Abstract
Investments in design can make a significant contribution to successful new product development (NPD). However, there is insufficient evidence on the most appropriate or effective role that design could play. Previous case-based research has identified alternative roles for designers in NPD, but there is only tentative evidence over such roles’ contribution to NPD outcomes. Using data on a large sample (c. 1300) of Irish manufacturing plants we are able to examine the effectiveness of three different levels of involvement of designers in NPD and their impact on NPD novelty and success. Our analysis suggests that design is closely associated with enhanced performance regardless of the type of role it plays. However, the potential effects of involving design throughout the process appear to be much greater. The relationship between design and NPD outcomes is also strongly moderated by contextual factors; for example, its significance is only evident for organisations, which also engage in in-house R&D. Also, while both small and larger plants do gain from using design as functional specialism and in some stages of the NPD process, the additional benefits of a continuous involvement of design throughout the process are only evident in larger plants. Finally, while discourse and perceptions over design's role in NPD have certainly changed over time, suggesting a much more widespread and strategic use of design, our findings provide a more static picture, showing that design engagement with the NPD process has not changed significantly over the last two decades.
Highlights
Over the past decade a growing number of studies have identified design as a primary driver of innovation
Our results indicate that engaging design either as functional specialism or in several new product development (NPD) stages is associated with enhanced NPD success and novelty in both small and larger plants (Models 4 and 5, Tables 2 and 3)
There is limited evidence over the effectiveness of different roles designers can play in NPD (Perks et al, 2005; Candi and Gemser, 2010), and the difficulties of integrating design into the NPD process have been emphasised repeatedly (Beverland, 2005; Micheli et al, 2012)
Summary
Over the past decade a growing number of studies have identified design as a primary driver of innovation (see, e.g., Gemser and Leenders, 2001; Chiva and Alegre, 2009; Talke et al, 2009; Verganti, 2009; D’Ippolito et al, 2014; Moultrie and Livesey, 2014). While there is evidence that involving designers at different stages of the NPD process and using multifunctional teams in NPD positively impacts performance (Sarin, 2009), tensions among functions still exist (Beverland, 2005; De Clercq et al, 2011). Such tensions arise for several reasons, including divergences between designers’ and managers’ perspectives and goals, conflicts between marketers’ and designers’ priorities and ways of working, and cultural barriers related to language and designers’ self-image (Micheli et al, 2012). The application of management systems and formal product development processes has been suggested as a possible way to reduce tensions and introduce design more effectively in NPD (De Luca and Atuahene-Gima, 2007)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
