Measuring the impact of human—AI collaboration on knowledge diffusion in new product development projects

Identifying and Dealing with Complexties in New Product and Process Development Projects

Does the strategic type of firm affect which success measures should be used for product development (PD) projects? This paper theorizes that it should and finds that it does because the PD projects undertaken are usually an expression of the strategic type of the firm. The purpose of this research is to affirm a 1996 survey of members of the Product Development & Management Association (PDMA) that proposes that firms' PD performance measures should vary by their strategic type. Thus, for example, prospectors, the strategic type most likely to introduce new products to new markets, should place greater importance on PD success measures consistent with their characteristic strategies of changing product lines and early market entry. In contrast, defenders, the strategic type most likely to maintain stable product lines for existing markets, should place greater importance on PD success measures consistent with their characteristic strategies of stable product lines and market penetration. Analyzers, a hybrid type between prospectors and defenders, should prefer measures consistent with their characteristic strategies for improving products and being early followers in newer markets. To relate strategic types to specific success measures for PD projects, this paper proposes a model of the relationship based on the degree of project newness to the firm and then catalogs measures of PD project success and groups them according to degree of project newness. The research findings are based on survey responses from 222 individuals who are employed by financial service providers, who identified their firms by strategic type and rated the importance of PD success measures to their firms. The importance of 21 performance measures is compared by strategic type to find significant differences among prospectors, analyzers, and defenders. This research finds several significant relationships. prospectors, for example, attach greater importance to customer satisfaction, launch timeliness, and product return on investment, all of which may be characterized as relating to a higher degree of project newness to the firm. defenders and analyzers, on the other hand, attach more importance than prospectors to measures of unit volume, cost reduction, and margin goals, all of which relate to a lower degree of project newness to the firm. In short, because prospectors seek to introduce new products to new markets, they consider important those measures, which accord with greater product and market newness. The major conclusion of this paper is that strategic type affects the importance of project performance measures and that all firms should not use the same success measures. Firms should contextualize their success in PD projects based on their strategic type. This conclusion resonates with previous findings that strategy is a key determinant of PD success, though it is infrequently included in PD success studies. This paper, therefore, challenges the implicit assumption in the mainstream of PD success literature that success can be determined without regard to firm strategy.

For complex new product development (NPD) projects, traditional planning techniques have failed in realistic planning. Consequently, project performance has poor results, despite the dissemination of project management knowledge. This research aims to investigate the relationship between product complexity and team seniority as planning parameters for the NPD project, exploring the effect on project performance. The research applies a system dynamics model for simulating the influence of these parameters on project performance, particularly relating schedule and scope dimensions. In this article, we compare the impact of different relations between product complexity and team seniority on three projects in order to test the method. Only the product primary functions must be taken into account for gathering data from product complexity, and team seniority must be known. Besides, the decision-maker applies a first-order linear model to a goal-seeking background to predict the project schedule for a specified product scope. The results show that the model predicts the project schedule performance with an error of less than 15%, as compared to the actual projects’ performance.

Today, in new product development projects, “NPDs”, time is the cutting edge. The time to market in new product development projects is a key factor in the competition between innovative companies. Research has shown that time can be managed, and speed too. Our concern in this paper is to study the time factor in the case of new product development projects based on a time-cost trade-off curve, which is important for the project success by delivering the product as fast as possible. We will explain the motivation behind delivering fast in NPD projects. In construction projects, a customer initially contracts for a project from a contractor based on specifications, budget and delay. Time to market is a key success factor in new product development projects. Does time to delivery have high importance in construction projects? We conclude by showing the significance of NPD projects’ speed with respect to management in construction projects.

A Co-evolution Oriented Change Analysis Framework in Product Development Project

It is important for enterprise to invest more in new product development (NPD) projects and to develop their own innovative capabilities. The continuous development and market introduction of new products can be an important determinant of sustained enterprise performance. For approximately 30 years, conceptual and empirical research has been undertaken to identify the critical success factors (CSFs) of NPD project. Based on the correlative literature analysis, this paper sums up 19 Critical Success Factors (CSFs) of New Product Development (NPD) projects through the NPD process. By the questionnaire surveyed gathering data from the 97 domestic enterprises, used the SPSS software to carry on Factors analysis, the five parent factors had been found. At last this paper built a Conceptual model of NPD projects CSFs based on NPD process.

Psychosocial aspects of project work: a comparison between product development and construction projects

Although successful development of a given product may help explain the current success of a firm, creating longer‐term competitive advantage demands significantly more attention to developing and nurturing dynamic integration capabilities. These capabilities propel product development activities in ways that build on and develop technological and marketing capabilities for future product development efforts and create platforms for future product development. In this article, we develop a conceptual model of a dynamic integration process in product development, which we call intertemporal integration (ITI). In its most general form ITI is defined as the process of collecting, interpreting, and internalizing technological and marketing capabilities from past new product development projects and incorporating that knowledge in a systematic and purposeful manner into the development of future new products. Research propositions outlining the relationship of ITI to performance are presented. We provide specific examples of managerial mechanisms to be used in implementing ITI.We conclude with implications for research and practice. Effective management of ITI can increase new product development success and long‐term competitive advantage. This implies that management needs to engage in activities that gather and transform information and knowledge from prior development projects so that it can be used in future development projects. Project audits, design databases in computer‐aided design (CAD) systems, engineering notebooks, collections of test and experimental results, market research and test market results, project management databases, and other activities will all be important in the acquisition of knowledge from prior new product development (NPD) projects. Managers also should initiate the creation and maintenance of databases of technical and marketing information from prior projects, job performance reports, seminars and workshops related to technological issues and advances, and publication of technical journals to assist in the process of knowledge acquisition. Similarly, techniques such as assigning project managers from earlier development projects, reusing key components and technologies, and developing a company‐wide methodology for managing projects can be used to boost the application and use of knowledge.

Implementing a performance measurement system (PMS) for research and development (R&D) is fundamental for supporting decision making and motivating researchers and engineers; however, this is a very challenging task, because effort levels are not measurable and success highly uncertain. Even if the subject has largely been debated in academic and practitioners literature so far, an acknowledged managerial approach is not available yet. This paper investigates the implementation and use of a PMS in new product development (NPD) projects, which represents a relatively unexplored issue in the R&D performance measurement debate. In particular, studying the case of a military aircraft development project, it provides a reference framework that integrates the major literature contributions’ findings and suggests a practical approach for the design and implementation of an effective PMS for NPD.

Knowledge integration in IPPD project: role of shared project mission, mutual trust, and mutual influence

Thinking alike or not: Performance implications of transactional psychological contract congruence in buyer–supplier new product development projects

Shared knowledge and product design glitches in integrated product development

The paper discusses the success factors influencing product development design and product launch projects. The lives of people and businesses have been threatened and affected by the global COVID-19 pandemic for more than two years. Knowing these factors can help us make the right decisions and develop an effective project plan and matrix. Nowadays, project management is a very important part of work in companies of different sizes. Project management can be seen as applying innovation processes in an enterprise. The authors conducted quantitative and qualitative research on 544 companies in the Slovak Republic. The research focuses on aspects of project management and individual success factors. The data obtained by the questionnaire survey were processed by statistical methods, where the authors chose the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test as the basic method and the Wilcoxon two-tailed test for independent sample data sets. An essential variable in the sample of enterprises surveyed was, in particular, the sector of the economy in which the enterprise surveyed operates. Two key factors were considered when developing the product – employee education and the implication of social responsibility. The study’s uniqueness lies in surveying all types of enterprises, irrespective of their size, line of business, and financial turnover. The percentage distribution of the maximum use of CSR among the surveyed companies in each sector was most positive in the Logistics industry. Training and certification of employees are primarily one of the most important factors to ensure an increase in the success of those projects aimed at launching new products on the market; in the case of the surveyed sample, this is more than 40% of enterprises. Based on the sub-results, we can conclude that enterprises place more emphasis on new product development projects and the environmental concept of CSR. Still, the launch of new products or services is underestimated by the project management of enterprises. After more than eight years, the research has shown an increase in the importance of using social responsibility in management processes for new product development. A breakthrough finding is comparing the use of CSR in small businesses in Slovakia to global trends in which we perceive the dominance of multinational corporations. Enterprises are advised to focus specifically on new product launches and detailed planning.

With the growing complexity of the business context, companies are confronting more challenging Product Development (PD) projects because of the potential risks externally brought by the partners’ participation and internally accumulated through the activities’ execution. In this paper, we formulate and decompose a PD project in a hierarchical way, and the obtained end elements perceived as objects are built into a number of Design Structure Matrices (DSMs) and Domain Mapping Matrices (DMMs). We also propose a conceptual model of change occurring and change propagation, base on which the potential change propagating channels are discovered through observing and tracking change occurring and change propagation in DSMs and DMMs. Associated with the depth-first and breath-first search methods executed in matrices the critical objects during change propagation are discovered and the implicit change propagating channels cross multiple fields are identified. As the exploratory results, the critical objects taking account of change propagation are highlighted as the contribution to change management in PD project.

While some degree of freedom and flexibility is an essential ingredient to productive cross‐functional NPD teams, upper‐managers are faced with the challenge of instituting effective control mechanisms which head projects in the right strategic direction, monitor progress toward organizational and project goals, and allow for adjustments in the project if necessary. But too much or the wrong type of control may constrain the team's creativity, impede their progress, and injure their ultimate performance. Therefore, this study examines formal and interactive control mechanisms available to upper‐managers in controlling new product development (NPD) projects, and the relationship between these mechanisms and NPD project performance.Formal output and process controls are examined which consist of the setting and monitoring of outcomes, such as goals, schedule and budgets, and of processes and procedures, respectively. This study also looks at how the effectiveness of these control mechanisms may be contingent upon the degree of innovativeness in the project and the degree to which the project is part of a broad product program. In addition, the use of formal rewards for achieving team performance as opposed to rewards for individual achievement is investigated. Lastly, interactive controls are examined which consist of upper‐managers interacting directly with project members in the development of strategy and operational goals and procedures prior to the start of the project, and upper‐managers intervening in project decision‐making.Questionnaire data are collected on 95 projects across a variety of industries. The findings suggest that while NPD projects teams need some level of strategic direction concerning the objectives to be accomplished and the procedures to be followed, upper‐level managers can exert too much control. In particular, the findings showed a negative association between the use of upper manager‐imposed process controls and project performance. The findings also indicated that the degree to which upper‐managers intervened in project‐level decisions during the project was negatively related to project performance. However, the results showed support for the notion that early and interactive decision‐making on control mechanisms is important for effective projects. In particular, early team member and upper‐management involvement in the setting of operational controls, such as goals and procedures for monitoring and evaluating the project, was positively associated with project performance.This study provides additional insight into our understanding of upper‐management support in new product development. The study suggests that upper‐managers can over control with the wrong type of controls, and suggests effective ways of implementing participative and interactive control mechanisms.