Managing innovation performance: Results from an industry‐spanning explorative study on R&D key measures

Abstract

Research on R&D performance measures applied in firms is still scarce. Based on the established "R&D laboratory as a system" thinking, systematically derive and identify R&D department level key performance measures. Through a mixedmethod approach, grounded in (1) literature and (2) text analysis, 154 R&D performance measures were developed. Amongst those, an (3) online expert survey, as well as (4) three independent focus group workshops with >40 industry experts from more than ten industries identified and validated ten key R&D performance measures. All industry experts involved are members of an innovation network, additionally accounting for innovation network effects. In contrast to earlier research, some of the measures like degree of anticipation of internal customer needs were perceived both by the survey respondents and the focus groups as key measures, indicating that behavioral measures should not be excluded per se. However, the importance of external validity of R&D performance or indicators to measure performance in relation to activities outside the R&D department were not confirmed. Hence, we partly confirm the relevance of the original "R&D Lab" measures, contributing a more granular level, thereby drawing implications for future research and practice.

Digital Entrepreneurship in Finance: Fintechs and Funding Decision Criteria

“…Additionally, in line with the findings of Angerer et al [32], this study found that financial data is one of the investors' main motivations. Along with the few key performance indicators described in available research, this study's interviewees underscored the importance of efficiency to generate the expected revenues, as financial performance measures are scarce for innovation activities [66].…”

Innovation management in crisis: patent analytics as a response to the COVID‐19 pandemic

“…Measuring the impact of research and development or innovation activities proves difficult (Bican and Brem, 2020). Commonly, innovation managers turn to patent analytics (e.g., Pavitt, 1985; Arundel and Kabla, 1998; Hall et al, 2005).…”

Measuring the Innovation Capacity and Performance of Organizations: A Balanced Scorecard Approach Combined With Analytic Network Process

“…As a result, it was possible to identify 28 empirical studies which were compared according to their objectives, analytical structures for proposing innovation indicators and metrics, methodological approaches, and methods adopted. Then, focusing more specifically on methodological issues, it can be concluded that among the 28 studies, 15 adopted the scorecard approach (Kerssens-van-Drongelen and Cook, 1997;Wong, 2001;Verhaeghe and Kfir, 2002;Godener and Soderquist, 2004;Bremser and Barsky, 2004;Ojanen and Vuola, 2006;Gama et al, 2007;Chiesa and Frattini, 2009;Lazzarotti et al, 2011, Mohamed, 2013Dewangan and Godse, 2014;Spanò et al, 2016;Zhang, 2016;Bican and Brem, 2020;and Dudic et al, 2020).…”

“…To complement the comparative analysis of five established innovation management models, a literature search was conducted, focusing more specifically on previous studies that had employed the systematic literature review (SLR) approach to investigate this research field. This search has yielded several reviews, but only three were selected as an initial step of the literature review: Adams et al, 2006;Dewangan and Godse, 2014;and Bican et al, 2020. An indepth analysis of these articles, including backward citation search and a new search in the Scopus, Web of Science databases, made it possible to identify 28 empirical studies, presented in Table 2.2. They were compared according to their analytical structures for proposing innovation indicators and metrics, methodological approaches, and methods adopted.…”

“…Of that total, 15 studies employed the scorecard approach, adapting the original conceptual framework conceived by Kaplan and Norton (1996; to include specific innovation strategic goals and associated key innovation indicators and metrics, classified according to four BSC perspectives. One can distinguish two streams in these studies: (i) the first focuses on the innovation performance (Gama et al, 2007;Spanó et al, 2016;Ivanov and Avasilcai, 2014;Dewangan and Godse, 2014;Dudic et al, 2020); and (ii) the second emphasizes the measurement and evaluation of R&D outcome and processes (Bremser and Barsky, 2004;Ojanen and Vuola, 2006;Chiesa et al, 2009;Lazzarotti et al, 2011;and Bican and Brem, 2020). Gama et al, 2007;Spanò et al, 2016).…”