New product strategies of large, dominant product manufacturing firms: An exploratory analysis

Although researchers have expended considerable effort exploring the links between new product strategy and firm-level performance, most studies of this subject focus on small- to medium-sized firms. Compared to smaller firms, however, large companies typically maintain broader portfolios of products and have easier access to capital markets. Such fundamental differences suggest the need for closer examination of the relationship between new product strategy and the performance of large firms. Based on a study of 459 new products introduced during a 5-year period, Richard W. Firth and V. K. Narayanan profile the new product strategies of 18 large companies. They examine the methods used to acquire new products (internal development or external sources) as well as three dimensions of each firm's new product introductions: newness of embodied technology, newness of market application, and innovativeness in the market. In other words, these profiles identify the degree to which a firm's new product introductions involve core technologies and markets that are new to the firm, as well as the degree to which the market views these products as innovative. Because new product strategy is an investment decision, the study also examines the relationship between these strategic profiles and two facets of firm-level performance: risk and return. The study identifies five archetypes of new product strategy: Innovators, who produce innovative products by using their existing resources; Investors in Technology, who focus on expanding their technological base. Searching for New Markets, firms that venture into unfamiliar markets by introducing products closely aligned with those in their existing portfolios; Business as Usual, firms that rely on existing technologies and products to serve existing markets; and Middle-of-the-Road, firms content to introduce new products rated as low to moderate along all three dimensions of the strategic profile. For new products closely aligned with their core markets and technologies, the firms in this study typically rely on internal development. To introduce products involving new technologies or market applications, they turn to acquisition from external sources. Firms that emphasized market innovativeness in their new product introductions enjoyed higher returns than less innovative firms. And contrary to conventional wisdom, they gained this advantage without an accompanying increase in risk. In other words, continual innovation might provide a large firm with the means for achieving higher returns without higher risk.

[1]  Kwaku Atuahene-Gima,et al.  Inward Technology Licensing as an Alternative to Internal R&D in New Product Development: A Conceptual Framework , 1992 .

[2]  R. Cooper,et al.  Benchmarking the Firm's Critical Success Factors in New Product Development , 1995 .

[3]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  Of strategies, deliberate and emergent , 1985, Strategic Management Journal.

[4]  David A. Aaker,et al.  The Role of Risk in Explaining Differences in Profitability , 1987 .

[5]  M. Porter.  Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance , 1985 .

[6]  K. Andrews.  The Concept of Corporate Strategy , 1971 .

[7]  R. Wensley.  Strategic Marketing: Betas, Boxes, Or Basics , 1981 .

[8]  Gregory G. Dess,et al.  Industry Effects and Strategic Management Research , 1990 .

[9]  John P. Campbell,et al.  Measurement Theory for the Behavioral Sciences. , 1983 .

[10]  Dennis A. Gioia,et al.  Mapping Strategic Thought. , 1992 .

[11]  Robert G. Cooper,et al.  The Dimensions of Industrial New Product Success and Failure , 1979 .

[12]  D. Dougherty.  Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms , 1992 .

[13]  Harry Nyström,et al.  Product Development Strategy: An Integration of Technology and Marketing , 1985 .

[14]  R. Lamb,et al.  Competitive strategic management , 1984 .

[15]  James M. Utterback,et al.  The product family and the dynamics of core capability , 1992 .

[16]  Liam Fahey,et al.  The Portable MBA in strategy , 1994 .

[17]  R. Cooper.  New Product Strategies: What Distinguishes the Top Performers? , 1984 .

[18]  W. Souder,et al.  Managing New Product Innovations , 1987 .

[19]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  Tracking Strategy in an Entrepreneurial Firm1 , 1982 .

[20]  A. Tsui,et al.  Configurational Approaches to Organizational Analysis , 1993 .

[21]  G. Barczak.  New product strategy, structure, process, and performance in the telecommunications industry , 1995 .

[22]  B. Zirger,et al.  A Model of New Product Development: An Empirical Test , 1990 .

[23]  James J. Chrisman,et al.  Toward a System for Classifying Business Strategies , 1988 .

[24]  D. Schendel,et al.  An empirical analysis of strategy types , 1983 .

[25]  C. Merle Crawford,et al.  New Products Management , 1983 .

[26]  Ken G. Smith,et al.  Dynamics of Competitive Strategy , 1992 .

[27]  Cynthia A. Montgomery,et al.  Tobin's q and the Importance of Focus in Firm Performance , 1988 .

[28]  R. Cooper,et al.  The Impact of Product Innovativeness on Performance , 1991 .

[29]  Are we Forgetting External Sources of New Products? , 1986 .

[30]  R. Rumelt.  Strategy, structure, and economic performance , 1974 .

[31]  David Miller.  Strategy Making and Structure: Analysis and Implications for Performance , 1987 .

[32]  H. Ansoff.  Corporate strategy : an analytic approach to business policy for growth and expansion , 1965 .

[33]  M. Hirschey,et al.  Advertising, R&D Expenditures and the Market Value of the Firm , 1993 .

[34]  Roger J. Calantone,et al.  Successful Industrial Product Innovation: An Integrative Literature Review , 1990 .

[35]  V. Mahajan,et al.  Risk/Return Performance of Diversified Firms , 1985 .

[36]  Financial Evaluation of the Product Line , 1985 .

[37]  D. Hambrick.  An Empirical Typology of Mature Industrial-Product Environments , 1983 .

[38]  William L. Moore,et al.  New product development practices of industrial marketers , 1987 .