Author:
Panizzolo Roberto,Biazzo Stefano,Garengo Patrizia
Abstract
PurposeA large amount of research deals with the identification of management practices related to new product development (NPD) success. To this purpose, assessment tools capable of helping enterprises to set up improvement processes are of extreme importance. The aim of this paper is to build a product development assessment model based upon a normative‐contingent approach.Design/methodology/approachFirst, a literature review of the main approaches and models used in NPD assessment was carried out. Second, the tool was tested in five firms. The case studies allowed the authors to test the tool in its prototypal phase in order to assess both its limits and potential and also to highlight possible improvements.FindingsThe assessment tool developed yields a clear understanding of the current state of product development process in an organization in order to facilitate a shared understanding of the weakness and deficiencies, to enable effective process management, to develop implementation plan to support change initiatives and to support process improvement using metrics.Originality/valueThe product development assessment model is based upon a normative‐contingent approach meaning that the prescriptive requirements are defined according to the logic of coherence: requirements vary in relation to contextual conditions. In particular, there are two important context factors which are considered to have a significant influence on NPD process: the complexity of the product‐market interface and the enterprise's NPD strategic orientations.
Subject
Business and International Management,Strategy and Management
Reference49 articles.
1. Adams‐Bigelow, M. (2004), “First results from the 2003 comparative performance assessment study”, in Kahn, K.B. (Ed.), The PDMA Handbook of New Product Development, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York, NY.
2. Akao, Y. (1990), Quality Function Deployment, QFD, Integrating Customer Requirement into Product Design, Japan Standards Association, Tokyo.
3. Arthur D. Little (1991), The Arthur D. Little Survey on the Product Innovation Process, Arthur D. Little, Cambridge, MA.
4. Astley, W.G. (1985), “Administrative science as socially constructed truth”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 30, pp. 497‐513.
5. Biazzo, S. and Bernardi, G. (2003), “Organisational self‐assessment options. A classification and a conceptual map for SMEs”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 20 No. 8, pp. 881‐900.
Cited by
16 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献