in the organization, as opposed to relying on functional departments so common in large firms. The NPD process used by both firms was informal—much more skeletal than commonly recommended structured processes. The data indicated that these firms put less focus on managing the process and more emphasis on managing their goals (the main driver being getting the first product to market). In addition to little or no written procedures being used, development meetings did not run to specific paper‐based deliverables or defined steps. In terms of market and user insight, these activities were primarily performed inside the core team—using methods that again were distinctive in their approach. What drove a project to completion was relying on team experience or a “learn as you go approach.” Again, the driver for this type of truncated market research approach was a lack of resources and need to increase the project's speed‐to‐market. Both firms in our study were highly successful, from not only an NPD efficiency standpoint but also effectiveness. The second broad finding we draw from this work is that there are lessons to be learned from start‐ups for large, established firms seeking ever‐increasing efficiency. We have found that small empowered teams leading projects substantial in scope can be extremely effective when roles are expanded, decision power is ground‐level, and there is little emphasis on defined processes. This exploratory research highlights the unique aspects of NPD within small early‐stage firms, and highlights areas of further research and management implications for both small new ventures and large established firms seeking to increase NPD efficiency and effectiveness.