Developing new products in a network with efficiency and innovation

When managing a new product development (NPD) problem, a firm needs to consider the cooperation with its strategic partners in a network because surviving independently in the industry is almost impossible. However, due to the large variances among partners in terms of leadership, management, IT infrastructure and organizational cultures, it may lead to poor communication and cooperation and slow responses. A severe impact on the process and outcome of NPD may result. To facilitate buyer–supplier cooperation, suitable knowledge management and product development process management need to be adopted to match the characteristics of the selected NPD mix. In this paper, a supermatrix analytic network process (ANP) model with sensitivity analysis is first developed to select the most appropriate NPD mix. A balanced scorecard (BSC) using ANP with sensitivity analysis is used next to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model in the execution of NPD process.

[1]  M. West.  Sparkling Fountains or Stagnant Ponds: An Integrative Model of Creativity and Innovation Implementation in Work Groups , 2002 .

[2]  T. L. Saaty,et al.  Decision making with dependence and feedback , 2001 .

[3]  Keith C. C. Chan,et al.  A new fuzzy approach to improve fashion product development , 2006, Comput. Ind..

[4]  Da Ruan,et al.  Quality function deployment implementation based on analytic network process with linguistic data: An application in automotive industry , 2005, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst..

[5]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  The Art of Continuous Change : Linking Complexity Theory and Time-Paced Evolution in Relentlessly Shifting Organizations , 1997 .

[6]  Hongyi Sun,et al.  Critical success factors for new product development in Hong Kong toy industry , 2001, PICMET '01. Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology. Proceedings Vol.1: Book of Summaries (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37199).

[7]  Muge Ozman,et al.  Knowledge Integration and Network Formation , 2006 .

[8]  Shyi-Ming Chen,et al.  Evaluating weapon systems using fuzzy arithmetic operations , 1996, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[9]  E. Naveh,et al.  Do personal characteristics and cultural values that promote innovation, quality, and efficiency compete or complement each other? , 2004 .

[10]  Patrik Nilsson,et al.  Managing stakeholder requirements in a product modelling system , 2006, Comput. Ind..

[11]  Robert T. Clemen,et al.  Making Hard Decisions: An Introduction to Decision Analysis , 1997 .

[12]  T. Levitt,et al.  Creativity Is Not Enough , 2002 .

[13]  Eitan Naveh,et al.  The effect of integrated product development on efficiency and innovation , 2005 .

[14]  Yasutaka Kainuma,et al.  A multiple attribute utility theory approach to lean and green supply chain management , 2006 .

[15]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Decision making with dependence and feedback : the analytic network process : the organization and prioritization of complexity , 1996 .

[16]  Peter H. Gray,et al.  Knowledge Sourcing Effectiveness , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[17]  E. Carayannis,et al.  Profiling a methodology for economic growth and convergence: learning from the EU e-procurement experience for central and eastern European countries , 2005 .

[18]  Joseph Sarkis,et al.  Analyzing organizational project alternatives for agile manufacturing processes: An analytical network approach , 1999 .

[19]  Anja Schulze,et al.  How to Support Knowledge Creation in New Product Development:: An Investigation of Knowledge Management Methods , 2005 .

[20]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  The myopia of learning , 1993 .

[21]  J. March.  Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning , 1991, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[22]  Chian-Son Yu,et al.  A GP-AHP method for solving group decision-making fuzzy AHP problems , 2002, Comput. Oper. Res..

[23]  Yongsheng Ma,et al.  Towards unified modelling of product life-cycles , 2006, Comput. Ind..

[24]  Jeffrey L. Ringuest,et al.  Mean-Gini analysis in R&D portfolio selection , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[25]  M. Bohanec,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 2004 .

[26]  Barbara Becker,et al.  Choosing Research Priorities by Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process: An Application to International Agriculture , 2004 .

[27]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos , 1998 .

[28]  Fredrik Von Corswant,et al.  Coordinating customers and proactive suppliers: A case study of supplier collaboration in product development , 2002 .

[29]  Eric D. Darr,et al.  The Acquisition, Transfer, and Depreciation of Knowledge in Service Organizations: Productivity in Franchises , 1995 .

[30]  Teresa M. Amabile,et al.  Creativity under the gun. , 2002, Harvard business review.

[31]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  Into the black box: the knowledge transformation cycle , 2003, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[32]  Craig Lawson,et al.  THE APPLICATION OF A NEW RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SELECTION MODEL IN SMES , 2006 .

[33]  Stephan M. Wagner,et al.  Buyer-Supplier Collaboration in Product Development Projects , 2005 .

[34]  G. Farris,et al.  Knowledge Management in Research and Development , 2001 .

[35]  Mary J. Benner,et al.  Process Management and Technological Innovation: A Longitudinal Study of the Photography and Paint Industries , 2002 .

[36]  I. Nonaka,et al.  SECI, Ba and Leadership: a Unified Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation , 2000 .

[37]  L. Argote.  Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining and Transferring Knowledge , 1999 .

[38]  C. Prahalad,et al.  The new meaning of quality in the information age. , 1999, Harvard business review.

[39]  Jongseok Lee,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in the Presence of Network Externalities , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[40]  Akira Takeishi,et al.  Bridging inter‐ and intra‐firm boundaries: management of supplier involvement in automobile product development , 2001 .