Time‐Based Management of the New Product Development Process

Karagozoglu, Necmi; Brown, Warren B.

doi:10.1111/1540-5885.1030204

Cited by 76 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with this observation, firms have drastically cut NPD cycle times in response to increased market turbulence in recent years (Calantone et al, 2003). Karagozoglu and Brown (1993) and Chen et al (2005) show stronger relationships between speed to market and profitability in more volatile environments. Similarly, Judge and Miller (1991) show that fast organizational decision making is associated TRADE-OFF BETWEEN AMBIGUITY AND VOLATILITY J PROD INNOV MANAG 1065 2012;29(6):1061-1081 with higher firm performance, but only in rapidly changing environments.…”

Section: Speed and Interpretational Capabilities In Npdmentioning

confidence: 53%

Managing the Trade‐off between Ambiguity and Volatility in New Product Development

Carson¹,

Wu²,

Moore³

2012

J of Product Innov Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Uncertainty is widely recognized to be a key contingency influencing optimal new product development processes. However, extant new product research treats uncertainty in a largely unidimensional manner. Even in studies where multiple dimensions of uncertainty are measured, they are hypothesized to behave in a similar manner. This paper advances a theory describing how ambiguity and volatility place different and conflicting demands on new product development processes. Drawing on ideas from the organization theory and learning literatures, the theory suggests that more ambiguous environments favor slower development processes based on larger samples of data and interpretations whereas more volatile environments favor faster and more flexible development processes. Five hypotheses are advanced suggesting that as the level of ambiguity increases (decreases) relative to the level of volatility, firms should respond by decreasing (increasing) the role of top management in new product development, increasing (decreasing) front‐end and back‐end participation, allocating more (less) time and effort to ideation, and using more (less) aggressive screening processes. Some of these hypotheses are highly intuitive (participation and screening) while others are counterintuitive (top management involvement and screening aggressiveness). The theory is tested using primary data on the development of 120 new products and their subsequent performance collected from firms in U.S. manufacturing industries. The data largely confirm the hypotheses and provide strong evidence of a trade‐off between ambiguity and volatility that can be managed to improve new product performance. The exception is back‐end participation, which should be lower in relatively more ambiguous environments, in contrast to the hypothesis. A comparison with three alternative models shows that ambiguity generally has a larger impact on appropriate new product development processes and success than either the level of volatility or the overall level of environmental uncertainty. A detailed examination of the estimated relationships shows that for ideation and screening, the relative level of ambiguity and volatility determines optimal new product development processes, whereas for top management involvement and participation, processes can be designed based primarily on the level of ambiguity alone, with less concern over the degree of volatility. The study highlights the importance of considering the composition of uncertainty in addition to its overall level in contingent approaches to new product development. Real‐world examples of highly ambiguous and highly volatile new product development contexts are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Speed and Interpretational Capabilities In Npdmentioning

confidence: 53%

Managing the Trade‐off between Ambiguity and Volatility in New Product Development

Carson¹,

Wu²,

Moore³

2012

J of Product Innov Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study adds to our understanding of these relationships by showing that for these data from this company, shorter NPD cycle time only leads to an increase in new product performance when it is managed across all of the stages of the process. This is a very important finding, as previous research has shown that companies in the past have not managed cycle time reduction consistently across stages (Karagozoglu and Brown, 1993). Firms have used different time reduction mechanisms in different stages of the process and have not been careful to implement mechanisms to shorten every stage of the process.…”

Section: Managerial Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…In addition to the future research possibilities suggested earlier in this paper, several other key avenues for future research result from the findings of this study. First, given the finding that cycle time is only associated with improved new product performance if all three stages are consistently accelerated, it would be intriguing to stage-wise investigate the effectiveness of the acceleration techniques identified by Millson et al (1992), Karagozoglu and Brown (1993), and Langerak and Hultink (2005). To date, the effectiveness of these techniques has only been investigated at the monolithic process level.…”

Section: Limitations and Further Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Stage‐Wise Approach to Exploring Performance Effects of Cycle Time Reduction

Eling¹,

Langerak²,

Griffin³

2013

J of Product Innov Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on reducing new product development (NPD) cycle time has shown that firms tend to adopt different cycle time reduction mechanisms for different process stages. However, the vast majority of previous studies investigating the relationship between new product performance and NPD cycle time have adopted a monolithic process perspective rather than looking at cycle time for the distinct stages of the NPD process (i.e., fuzzy front end, development, and commercialization). As a result, little is known about the specific effect of the cycle times of the different stages on new product performance or how they interact to influence new product performance. This study uses a stage‐wise approach to NPD cycle time to test the main and interacting effects of fuzzy front end, development, and commercialization cycle times on new product performance using objective data for 399 NPD projects developed following a Stage‐Gate® type of process in one firm. The results reveal that at least in this firm, new product performance only increases if all three stages of the NPD process are consistently accelerated. This finding, combined with the previous research showing that firms use different mechanisms to accelerate different stages of the process, emphasizes the need to conduct performance effect studies of NPD cycle time at the stage level rather than at the monolithic process level.

show abstract

“…Turning to issues of perspectives on pace external to the focal organization, then having an innovation team working closely with customers and suppliers is a common practice (Du et al 2014;Karagozoglu and Brown 1993;Langerak and Hultink 2008;Mabert et al 1992;Wonglimpiyarat 2005). These studies invariably involved incremental innovation, or were employed in 'manufacturing firms'.…”

Section: Innovation Speed In Contexts Of Temporal Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In situations in which the degree of technology development was more complex, there appeared to be a corresponding increase in the sophistication of collecting market-related intelligence (Swink and Song 2007;Terziovski et al 2002;Wonglimpiyarat 2005;Zirger and Hartley 1996). Particular practices for monitoring the external environment included the use of 'Roadmaps' (Floricel and Miller 2003), benchmarking exercises (Karagozoglu and Brown 1993) and data-mining tools systematically to collect and collate information (Bers et al 2009). More direct forms of testing the pace of markets resulted from the evaluation of prototypes (Mabert et al 1992;O'Connor and DeMartino 2006) or the release of 'acceptable' products followed by rapid next-generation improvements (Kessler and Chakrabarti 1999).…”

Section: Innovation Speed In Contexts Of Temporal Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accelerating the Innovation Process: A Systematic Review and Realist Synthesis of the Research Literature

Ellwood

Grimshaw

Pandža

2016

Int J Management Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is continued interest among academics, practitioners and policy‐makers in methods to achieve accelerated innovation. Academic studies of this complex phenomenon have succeeded in reaching a high degree of consensus on the antecedents of innovation speed. The aim in this review is to elucidate further the mechanisms underlying management interventions to promote speed. The review adopts a theory‐led, realist synthesis of innovation speed research – the first example of this methodology in management studies. The authors develop a new time‐based framework for categorizing the innovation‐speed literature. The framework has a CIMO logic, and is built by invoking the organizational studies literature on time. The authors contextualize the innovation‐speed literature in relation to the three generic temporal challenges faced by all organizations: reducing temporal uncertainty; resolving temporal conflicts over activities; and allocating resources amid conditions of temporal scarcity. They problematize extant explanations of innovation speed as not taking account of different temporal orientations (temporal dichotomies) within innovation work, and thereby neglecting a potential barrier to achieving accelerated innovation outcomes. They further draw on the literature on time in organizations to suggest new avenues of research, and methodological approaches new to the study of innovation speed. The principal contribution of this review is to offer a new conceptual perspective on the complex empirical research examining how innovation projects may be accelerated from original idea to launch.

show abstract

Time‐Based Management of the New Product Development Process

Cited by 76 publications

References 29 publications

Managing the Trade‐off between Ambiguity and Volatility in New Product Development

Managing the Trade‐off between Ambiguity and Volatility in New Product Development

A Stage‐Wise Approach to Exploring Performance Effects of Cycle Time Reduction

Accelerating the Innovation Process: A Systematic Review and Realist Synthesis of the Research Literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About