1.7.4|Aceite Mineral:
1.14 DISPOSITIVO REGULADOR DE PRESIÓN:
We have already observed that the evolutionary view has influenced only a few areas of work to date. This is reflected in the chapters – most do not use the framework because it has not been used in the respective field. The evolutionary framework is explicitly represented in Chapters 2, 5 and 15, and it is reflected in the structure of the book (Fig. 1.6). We hope that the ensemble of the chapters invites researchers to identify opportunities where an application of the evolutionary framework can generate additional insights on NPD.
The focus of the book on operations issues implies that the three evolution-ary levels are not equally represented. NPD from the operations viewpoint has focused on the execution of innovation, and therefore on the firm and process levels. The external environment and industry levels have been vir-tually absent from operations-related NPD literature. This is reflected in the structure of the book.
Chapter 2 gives a view of Technology Strategy. It touches upon literature that looks at population of firms and the evolution of an entire industry. The focus of the chapter lies on industry life cycles and on the contribution of NPD to the firm’s strategy (reflecting the focus of past research). Two related chapters summarize important aspects of technology strategy that have seen a lot of attention in NPD literature: the contribution of NPD to the firm’s competitive positioning (Chapter 3, a view from the Industrial Organization and the Marketing discipline), and the strategic structuring of product families (Chapter 4).
The rest of the book focuses on the firm level, reflecting the emphasis in the existing work. First, the firm level view encompasses the firm’s deci-sion rules and processes. Existing work has largely taken the approach of
‘optimizing’ process structure given the strategy. Thus, the chapters them-selves do not elaborate on an evolutionary framework (except Chapter 5).
We see the evolutionary framework reflected in the chapter structure: idea
Handbook of New Product Development Management
generation (Chapter 5), (portfolio) selection (Chapter 6), and elaboration and execution, the latter seen in the aggregate through the organizational struc-ture (Chapter 7). Selection appears again in the Chapter 8 in the context of performance measurement: what are the criteria according to which the NPD function as a whole is evaluated (and thus investments in NPD are justified)?
Finally, two chapters explore coordination across multiple organizations at the institutionalized process level, with suppliers (Chapter 9) and partners (Chapter 10).
The aggregate firm level is linked to the process level, the execution of individual projects, through hierarchical planning, the reconciliation between operational short-term plans and longer-term goals (Chapter 11). The remain-ing chapters turn to the process level, or the execution of individual projects to transform an opportunity into a new product or service.
Throughout execution, or the transformation of an opportunity into a prod-uct, multiple players are involved who must coordinate and communicate to be effective (Chapter 12). Product opportunities are created (at least in products of moderate novelty) by systematic customer input (Chapter 13); a
6. NPD Portfolio management:
S. Kavadias and R. Chao
8. NPD Performance measurement: M. Tatikonda 5. Creativity in
3. Competitive Positioning through NPD: E. Ofek 4. Product family design: V. Krishnan and K. Ramachandran (Environment)
Industry level 2. Technology Strategy
A. De Meyer and C. Loch Industry level
Firm Level:
processes and structures
11. Hierarchical Planning. N. Joglekar, N. Kulatilaka, and E. Anderson Linking strategy,
16. Users, Experts & Institutions in Design: K. Ulrich 12. Coordination
and information exchange:
C. Loch and C. Terwiesch
17. Risk management: S. Sommer, C. Loch, M. Pich S. Thomke
14. Defining Specifications: S. Bhattacharya
Process Level:
perceived opportunity is translated into a set of activities by product spec-ifications (Chapter 14), which determine the link between the design and the performance targets (that come from the aggregate strategy and process levels). Appropriate and stable product specifications are very important for achieving a fast time to market and capacity utilization.
At the heart of execution, the evolutionary cycle appears again in Chapter 15, which discusses design iterations. The design and development of products evolves in iterative loops. A recent version of design iterations and testing is collaborative testing with customers (Chapter 16). Using cus-tomer insight increases the information gained from tests and is becoming widely used. In addition, project execution means risk reduction, from a poorly defined task at the outset to well defined tasks at the beginning of manufacturing or service delivery. Chapter 17 summarizes methods of risk reduction.
Chapter 18 on downstream design for serviceability is concerned with the effect of NPD on the operations of product delivery. A separate chapter describes the similarities and differences of service design as compared to the design of manufactured products (Chapter 19).
This overview shows that the evolutionary framework repeatedly appears in the structure of the book; at the same time, evolutionary dynamics are men-tioned in several chapters but are not yet widely used as a common theoretical guide to understand and structure observed phenomena. We believe that this represents unused potential and a major opportunity for future improvements of our understanding of NPD. Each chapter offers some future research oppor-tunities at a ‘micro’ level. We encourage the reader to keep in mind this overarching opportunity to discover patterns of success drivers.
References
Abernathy W., and Utterback J. (1978). “Patterns of Industrial Innovation,”
Technology Review, 80 (7), 40–47.
Adler P. S. (1989). “Technology Strategy: A Guide to the Literatures”, In: Research in Technological Innovation Management, and Policy, (Eds) R. S. Rosenbloom and R. A. Burgelman, 4, 25–151, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
Ancona D. G., and Caldwell D. F. (1992). “Bridging the Boundary: External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 37 (4), 634–665.
Baker G., Gibbons R., and Murphy K. (2002). “Relational Contracts and The Theory of the Firm,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117 (1), 37–84.
Basalla G. (1988). The Evolution of Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Handbook of New Product Development Management
Bass F. M. (1969). “A New Product Growth Model for Consumer Durables,”
Management Science, 15, 215–227.
Bhide A. V. (2000). The Origin and Evolution of New Businesses. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Bloch F. D. (2002). “Coalitions and Networks in Industrial Organization,”
The Manchester School, 70 (1), 36–55.
Boyd R., and Richerson P. J. (1985). Culture and the Evolutionary Process.
Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Boyd R., and Richerson P. J. (2005). The Origin and Evolution of Cultures.
NY: Oxford University Press.
Brown S. L., and Eisenhardt K. M. (1995). “Product Development: Past Research, Present Findings, and Future Directions,” Academy of Manage-ment Review, 20 (2), 343–378.
Boulding W., Rusking M., and Staelin R. (1997). “Pulling the Plug to Stop the New Product Drain,” Journal of Marketing Research, 34 (1), 164–176.
Burgelman R. A., Maidique M. A., and Wheelwright S. C. (1995). Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation. Chicago, IL: Irwin.
Burt R. S. “The Network Structure of Social Capital,” 2000, in R. I. Sutton and B. M. Staw (eds.) Research in Organizational Behavior, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
Campbell D. T. (1960). “Blind Variation and Selective Retention in Creative Thought as in Other Knowledge Processes,” Psychological Review, 67, 380–400.
Chapman C. B., and Ward S. C. (2003). Project Risk Management: Processes, Techniques, and Insights, 2nd edition, Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.
Clark K. B. (1985). “The Interaction of Design Hierarchies and Market Con-cepts in Technological Evolution,” Research Policy, 14, 235–251.
Clark K. B., and Fujimoto T. (1991), Product Development Performance, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Collins J. (2001).Good to Great. NY: Harper Collins.
Cohen W. M., Nelson R. R., and Walsh J. P. (2002). “Links and Impacts: The Role of Public Research on Industrial R&D,” Management Science, 48 (1), 1–23.
Darwin C. (1871). The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. NY:
Murray.
Dawkins R. (1986). The Blind Watchmaker. NY: Penguin.
Dawkins R. (1996). Climbing Mount Improbable. W.W. Norton, New York, NY.
Demeulemeester E. L., and Herroelen W. S. (2002). Project Scheduling:
A Research Handbook. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
• • • • • 22
Deshmukh S. D., and Chikte S. D. (1980). “A Unified approach for Mod-eling and Analyzing New Product R&D Decisions,” TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences, 15, 163–182.
Dougherty D. (1992). “Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms,” Organization Science, 3 (2), 179–202.
Doz Y. Z., and Hamel G. (1997). Winning Alliances. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Dyer J. H., and Ouchi W. G. (1993). “Japanese Style Partnerships: Giving Companies a Competitive Edge,” Sloan Management Review, 35 (1).
Dyer J. H. (1996). “Specialized Supplier Networks as a Source of Competi-tive Advantage: Evidence from the Auto Industry,” Strategic Management Journal, 17 (4), 271–292.
Edelman G. M., and Tononi G. A. (2000). “Universe of Consciousness: How Matter Becomes Imagination,” Basic Books, New York, NY.
Feltham G. A., and Xie J. (1994). “Performance Measure Congruity and Diversity in Multitask Principal Agent Relations,” Accounting Review, 69 (3), 429–453.
Fleming L. (2001). “Recombinant uncertainty in technological search,” Man-agement Science, 47 (1), 117–132.
Fleming L., and Sorenson O. (2004). “Science as a map in technological search,” Strategic Management Journal, 25, 8, 909–928.
French H. (2005). “Whose Patent is it Anyway?” New York Times.
Galbraith J. (1973). Designing Complex Organizations. Cambridge, MA:
Addison Wesley.
Gibbons M., and Johnston R. (1975). “The Roles of Science in Technological Innovation,” Research Policy, 3, 220–242.
Gibbons R. (2005). “Incentives Between Firms (and Within),” Management Science, 51 (1), 2–17.
Gompers P., Lerner J., and Scharfstein D. (2005). “Entrepreneurial Spawn-ing: Public Corporations and the Formation of New Ventures 1986–1999,”
Journal of Finance, 60 (2), 577–614.
Goyal S., and Moranga J. L. (2001). “R&D Networks,” Rand Journal of Economics, 32 (4), 686–707.
Hannan M. T., and Freeman J. H. (1977). “The Population Ecology of Organizations”, American Journal of Sociology, 82 (2), 929–964.
Henderson B. D. (1979). Henderson on Corporate Strategy. Cambridge: Abt Books.
Henderson R. M., and Clark K. B. (1990). “Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firms,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 9–30.
Hoang H., and Rothaermel F. T. (2005). “The Effect of General and Partner-Specific Alliance on Joint R&D Project Performance,” Academy of Man-agement Journal, 48 (2), 332–345.
Handbook of New Product Development Management
Holmstr¨om B., and Milgrom P. (1991). “Multitask Principal-Agent Analyses:
Incentive Contracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design,” Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 9 (1), 25–52.
Kavadias S., and Loch C. H. (2003). Dynamic Portfolio Selection Under Uncertainty. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA.
Kerr S. (1975). “On the Folly of Rewarding A While Hoping for B,” Academy of Management Journal, 18, 769–783.
Krishnan V., and Ulrich K. T. (2001). “Product Development Decisions:
A Review of the Literature,” Management Science, 47 (1), 1–21.
Lawrence P., and Lorsch J. (1967). “Differentiation and Integration in Com-plex Organizations,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 12 (1), 1–30.
Leonard-Barton D. (1992). “Core capabilities and core rigidities,” Strategic Management Journal, 13, 111–125.
Leonard-Barton D. (1995). Wellsprings of Knowledge. Boston: Harvard Busi-ness School Press.
Levy S. R., Plaks J., Hong Y., Chin C., and Dweck C. S. (2001). “Static vs.
Dynamic Theories of Groups: Different Routes to Different Destinations,”
Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 155–167.
Liker J. K., Kamath R. R., Wasti S. N., and Nagamachi M. (1996). “Supplier Involvement in Automotive Component Design: Are there Really Large US Japan Differences?” Research Policy, 25 (1), 59–89.
Loch C. H., De Meyer A., Pich M. T. (2006). Managing the Unknown.
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
MacCormack A., Verganti R., and Iansiti M. (2001). Developing Products on “Internet Time: The Anatomy of A flexible Development Process,”
Management Science, 47 (1), 133–150.
Markides C. (1999). “Dynamic View of Strategy,” Sloan Management Review, 40(3), 55–63.
Mihm J., Loch C. H., and Huchzermeier A. (2003). “Problem Solving Oscil-lations in Complex Projects,” Management Science, 49 (6), 733–750.
Mokyr J. (1990). The Lever of Riches. New York: Oxford University Press.
Moorthy K. S. (1984). “Market Segmentation, Self-Selection, and Product Line Design,” Marketing Science, 3 (4), 288–307.
Morison E. (1966). “Gunfire at Sea”. In: Men, Machines and Modern Times.
Cambridge: MT Press, 17–44.
Mussa M., and Rosen S. (1978). “Monopoly and Product Quality,” Economic Theory, 18, 301–317.
Nelson R. R., and Winter S. G. (1982). “An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change,” Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA.
O’Sullivan M. A. (2000). Contests for Corporate Control: Corporate Gov-ernance and Economic Performance in the United States and Germany.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• • • • • 24
Pahl G., and Beitz W. (1988). Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach, NY: Springer-Verlag.
Pich M. T., Loch C. H., and De Meyer A. (2002). “On Uncertainty, Ambiguity, and Complexity in Project Management,” Management Science, 48 (8), 1008–1023.
Porter M. E. (1980). Competitive Advantage, NY: Free Press, 164–200.
Porter M. E. (1985). Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Supe-rior Performance. NY: Free Press.
Porter M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: The Free Press.
Roberts J. D. (2004). The Modern Firm: Organizational Design for Perfor-mance and Growth. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Rothaermel F. T., and Deeds D. L. (2004). “Exploration and Exploitation Alliances in Biotechnology: A System of New Product Development,”
Strategic Management Journal, 25 (3), 201–221.
Schumpeter J. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. NY: Harper Brothers.
Shane S. (2000). “Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurial Opportunities,” Organization Science, 11 (4), 448–469.
Simonton D. K. (1999). Origins of Genius. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Silverberg G., Dosi G., and Orsenigo L. (1988). “Innovation, Diversity and Diffusion: A Self-organisation Model,” Economic Journal, 98 (393), 1032–1054. Royal Economic Society.
Sober E., and Wilson D. S. (1999). Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychol-ogy of Unselfish Behavior. Boston: Harvard University Press.
Sommer S., and Loch C. H. (2004). “Selectionism and Learning in Projects with Complexity and Ambiguity,” Management Science, 50 (10), 1334–1347.
Sutton R. I. (2001). “The Weird Rules of Creativity,” Harvard Business Review, 79 (8), 94–103.
Teece D. J., Pisano G., and Shuen A. (1997). “Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management,” Strategic Management Journal, 18 (7), 509–533.
Terwiesch C., Loch C. H., and De Meyer A. (2002). “Exchanging Preliminary Information in Concurrent Engineering: Alternative Coordination Strate-gies,” Organization Science, 13 (4), 402–419.
Thomke S. H. (2003). Experimentation Matters. Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.
Thompson J. D. (1967). Organizations in Action, New York: McGraw Hill.
Tirole J. (1988). Theory of Industrial Organization, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Tushman M., and Anderson P. (1986). “Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 439–465.
Handbook of New Product Development Management
Tushman M. L., and Rosenkopf L. (1992). “Organizational determinants of technological change: Towards a sociology of technological evolution.”
In: Research in Organizational Behavior, (Eds.) B. M. Staw and L. L.
Cummings, Greenwich: JAI Press, 311–347.
Ulrich K. T., and Eppinger S. D. (2004). Product Design and Development 3rd edition, NY: McGraw Hill.
Utterback J. M. (1994). Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation. Cambridge MA: HBS Press.
Van de Ven A. H., Angle H., and Pole M. S. (1989). Research on the Management of Innovation: The Minnesota Studies. New York: Harper and Row.
Weick K. E. (1993). “Collapse of Sensemaking in Organizations: The Mann Gulch Disaster,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 628–652.
Wheelwright S. C., and Clark K. B. (1992). “Revolutionizing Product Devel-opment,” Maxwell-Macmillan, New York, NY.
Zhao M. (2006). “Conducting R&D in countries with weak intellectual prop-erty rights protection,” Management Science, 52 (8), 1185–1199.
Zott C. (2002). “Dynamic Capabilities and the Emergence of Intraindustry Differential Firm Performance: Insights from a Simulations Study,” Strate-gic Management Journal, 24 (2), 97–125.
Zwiebel J. (1995). “Corporate Conservativism and Relative Compensation,”
Journal of Political Economy, 103 (1), 1–25.
• • • • • 26