Portfolio Of New Product Development Projects Research Articles

Formulation and Prioritization of Sustainable New Product Design in Smart Glasses Development

Due to fierce competition in the global market, success in product innovation has always been challenging for most enterprises to be able to stand out in business values and product novelty. Typically, available technological features in the market are taken into consideration in the innovation process for differentiation from existing products. In order to enhance the likelihood of innovation success, project portfolio management (PPM) has recently been advocated to examine the supply chain performance of new product development (NPD) projects in terms of economic, social, and sustainable aspects. In this study, a two-stage methodology is proposed to formulate and select the most appropriate NPD project portfolio by means of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches in probabilistic and group decision-making processes. In stage one, the available product features on the market are searched for and ranked to indicate a number of potential NPD projects. In stage two, such projects are evaluated by the sustainable supply chain operation reference (SustainableSCOR) model to select the most sustainable NPD project for product development. Moreover, a case study of developing augmented reality (AR) smart glasses is conducted to demonstrate the above methodology, with the result indicating that the functions of voice commands, 3D visualization, and phone calls should be focused on for the next generation of smart glasses.

A multi objective-BSC model for new product development project portfolio selection

The most significant factor for the survival of an enterprise under a high level of competition is new product development (NPD). As a result, selecting a potential NPD project portfolio to gain competitive advantage has become a major concern to enterprises. However, selection of an NPD project portfolio is intricate due to multiple selection criteria and factors. This study focuses on optimizing an NPD project portfolio selection problem. To this end, Balance Score Card (BSC) is employed as a comprehensive framework to define NPD project selection criteria. Afterward, a multi-objective mathematical model is formulated that attempts to maximize total outcome, to minimize total risk, and to maximize strategic advantages. Our proposed model also takes into account suppliers, consumer demands, and project interdependencies. Because of the NP-hardness of the proposed model, two multi-objective metaheuristic algorithms, multi-objective particle swarm optimization (MOPSO), and non dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) are applied to solve the proposed model. It should be noted that the performance of algorithms is evaluated using the ɛ-constraint method and enhanced using response surface methodology (RSM). Finally, several numerical examples of different sizes are generated to compare the performance of metaheuristic solution methods based on four comparing metrics. Computational results show that NSGA-II outperforms MOPSO in terms of all the evaluation metrics.

The Effects of Decentralization in Strategy‐Making and National Culture on NPD Portfolio Planning

Traditionally, the understanding among scholars and practitioners has been that a portfolio of NPD projects is the expression of a firm's strategy and thus it must support the strategy. In keeping with this view, the current study focuses on new product development (NPD) portfolio planning, which is defined as a firm's effort to formulate portfolio decisions using a defined innovation strategy. Connecting portfolio decisions to a defined innovation strategy has been associated with higher innovation success. Surprisingly, empirical research indicates that portfolio decisions do not always support the company's innovation strategy. Furthermore, during recent years, an increasing number of authors underscore the importance of responsiveness and adaptability in portfolio decision‐making. The current study addresses these two issues by examining a direct effect of decentralization in strategy‐making on NPD portfolio planning, and a moderating effect of decentralization in strategy‐making on the relationship between NPD portfolio planning and NPD program success. The study also examines the influence of national culture on the proposed relationships. The theoretical model was tested using data from the 2012 PDMA Comparative Performance Assessment Study. Findings indicate that NPD portfolio planning positively influences NPD program success. Also, results revealed inverted U‐shaped direct and moderating effects, respectively, of decentralization in strategy‐making on NPD portfolio planning, and of decentralization in strategy‐making on the relationship between NPD portfolio planning and NPD program success. With regard to the moderating effect of national culture, results indicate that uncertainty avoidance does not moderate the relationship between NPD portfolio planning and NPD program success. Nonetheless, we found significant moderating effects of individualism and power distance on the curvilinear relationship between decentralization in strategy‐making and NPD portfolio planning.

Feature based process framework to manage scope in dynamic NPD portfolios

The need to develop new products in increasingly frequent cycles of innovation drives organizations to form new product development (NPD) portfolios. In such dynamic environments, organizations need to reinforce their capabilities to deal with the simultaneity of multiple NPD projects, as well as with the frequent changes of the product scope. Many organizations, that have adopted the typical NPD process enforcing a streamlined product development process, are challenged beyond strict planning and rigorous control of their NPD projects.This paper identifies the challenges to manage the scope of a complete portfolio of NPD projects within the dynamic context that organizations face today, and using existing scope management practices. This paper suggests a novel approach to structuring the scope in dynamic NPD portfolios using feature modeling, and illustrates its use in an action-research case.

A model for selecting a new product development project portfolio

The key to enhancing competitiveness of enterprises is new product development (NPD). The screening of potential NPD project portfolios to gain competitive advantage has become the main concern of product managers. However, the most difficult problem with portfolio decisions is the fuzziness of the related information. Therefore, this study proposes a product portfolio selection model (PPSM) to help enterprises focus on the most feasible NPD project portfolio. PPSM utilizes fuzzy-gate (FG) to control and kill inferior NPD projects to avoid possible future sunk costs. Furthermore, PPSM can select better NPD projects to maximize portfolio synergy, hence, increasing the flexibility of planning and deployment of enterprises resources. A projector firm is used to illustrate the application of the proposed PPSM model.

Organizational politics in new product development project selection

PurposeFirms engaged in new product development (NPD) have to achieve a balanced portfolio of NPD projects. Despite the large number of models purporting to support portfolio optimization, most of them do not take into account political bias in project selection decisions. This paper aims to analyze approaches of organizational politics to NPD project selection and their implications for NPD portfolio management and future research.Design/methodology/approachA review is made of the current literature at the intersection between organizational politics and NPD project selection. With regard to the underlying assumptions of organizational politics, similarities, differences, practical implications, and research perspectives are identified.FindingsFrom the paper, insights could be gained into explaining the effects of organizational politics on NPD project selection. However, the differences in assumptions that can be generally observed in organizational politics are also reflected in the studies analyzed. Future research could benefit from integrating different political and methodological perspectives.Practical implicationsIn order to reach a balanced NPD portfolio, the potentially dysfunctional biases which characterize political processes from idea generation to project selection should be addressed. A concept of NPD portfolio management is proposed which considers the management of power and politics.Originality/valueThis paper contributes to a more comprehensive overview of political approaches of NPD project selection and serves as a sound basis for future research. The relevance and implications of politics for NPD portfolio management are demonstrated.

Tailoring product development to strategy: case of a European technology manufacturer

A large body of work on new product development (NPD) has identified a number of general success drivers, which imply `best practice' approaches in NPD. In particular, a newer market or a newer technology renders a project riskier and, therefore, requires a higher hurdle rate on returns. Furthermore, a good NPD process exhibits customer orientation and demand pull, cross-functional co-operation, top management support, existence of a champion, good planning and execution with a strong project manager, and the use of a well-defined process with formal measures. Radically new NPD projects require less structure and more exploration than incremental projects. This article examines whether such general `best practices' are directly applicable to a specific company. We study 90 NPD projects across many different business units in a large diversified European technology manufacturer. We find that the market positioning of new products depends more on the specific portfolio needs of our host company than on general principles of riskiness. In addition, we identify three predominant NPD process approaches in the company, but success differences among them are `muddled' by the non-targeted way they are used. We conclude that there is no `best practice' NPD process. Rather, a company should develop a customized NPD project portfolio and a corresponding mixture of processes, which together meet its strategic innovation needs. We develop a systematic procedure that can help a company to achieve such strategic alignment.