An Analysis of Several New Product Performance Metrics

For most firms, new product development is the engine for growth and profitability. A firm's new product success depends on its ability to manage the product development process in a way that employs scarce resources to achieve the goal of the firm as well as the specific project's objectives. Simple and measurable performance metrics have been proposed and applied to monitor and compensate the development teams. In this paper, we develop a modeling frame work to analyze the implications of setting managerial priorities for three commonly used new product performance metrics: (1) time-to-market, (2) product performance, and (3) total development cost. We model new product development as a "product performance production" process that requires scarce development resources. Setting a target for development teams for each of these performance metrics can constrain this performance production process and, thereby, affect the other performance metrics. We model the constrained process as a restricted case of a general process that does not have such constraints. We benchmark each constrained process against the optimal, unrestricted process with respect to the level of the resource intensity employed during the development process, the time-to-market, and the performance level of the new product at launch. We show that an overly ambitious time-to-market target leads to an upward bias in resource intensity usage and a downward bias in product performance (i.e., evolutionary product innovation). In addition, our results suggest that the target time-to-market approach may ignore the effect of cannibalization and, thus, can perform suboptimally if a significant degree of cannibalization in the existing product market is expected. Given a target product performance, we show that the coordination between marketing and R&D is easier because the resulting development resource intensity and time-to-market decisions becomes separable. However, an overly ambitious product performance target leads to an upward bias in the development resource intensity and a delayed product launch that misses the window of opportunity. Finally, we show that the target development cost approach can lead a downward bias in product performance and a premature product launch. The above analyses are performed for a monopolistic firm, and they are extended to passive and active competitive environment.

[1]  V. Mahajan,et al.  Introduction Strategy for New Products with Positive and Negative Word-of-Mouth , 1984 .

[2]  吳安妮 產品發展績效:策略、組織及管理[評Kim B. Clark & Takahiro Fujimoto,Product Development Performance: Strategy,Organization,and Management in the World Auto Industry] , 1993 .

[3]  Morris A. Cohen,et al.  An Anatomy of a Decision-Support System for Developing and Launching Line Extensions , 1997 .

[4]  Teck Hua Ho Product design strategy analysis: The marketing-manufacturing interface , 1993 .

[5]  R. Dorfman,et al.  Optimal Advertising and Optimal Quality , 1976 .

[6]  Teck-Hua Ho,et al.  New product development: the performance and time-to-market tradeoff , 1996 .

[7]  E. Mansfield The speed and cost of industrial innovation in Japan and the United States: external vs. internal technology , 1988 .

[8]  G. Lilien,et al.  The timing of competitive market entry: an exploratory study of new industrial products , 1990 .

[9]  Lee G. Cooper,et al.  Market-Share Analysis , 1988 .

[10]  Ming Ding,et al.  Structuring the New Product Development Pipeline , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[11]  Lee G. Cooper,et al.  Market-Share Analysis: Evaluating Competitive Marketing Effectiveness , 1988 .

[12]  Glenn C. Loury,et al.  Market Structure and Innovation , 1979 .

[13]  D. R. Fulkerson A Network Flow Computation for Project Cost Curves , 1961 .

[14]  Devavrat Purohit,et al.  What Should You Do When Your Competitors Send in the Clones , 1994 .

[15]  Richard S. Rosenbloom Notes on the development of network models for resource allocation in R & D projects , 1964 .

[16]  Lawrence H. Linden,et al.  Improving the Return on R&D—II , 1985 .

[17]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Special Issue on Design and Development: Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[18]  R. N. Foster Improving the Return on R&D-II : Research Management , 1987 .

[19]  John A. Norton,et al.  Optimal Entry Timing for a Product Line Extension , 1989 .

[20]  Dominique M. Hanssens,et al.  Competitive pricing by a price leader , 1994 .

[21]  Jennifer F. Reinganum The timing of innovation: Research, development, and diffusion , 1989 .

[22]  Steve Dunphy,et al.  Structure and Innovation , 1995 .

[23]  J. Eliashberg,et al.  The Impact of Competitive Entry in a Developing Market Upon Dynamic Pricing Strategies , 1986 .

[24]  H. Stackelberg,et al.  Marktform und Gleichgewicht , 1935 .

[25]  Z. Griliches Productivity, R&D, and the Data Constraint , 1998 .