Management of Technology and Innovation in Japan
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-31248-x_12
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

NPD-Process and Planning in Japanese Engineering Companies — Findings from an Interview Research

Abstract: In this paper we report on the results of an interview research about new product development (NPD) processes and planning in 15 Japanese mechanical and electrical engineering companies. We asked the companies to describe one successful and one less successful project. All in all, we collected data for 29 projects, 15 of which were successful. We explore how these companies structure their NPD processes and conduct their planning activities in order to strike a balance between the needs for efficiency and flex… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 53 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Internal validity: The metrics considered in this study are project complexity, newness of product and whether a formal process is used or not. The lack of interdependency among these is widely accepted as visible in the works of Callahan and Moretton [4], Olson et al [16], Herstatt et al [38], Michalek et al [39], Schimmoeller [40] and Bonner et al [41]. As we are investigating how product development time is a®ected with similarity of the new product to the ones developed in the past by the same company and having parallel degrees of complexity we believe that it is fairly safe to assume that the dominant factor causing improvement or degradation is the newness and complexity of the product.…”
Section: Validity Of the Case Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Internal validity: The metrics considered in this study are project complexity, newness of product and whether a formal process is used or not. The lack of interdependency among these is widely accepted as visible in the works of Callahan and Moretton [4], Olson et al [16], Herstatt et al [38], Michalek et al [39], Schimmoeller [40] and Bonner et al [41]. As we are investigating how product development time is a®ected with similarity of the new product to the ones developed in the past by the same company and having parallel degrees of complexity we believe that it is fairly safe to assume that the dominant factor causing improvement or degradation is the newness and complexity of the product.…”
Section: Validity Of the Case Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%