PERSPECTIVE: Establishing an NPD Best Practices Framework

Achieving NPD best practices is a top‐of‐mind issue for many new product development (NPD) managers and is often an overarching implicit, if not explicit, goal. The question is what does one mean when talking about NPD best practices? And how does a manager move toward achieving these? This article proposes a best practices framework as a starting point for much‐needed discussion on this topic. Originally presented during the 2004 Product Development Management Association (PDMA) Research Conference in Chicago, the article and the authors' presentation spurred a significant, expansive discussion that included all conference attendees. Given the interest generated, the decision was made to move forward on a series of rejoinders on the topic of NPD best practice, using the Kahn, Barczak, and Moss framework as a focal launching point for these rejoinders. A total of five rejoinders were received and accompany the best practices framework in this issue of JPIM. Each rejoinder brings out a distinct issue because each of the five authors has a unique perspective. The first rejoinder is written by Dr. Marjorie Adams‐Bigelow, director of the PDMA's Comparative Performance Assessment Study (CPAS), PDMA Foundation. Based on her findings during the CPAS study, Adams comments on the proposed framework, suggesting limitations in scope. She particularly points out discrepancies between the proposed framework and the framework offered by PDMA's emerging body of knowledge. Dr. Elko Kleinschmidt, professor of marketing and international business at McMaster University, wrote the second rejoinder. Based on his extensive research with Robert G. Cooper on NPD practices, he points out that best practices really raise more questions than answers. Thomas Kuczmarski, president of Kuczmarski and Associates, is the author of the third rejoinder. Kuczmarski highlights that company mindset and metrics are critical elements needing keen attention. Where do these fit—or should they—in the proposed framework? The fourth rejoinder is written by Richard Notargiacomo, consultant for the integrated product delivery process at Eastman Kodak Company. Notargiacomo compares the proposed framework to a best practices framework Kodak has used for new product commercialization and management since 1998. The distinction of the Kodak framework is the inclusion of a product maturity model component. Dr. Lois Peters, associate professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI), is the author of the fifth rejoinder. She brings out issues of radical innovation, a natural focal issue of RPI's radical innovation project (RRIP). It is highlighted that radical innovation may require unique, distinctive process characteristics a single framework cannot illustrate. Multiple layers of frameworks may be more appropriate, each corresponding to a level of innovation desired. The overall hope is that the discourse on best practices in this issue of JPIM generates more discussion and debate. Ultimately, the hope is that such discourse will lead to subsequent continued study to help discern what NPD best practice means for our discipline.     

PDMA Research on New Product Development Practices: Updating Trends and Benchmarking Best Practices

Product development professionals may have the feeling that yet another buzzword or magic bullet always lurks just around the corner. However, researchers have devoted considerable effort to helping practioners determine which tools, techniques, and methods really do offer a competitive edge. Starting 30 years ago, research efforts have aimed at understanding NPD practices and identifying those which are deemed “best practices.” During the past five years, pursuit of this goal has produced numerous privately available reports and two research efforts sponsored by the PDMA. Abbie Griffin summarizes the results of research efforts undertaken during the past five years and presents findings from the most recent PDMA survey on NPD best practices. This survey, conducted slightly more than five years after PDMA's first best-practices survey, updates trends in processes, organizations, and outcomes for NPD in the U.S., and determines which practices are more commonly associated with firms that are more successsful in developing new products. The survey has the following objectives: determining the current status of NPD practices and performance; understanding how product development has changed from five years ago; determining whether NPD practice and performance differ across industry segments; and, investigating process and product development tools that differentiate product development success. The survey findings indicate that NPD processes continue to evolve and become more sophisticated. NPD changes continually on multiple fronts, and firms that fail to keep their NPD practices up to date will suffer an increasingly marked competitive disadvantage. Interestingly, although more than half of the respondents use a cross-functional stage-gate process for NPD, more than one-third of all firms in the study still use no formal process for managing NPD. The findings suggest that firms are not adequately handling the issue of team-based rewards. Project-completion dinners are for the most frequently used NPD reward; they are also the only reward used more by best-practice firms than by the rest of the respondents. The best-practice firms participating in the study do not use financial rewards for NPD. Compared to the other firms in the study, best-practice firms use more multifunctional teams, are more likely to measure NPD processes and outcomes, and expect more from their NPD programs.     

Drivers and Pathways of NPD Success in the Marketing–External Design Relationship

Marketing often cooperates with external design in the new product development (NPD) process. While this relationship is crucial for NPD success and is a typical case of interorganizational collaboration between a business‐oriented function (marketing) and a creative partner (external design), a comprehensive understanding of this relationship remains lacking. As the NPD field evolves to open systems that have changed concepts like functional integration into interorganizational integration, this study contributes to NPD literature by developing an integrated conceptual framework leading to a model of drivers and pathways of NPD success in the marketing–external design relationship. Building on the literature on NPD, design management and relationship marketing, and on nine dyadic case studies from the luxury fragrance and cosmetics industry, a content analysis was conducted, enriched by a crisp‐set qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). This research confirms several NPD success drivers suggested in the literature and reveals three new drivers: source of design expertise, designer brand commitment, and number of NPD stages involving designer. The first new driver (source of design expertise) impacts the relationship process, which then impacts NPD success, while the other two drivers (designer brand commitment, and number of NPD stages involving designer) directly influence NPD success. The paper also identifies the pathways of NPD success, showing that contact authority and designer brand commitment are necessary conditions for NPD success, especially when combined with a high number of NPD stages involving designer or a previous relationship. The results also indicate that pathways of NPD success may differ according to the source of design expertise. From a managerial perspective, this study provides recommendations to managers to select the right design partner and choose from a range of drivers and pathways to devise more effective ways to work with external designers, thereby leading to NPD success.     

An Exploratory Investigation of NPD Practices in Nonprofit Organizations*

Studies of practices in new product and service development have focused predominantly on for‐profit organizations, whereas attention to the nonprofit sector has been minimal. Such attention is needed given that nonprofit organizations are unique in their structures and are growing with regards to impact on the world economy and society in general. Moreover, such disparate attention suggests a void in this discipline's understanding of new product development (NPD) practices of nonprofit organizations. Two particular research questions are posed: (1) To what extent are the practices of for‐profit organizations employed in nonprofit organizations? (2) How do the practices of nonprofits compare to those of for‐profit organizations? In the course of answering these questions, the present study reviewed literature and the Product Development and Management Association (PDMA) certification work. The study subsequently identified six dimensions of successful NPD efforts: strategy, portfolio management, process, market research, people, and metrics and performance measurement. These dimensions were applied via an in‐depth case‐study methodology to six large, U.S. nonprofit organizations: American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Red Cross, Boys and Girls Club of America, and Goodwill Industries. The dimensions assisted in categorizing and analyzing the responses of 40 respondents across the six organizations. Results show that some NPD practices of large nonprofit organizations are similar to for‐profit organizations, but other practices are more distinctive and related to the nature of nonprofit organizations. Large nonprofit organizations tend to be very good at articulating their mission, embedding it throughout, and using it to drive programs and activities. These organizations tend to view product development as a tactical endeavor versus a strategic one and do not engage in portfolio management practices for their new programs. Instead, broad criteria such as fit with mission, funding availability, and presence of a champion are used for evaluating programs. The NPD process tends to be informal with little structure, and individual departments and local chapters tend to undertake their own NPD initiatives and have their own process for doing so. Nonprofits place a heavy emphasis on ideation and less emphasis on other activities such as concept development and testing, project evaluation, and business analysis. Pilot testing is the most used type of market research. These results suggest that NPD processes within large nonprofit organizations share some of the same weaknesses as those of for‐profit organizations, with NPD metrics being a particularly weak area. The NPD practices of nonprofits also have some unique characteristics that include the following: a heavy emphasis on the mission, a desire for flexibility, strong influence of external sponsors, and difficulty in assessing long‐term program success. Management of nonprofit NPD and directions for future research are discussed.     

Investigating the Drivers of Innovation and New Product Success: A Comparison of Strategic Orientations*

The notion of producing innovations and achieving new product success has received a great deal of attention. Though many have investigated these effects in marketing and various fields within management, there has been little cross‐fertilization between fields of study to explain the basis for this superior performance. Though research has examined the resource‐based view (RBV) and market orientation individually, none has evaluated and compared their effect on firm innovation and new product success in one study. Furthermore, although empirical work has been conducted between market orientation and organizational learning, comparatively less research has been conducted to evaluate the relationship between organizational learning and the RBV to examine their combined effects on a firm's ability to innovate and succeed. Subsequently, the purpose of the present article is to investigate whether a focus on the customer (i.e., market orientation) or the firm (i.e., RBV) will drive the ability to (1) innovate within the firm and (2) succeed in terms of new product success, financial performance, market share, and customer value. The present article examines the relationship between organizational learning and the RBV and market orientation. It presents an empirically testable framework that investigates the relationship that RBV and market orientation have with performance outcomes. Data were collected from 249 senior executives. LISREL was applied to evaluate the relationships. Confirmatory factor analysis and related techniques were applied to assess the robustness of the measures used. Findings show that organizational learning is strongly associated with market orientation, which in turn impacts various performance outcomes including customer value. The RBV had a significant relationship with new product success. These results suggest that managers seeking innovation and new product success should focus less on the provision of customer value. Instead they should look toward developing their resources within the firm, including investing in human resources, to ultimately provide value to the firm. Findings indicate that this unique offering—innovations—will have an indirect effect on customer value and financial performance. In contrast, those in pursuit of positive financial performance and customer value should focus on the development of market orientation. Even though this will not necessarily lead to the development of innovative processes and new product success according to the present study, this approach may lead to a greater market share in the long term. This article reviews theoretical and managerial implications in more depth, providing an impetus for further research.     

Drivers of Outsourced Innovation: An Exploratory Study*

The outsourcing of innovation has been on the rise for years, but research in this area lags behind industry practice. Interviews with managers and a theory base grounded in transaction cost analysis are used to guide the development of an exploratory model that details potential drivers of the outsourcing of innovation activities. Using industry‐level data, the proposed model is partially tested using two distinct regression analyses that reveal significant effects both contemporaneously and persisting over time. Several of the proposed drivers of outsourced innovation are shown to be significant, including exploratory research performed and profit margin. The finding that exploratory research performed is significantly related to the outsourcing of innovation activities represents a significant contribution to the innovation and organizational learning literatures. As well, finding a relationship between margins and organizational sourcing fills a gap in the business to business marketing literature. Managerial implications are drawn for both managers of the innovation process in traditional firms and those in firms wishing to garner outsourced innovation contracts. The drivers found to be significant in this study should allow for better resource planning from innovation managers in traditional firms as well as better targeting of perspective clients from firms seeking contract innovation business.     

An Empirical Investigation of the Antecedents and Outcomes of NPD Portfolio Success

Managing new product development (NPD) portfolios is difficult and little is known about how successful NPD portfolio management can improve overall firm performance. Despite regular calls in the literature for more research on NPD portfolio management, what successful NPD portfolio management means and how firms can achieve it remains unclear. For this reason, this paper combines theory and previous empirical findings to build a model of the antecedents and outcomes of NPD portfolio success. We generate and test 12 hypotheses with empirical data from 189 paired dyads in Dutch firms. Our results show that all three dimensions of NPD portfolio decision‐making effectiveness (i.e., portfolio mindset, focus, and agility) are associated with achieving the three dimensions of NPD portfolio success (i.e., strategic alignment, maximal NPD portfolio value, and portfolio balance), which in turn influences market performance. While a portfolio mindset and agility are related to all three dimensions of NPD portfolio success, focus is related only to strategic alignment and maximal value. No one dimension of NPD portfolio decision‐making effectiveness or portfolio success is sufficient to achieve overall market performance. We also found several unexpected findings with important implications. For example, portfolio balance, one recommended measure of portfolio success, has no direct link to market performance, but operates through the other two dimensions of NPD portfolio success, i.e., strategic alignment and maximal portfolio value. We conclude our paper with implications for further theory development and testing on successful NPD portfolio decision‐making, and with implications for managerial practice.     

Japanese and British Companies Compared: Contributing Factors to Success and Failure in NPD

The success or failure of a new product is an issue of continuing concern to management in the 1990s. Little research, however, has been conducted on this issue from a British perspective. In this article, Scott Edgett, David Shipley and Giles Forbes report the findings of an investigation into success and failure in Japanese- and British-owned firms that conduct business in the United Kingdom. The results from this comparative study illustrate that new product failure rates are still high, with the Japanese firms only marginally outperforming British owned firms.     

Firm Characteristics and NPD Program Success: The Significant Influence of Global Discovery Management

Managing new product development (NPD) with a global point of view is argued to be essential in current business more than ever. Accordingly, many firms are trying to revitalize their NPD processes to make them more global. Therefore, examining global NPD management is one of the top priorities for research. While scholars have examined global launch management, there has been scant attention on the direct effect of global discovery management on NPD success. Therefore, this study investigates how a globally managed discovery phase enhances a firm's overall NPD success. Drawing upon the resource‐based view (RBV) and using Kotabe's ( 1990 ) generic model for market success in global competition as the overarching framework, this study examines four drivers of NPD success: global discovery management, the firm's “global footprint,” its inbound knowledge sourcing practices (i.e., “open innovation proclivity”), and nationality of the teams (i.e., “cross‐national global NPD team use”). The hypotheses are tested using a sample of 255 business units from multiple industries, headquartered worldwide, and surveyed during the 2012 PDMA Comparative Performance Assessment Study (CPAS). The PLM‐SEM analyses show that, of the four drivers examined, only global discovery management strongly influences a firm's NPD program success. The findings enhance our understanding of the particularities in global NPD. Based on the study's results, suggestions are provided as to how multinationals can leverage their international operations in the course of their front‐end activities.     

Management Practices Influencing New Product Success and Failure in the United States and Scandinavia: A Cross-Cultural Comparative Study

This comparative cross-cultural study of United States (U.S.) and Scandinavian telecommunications products found both similarities and differences in the successful new product development (NPD) management practices within the U.S. and Scandinavia. Proficiencies in conducting development, marketing, and customer service activities were identified as important to NPD success in both Scandinavia and the U.S. However, differences between the U.S. and Scandinavia were found with regard to the importance of research and development/marketing integration and project manager competency, with these aspects being more important to NPD success in the U.S. Additional differences between Scandinavia and the U.S. were found in the successful NPD strategies for entering familiar versus unfamiliar markets, with the Scandinavian systems being more oriented toward product design strategies. The overall results characterized U.S. NPD management systems as product-market oriented, task focused, and project management driven. By comparison, the Scandinavian NPD management systems were characterized as product-service oriented, driven by enduring interpersonal relationships and socially oriented to helping others. These characterizations were found to be consistent with dissimilarities in the national cultures of the U.S. and Scandinavia, suggesting that some core NPD management principles may be generally important to success, whereas others may be culturally dependent. The importance of recognizing these differences is pointed out in a discussion of their implications for NPD theory and practice in today's global economy. © 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.     

PERSPECTIVE: Empirical Generalization and the Role of Culture in New Product Development*

Empirical generalization continues to be a challenge in most applied fields that favor publication of original results. The purpose of this study was to report on a new product development exercise in one, controlled cultural setting, which replicates and extends Ettlie (2002) . Results from four recent graduate business classes in Portugal show that the background of students—technical versus other or mixed—is a nearly perfect predictor of the average or central estimates the class makes tendency (median) of new product success in the exercise. Country matters little. These results have now persisted over nearly seven years, and implications are discussed concerning theory, practice, and future research.     

PERSPECTIVE: An Analysis of 22 Years of Research in JPIM*

Numerous articles have been published in the Journal of Product Innovation Management (JPIM) since its inception in 1984, representing the most advanced studies dedicated to the management practice in all of the functions involved in the total process of product innovation. It is timely to draw a research profile by investigating the research patterns and development in JPIM to reflect the evolution of the field. First of all, the present study performed a text analysis of 544 research articles published from 1984 to 2005 and then developed a list of research streams. Next, each article was analyzed by coding the following information: the author's background (i.e., academic or professional), the author's country of affiliation, the research topic, the structure of theoretical framework (i.e., analog, composite, or propositional), the type of research design, the quantitative analytical technique, the types of industries, and the countries investigated in the empirical studies. The results indicated that JPIM had made substantial progress in two points. The first is the expanded collaborations of authors, which are not only within the national boundary but also across countries and continents. With such a divergence of research traditions and cultural perspectives, this cooperation offers the potential to enrich the stock of new product development and innovation management theories as well as methodologies more than single‐country arrangement. The second is a high degree of science in respect of methodology. Although JPIM has become a major journal for business research, three opportunities of knowledge advancement were suggested. The first is to reduce the domination of American and European publication and to promote article submission from developing countries. The second concerns the need of relatively broad theoretical schema and diversified research methods. The last opportunity lies in the encouragement of research on certain promising topics.     

Career Success Networks in China: Sex Differences in Network Composition and Social Exchange Practices

Through structured interviews with 108 senior and middle managers in China, we compared the composition and social exchange practices of Chinese male and female managers' career success networks (CSNs). The results indicated that most of the CSN ties formed by both male and female managers are with men, especially power ties. Male and female managers differed in the extent to which they engaged in instrumental and expressive transactions with same- and opposite-sex CSN alters, reciprocated the help provided by CSN alters, and socialized outside of the workplace with opposite-sex alters. The implications of these results for career success in China are discussed.     

Antecedents and Consequences of Information Technology Usage in NPD: A Comparison of Dutch and U.S. Companies*

This study examines information technology (IT) usage for new product development (NPD) in a global context. Specifically, this research seeks to ascertain the factors that influence IT usage and the relationship between IT usage and new product performance in two different countries—the United States and the Netherlands. The interest here is in discovering if, and how, these relationships may be different depending on the country within which the NPD effort is undertaken. Employing a mail survey methodology, the present study uses data from a sample of U.S. practitioner members from the Product Development & Management Association (PDMA) and new product managers from Dutch manufacturing companies to examine the effect of IT infrastructure, IT embeddedness, NPD process formalization, colocation, outsourcing of NPD projects, and length of time on the job on the extent of IT usage. The data are also used to explore the impact of IT usage on speed to market and market performance. The results indicate that IT embeddedness and NPD process formalization positively influence IT usage in both the United States and the Netherlands. Colocation and length of time on the job are negatively associated with IT usage only in Dutch firms. Similarly, outsourcing of NPD projects is positively related to IT usage only in U.S. firms. Finally, IT usage has a positive relationship with speed to market in the Netherlands and with market performance in the United States. An important implication of the present study is that IT usage does impact speed to market and market performance, confirming anecdotal evidence. However, these relationships are not the same in each country. Moreover, the antecedents to IT usage also vary by country. Thus, the precursors and consequences of IT usage in NPD are context specific. Another implication of this research is that unless IT is embedded into the NPD process, it is unlikely that the benefits of IT will come to fruition. Finally, this study suggests that as firms use more globally dispersed teams for NPD and outsource more of their development activities, IT usage is likely to increase to facilitate communication and cooperation.     

In Search of the Classics: A Study of the Impact of JPIM Papers from 1984 to 2003*

The Journal of Product Innovation Management (JPIM) was launched in 1984 and over its first two decades of existence evolved into the leading journal in the field of innovation and the management of technology. During these 20 years JPIM contributed to the field by publishing 488 academic papers. This paper is a follow‐up study to an earlier study that looked at how JPIM evolved in terms of knowledge stock and knowledge flows during the first two decades (published in JPIM, March 2007). That paper looked at what was published during the first 20 years, which sources were cited, and which journals cited JPIM papers. This study takes a closer look at the impact of JPIM on the field of innovation and the management of technology by identifying the most classic papers published in JPIM during its first two decades of existence. This study used multiple research methods to identify 64 candidate potential classics from the 488 papers published in the first 20 years of JPIM's existence, to analyze how they differ from the other 424 papers published in the journal, and to investigate authors' motivations for writing these papers. Finally, using survey responses from the Product Development and Management Association (PDMA) membership and other academics in innovation and new product development, the research then determines which 5 of the 64 candidate papers are considered to be the “most classic” papers published and the factors driving that determination. The findings show that classic papers are those presenting a “pioneering idea” in the field that creates buzz in both the academic and practitioner worlds. High numbers of citations are indeed the outcome of these endeavors, but being a classic requires more than having high numbers of citations. Authors of the true classics generally have worked hard to disseminate their research, usually to both academics and practitioners, perhaps also contributing to the network buzz created by their findings. While one of the five most classic papers represented the first investigation into a particular stream of research, the other four were culminations of a significant body of research, providing a distinct summary of known information on a topic at the time they were published and a clear road forward for future research on the topic. These bodies of knowledge have yet to be superseded by other culminating papers.     

Mapping the Impact of Social Media for Innovation: The Role of Social Media in Explaining Innovation Performance in the PDMA Comparative Performance Assessment Study

Social media (SM) allow users to easily create, edit, or share content. The vast numbers of individuals that converge around sites like LinkedIn, Facebook, or Twitter embody a rich source of external knowledge that could be utilized for new product development (NPD). Complementing other channels for open innovation (OI), SM can provide access to novel information about customer needs and technological solutions unknown to the firm. Anecdotal evidence suggests that there are considerable benefits from using SM during an innovation project, but empirical evidence is scarce. Contributing to the perspective of openness in search, a number of hypotheses propose how SM as a new channel for OI can contribute to firm performance. This model is tested using data from the PDMA Comparative Performance Assessment Study, identifying factors influencing the relationship between SM and NPD performance. The findings indicate that utilizing information from SM channels can lead to higher performance, but that this link is influenced by the formalization of a firm's NPD process. This study also finds that the ability of a firm to benefit from external search in SM strongly depends on complementary internal processes when organizing and conducting this activity. Furthermore, managers have to take care when utilizing information from SM channels in radical projects, as for this kind of project only a weak significant performance contribution of SM could be found.     

Championship Behaviors and Innovations Success: An Empirical Investigation of University Spin‐Offs*

Despite the flurry of scholarly research on champions, no prior article has explicitly addressed how different dimensions of championship behavior actually contribute to innovation success. In this article, based on an extensive literature review, the authors argue that champions display four behaviors, namely (1) pursuing innovative ideas, (2) network building, (3) persisting under adversity, and (4) taking responsibility for the idea. The authors use data from 123 university spin‐offs to test proposed linear and curvilinear relationships between the four behaviors and an objective measure of innovation success, namely a longitudinal measure of sales growth. The results indicate that network building has the desired positive relationship with sales performance. Surprisingly, pursuing the innovative idea is not related to sales growth. Furthermore, the present study also reveals some dysfunctional effects of champion behaviors. Persisting under adversity and taking responsibility have the hypothesized inverted‐U relationship with sales growth. The present study provides a more refined discussion of the benefits and dangers of championing behaviors. Our results show that linking technology to markets can be planned and controlled only to a very limited extent even if champions are working hard to sell the idea to potential customers. Moreover, any new idea is often competing with existing products and pursuing such ideas may result in opposition to the idea. In contrast, network building has the desired positive relationship with innovation success. Effective championing behavior keeps an innovative idea alive by mobilizing support and building coalitions around the idea with critical individuals or important third parties. Moreover, this study challenges the widespread “heroic” discussion of championing as fundamentally positive “across the board.” The results show that persisting under adversity and taking responsibility are desirable up to some levels. Beyond such critical levels, these two champion behaviors may actually become detrimental to the innovation process. Being too persistent in the face of adversity or taking too much responsibility for the innovative idea might undermine the power of the champion's justifications for an innovation and thereby increase resistance to change. An “over‐performing” champion may interpret opposing communications as an unwarranted and injurious response. By taking overmuch responsibility for the innovative undertaking, the champion is likely to discourage contributions from other team members who see no valuable opportunity to bring their expertise and knowledge to the idea.     

Rational Versus Intuitive Gatekeeping: Escalation of Commitment in the Front End of NPD

The unwillingness of a gatekeeper to let go of a fruitless new product development (NPD) project wastes valuable resources and hampers NPD performance. The onset of such escalation of commitment is likely to occur already in the front end of NPD, where high ambiguity and complexity make it hard to distinguish fruitless from potentially successful projects. This study investigates if a gatekeeper’s thinking style—whether they think rationally or whether they follow their intuition—can prevent escalation of commitment in the front end. Theory on cognition provides arguments for and against either thinking style’s influence on escalation of commitment, but empirical evidence on this matter is lacking. Our study demonstrates that gatekeepers who think rationally are less likely to escalate their commitment than those who follow their intuition. This result holds both in a correlational study of dispositional thinking styles, as well as in an individual‐level randomized experiment in which the thinking style of experienced practitioners before they take gate decisions is induced. Our findings provide ample opportunities for improving existing front end gate review practices, such as allocating candidates for gatekeeper positions based on their thinking style, training gatekeepers to think rationally, and increasing the use of gate‐decision rules and templates.