Abbie Griffin

PDMA Research on New Product Development Practices: Updating Trends and Benchmarking Best Practices

Abstract Product development professionals may have the feeling that yet another buzzword or magic bullet always lurks just around the corner. However, researchers have devoted considerable effort to helping practioners determine which tools, techniques, and methods really do offer a competitive edge. Starting 30 years ago, research efforts have aimed at understanding NPD practices and identifying those which are deemed “best practices.” During the past five years, pursuit of this goal has produced numerous privately available reports and two research efforts sponsored by the PDMA. Abbie Griffin summarizes the results of research efforts undertaken during the past five years and presents findings from the most recent PDMA survey on NPD best practices. This survey, conducted slightly more than five years after PDMAs first best-practices survey, updates trends in processes, organizations, and outcomes for NPD in the U.S., and determines which practices are more commonly associated with firms that are more successful in developing new products. The survey has the following objectives: determining the current status of NPD practices and performance; understanding how product development has changed from five years ago; determining whether NPD practice and performance differ across industry segments; and, investigating process and product development tools that differentiate product development success. The survey findings indicate that NPD processes continue to evolve and become more sophisticated. NPD changes continually on multiple fronts, and firms that fail to keep their NPD practices up to date will suffer an increasingly marked competitive disadvantage. Interestingly, although more than half of the respondents use a cross-functional stage-gate process for NPD, more than onethird of all firms in the study still use no formal process for managing NPD. The findings suggest that firms are not adequately handling the issue of team-based rewards. Project-completion dinners are for the most frequently used NPD reward; they are also the only reward used more by best-practice firms than by the rest of the respondents. The best-practice firms participating in the study do not use financial rewards for NPD. Compared to the other firms in the study, best-practice firms use more multifunctional teams, are more likely to measure NPD processes and outcomes, and expect more from their NPD programs.

An Interim Report on Measuring Product Development Success and Failure

This article represents findings of a PDMA task force studying measures of product development success and failure. This investigation sought to identify all currently used measures, organize them into categories of similar measures that perform roughly the same function, and contrast the measures used by academics and companies to evaluate new product development performance. The authors compared the measures used in over seventy-five published studies of new product development to those surveyed companies say they use. The concept of product development success has many dimensions and each may be measured in a variety of ways. Firms generally use about four measures from two different categories in determining product development success. Academics and managers tend to focus on rather different sets of product development success/failure measures. Academics tend to investigate product development performance at the firm level, whereas managers currently measure, and indicate that they want to understand more completely, individual product success.

Metrics for measuring product development cycle time

As global competitive pressure increases and product life cycles compress, many companies are trying to shorten their product development cycles. Firms are implementing a wide variety of different techniques, management processes and development strategies in their quest for shorter development cycles. We read anecdotal accounts of some efforts that herald great success stories but seldom hear about any failures. Unfortunately, some of the companies changing their development processes do so without any a priori basis for determining whether the process change will have helped or hindered them. The firm implements the new process without having a cycle time performance baseline against which to compare results from the new process. In this article, Abbie Griffin presents a method for obtaining product development cycle time performance baselines. She also demonstrate how to use them to either forecast expected project duration, given that you have not changed your development process, or determine whether a process change has actually decreased development cycle times.

Industrial New Product Launch Strategies and Product Development Performance

Abstract Just as reporters must answer a few fundamental questions in every story they write, decision-makers in the new product development (NPD) process must address five key issues; what to launch, where to launch, when to launch, why to launch, and how to launch. These decisions involve significant commitments of time, money, and resources. They also go a long way toward determining the success or failure of any new product. Deeper insight into the tradeoffs these decisions involve may help to increase the likelihood of success for product launch efforts. Erik Jan Hultink, Abbie Griffin, Susan Hart, and Henry Robben present the results of a study that examines the interplay between these product launch decisions and NPD performance. Noting that previous launch studies focus primarily on the tactical decisions (that is, how to launch) rather than on the strategic decisions (what, where, when and why to launch), they explore not only which decisions are important to success, but also the associations between the two sets of decisions. Because the strategic launch decisions made early in the NPD process affect the tactical decisions made later in the process, their study emphasizes the importance of launch consistency—that is, the alignment of the strategic and tactical decisions made throughout the process. The survey respondents—managers from marketing, product development, or general management in U.K. firms—provided information about 221 industrial new products launched during the previous five years. The responses identify associations between various sets of strategic and tactical decisions. That is, the responses suggest that the strategic decisions managers make regarding product innovativeness, market targeting, the number of competitors, and whether the product is marketing- or technology-driven are associated with subsequent tactical decisions regarding branding, distribution expenditure and intensity, and pricing. The study also suggests that different sets of launch decisions have differing effects on performance of industrial new products. In this study, the greatest success was enjoyed by a small group of respondents categorized as Niche Innovators. Their launch strategy involves a niche focus, targeting innovative products into markets with few competitors. Tactical decisions made by this group include exclusive distribution, a skimming pricing strategy, and a broad product assortment.

Product development cycle time for business-to-business products

Abstract For a number of years, firms have been implementing changes in the way they develop new products, changes that are targeted at reducing overall product development cycle times. And over the years, a number of academics have conducted research trying to understand the factors that are related to reducing new product development (NPD) times. But the question remains — just how long does product development generally take in absolute numbers? Information on how long product development takes is helpful to firms for planning and controlling the flow of products into the marketplace and in determining resource needs for NPD. Other than anecdotal data pertaining to particular projects that have been commercialized by particular firms, very little hard data have been reported on this topic. This article analyzes data to quantify average cycle times for physical goods commercialized by business-to-business (B2B) firms. The data are a subset of a much larger data set from the Product Development & Management Associations (PDMA) Best Practices research. The analysis presents average product development cycle times for four different types of projects (new-to-the-world, new-to-the-firm, next generation improvements and incremental improvements), presents evidence of the lack of a relationship between cycle time and success and looks at factors that are associated with differences in the length of product development cycle times.

Launch decisions and new product success: an empirical comparison of consumer and industrial products

Many articles have investigated new product development success and failure. However, most of them have used the vantage point of characteristics of the product and development process in this research. In this article we extend this extensive stream of research, looking at factors affecting success; however, we look at the product in the context of the launch support program. We empirically answer the question of whether successful launch decisions differ for consumer and industrial products and identify how they differ. From data collected on over 1,000 product introductions, we first contrast consumer product launches with industrial product launches to identify key differences and similarities in launch decisions between market types. For consumer products, strategic launch decisions appear more defensive in nature, as they focus on defending current market positions. Industrial product strategic launch decisions seem more offensive, using technology and innovation to push the firm to operate outside their current realm of operations and move into new markets. The tactical marketing mix launch decisions (product, place, promotion and price) also differ markedly across the products launched for the two market types. Successful products were contrasted with failed products to identify those launch decisions that discriminate between both outcomes. Here the differences are more of degree rather than principle. Some launch decisions were associated with success for consumer and industrial products alike. Launch successes are more likely to be broader assortments of more innovative product improvements that are advertised with print advertising, independent of market. Other launch decisions uniquely related to success per product type, especially at the marketing mix level (pricing, distribution, and promotion in particular). The launch decisions most frequently made by firms are not well aligned with factors associated with higher success. Additionally, comparing the decisions associated with success to the recommendations for launches from the normative literature suggests that a number of conventional heuristics about how to launch products of each type will actually lead to failure rather than success.

Modeling and measuring product development cycle time across industries

Abstract As global competitive pressure increases and product life cycles compress, companies are trying to shorten product development cycles. This article relates the actual length of product development cycle times (in months) for project data from 21 divisions of 11 firms in 5 industries to project, process and team structure factors with statistically significant results. The model and data quantify the impact of project newness and complexity (the number of functions a product performs) on increasing development cycle time length. The data also demonstrate how much impact using a cross-functional product development team has on decreasing cycle time.

Customer Learning Processes, Strategy Selection, and Performance in Business-to-Business Service Firms*

Learning about customers takes place through relevant dialogues with those customers, also known as customer relationship management (CRM). As relationships develop, information about the customer is gathered in the firms customer information systems (CIS): the content, processes, and assets associated with gathering and moving customer information throughout the firm. This research develops a measure of CIS management capabilities based on learning organization theory and measured by the ability to get, store, move, and use information throughout the business unit. This measure is then used to analyze customer learning processes and associated performance in the context of marketing strategic decision making. This study of 209 business services firms finds that generic marketing strategy positioning (low-cost and differentiation) and the marketing tactics of personalization and customization are related to CIS development. Customer information systems development in turn is associated with higher levels of customer-based performance, which in turn is associated with increased business growth. Since the strongest association with customer-based performance is strategy selection, the long-term benefits of the knowledge gained from the CIS may be in the ability to assist in measuring customer-based performance, rather than in the ability to immediately contribute to performance. Finally, for these firms, customization and personalization are not directly associated with performance and thus may not be necessary to support every firms marketing strategy.

The Role of Transactional versus Relational Data in IMC Programs: Bringing Customer Data Together

ABSTRACT In this exploratory study of integrated marketing communications (IMC), we bring together relational and transactional data, and sales and marketing views, to investigate whether firms can enhance their position in the market in terms of both marketing-oriented and sales-based performance benchmarks. This article examines, in a business-to-business services context, the relationships between collecting various types of customer transaction and relational data, customer data quality, and two types of business unit performance. The first type of performance is a more traditional sales-oriented metric of sales-oriented business growth, growth in sales, and net income. The second type is a less traditional marketing-oriented metric, called marketing-oriented customer performance, a summed measure of retention rate, share of wallet, lifetime customer value, and return on investment (ROl). An extensive review of different types of transaction and relational data produced two different categories of transaction and relationship information.

Examining the Technical Corporate Entrepreneurs' Motivation: Voices from the Field

Prior research has proposed five conditions that support corporate entrepreneurship: rewards, management support, resources including time, organizational structures (at the macro level), and risk acceptance. This article investigates the sufficiency of these conditions in motivating individual scientists or engineers who have created and commercialized multiple breakthrough innovations in mature corporations—or technical corporate entrepreneurs. Using in–depth interviews with technical corporate entrepreneurs and human resource managers, we explore both how they are motivated and whether there is concurrence between how they say they are motivated and how their human resource managers perceive that they are motivated. We find the framework applicable but incomplete relative to motivating these individuals. The additional dimensions of appropriate work design (at the micro level) and their intrinsic motivation to innovate need to be considered in supporting technical corporate entrepreneurship. Further, we find that an important disparity exists between what technical corporate entrepreneurs say motivates them and the perceptions of their human resource manger.