IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v47y2001i8p1029-1045.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Incentive Schemes and Organizational Arrangements on the New Product Development Process

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Natter

    (Department of Production Management, Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration, Pappenheimgasse 35/3/5, A-1200, Vienna, Austria)

  • Andreas Mild

    (Department of Production Management, Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration, Pappenheimgasse 35/3/5, A-1200, Vienna, Austria)

  • Markus Feurstein

    (Department of Production Management, Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration, Pappenheimgasse 35/3/5, A-1200, Vienna, Austria)

  • Georg Dorffner

    (Department of Medical Cybernetics and Artificial Intelligence, University of Vienna, Freyung 6/2, A-1010, Vienna, Austria)

  • Alfred Taudes

    (Department of Production Management, Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration, Pappenheimgasse 35/3/5, A-1200, Vienna, Austria)

Abstract

This paper proposes a new model for studying the new product development process in an artificial environment. We show how connectionist models can be used to simulate the adaptive nature of agents' learning exhibiting similar behavior as practically experienced learning curves. We study the impact of incentive schemes (local, hybrid, and global) on the new product development process for different types of organizations. Sequential organizational structures are compared to two different types of team-based organizations, incorporating methods of quality function deployment such as the house of quality. A key finding of this analysis is that the firms' organizational structure and agents' incentive system significantly interact. We show that the house of quality is less affected by the incentive scheme than firms using a trial and error approach. This becomes an important factor for new product success when the agents' performance measures are conflicting.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Natter & Andreas Mild & Markus Feurstein & Georg Dorffner & Alfred Taudes, 2001. "The Effect of Incentive Schemes and Organizational Arrangements on the New Product Development Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(8), pages 1029-1045, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:47:y:2001:i:8:p:1029-1045
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.47.8.1029.10228
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.47.8.1029.10228
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.47.8.1029.10228?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edmund Chattoe-Brown, 1998. "Just How (Un)realistic Are Evolutionary Algorithms As Representations of Social Processes?," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 1(3), pages 1-2.
    2. Tesfatsion, Leigh, 1995. "How Economists Can Get Alife," Economic Reports 18196, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    3. Frank M. Bass, 1969. "A New Product Growth for Model Consumer Durables," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 215-227, January.
    4. Mitzi Montoya-Weiss & Roger J. Calantone, 1999. "Development and Implementation of a Segment Selection Procedure for Industrial Product Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 373-395.
    5. Luigi Marengo, 1996. "Structure, Competence and Learning in an Adaptive Model of the Firm," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Giovanni Dosi & Franco Malerba (ed.), Organization and Strategy in the Evolution of the Enterprise, chapter 5, pages 124-154, Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. Tesfatsion, Leigh, 1995. "How to Get Alife," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10546, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Herbert A. Simon, 1991. "Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 125-134, February.
    8. Kathleen Carley & Michael J. Prietula & Zhiang (John) Lin, 1998. "Design Versus Cognition: the Interaction of Agent Cognition and Organizational Design on Organizational Performance," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 1(3), pages 1-4.
    9. Giovanni Dosi & Franco Malerba (ed.), 1996. "Organization and Strategy in the Evolution of the Enterprise," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-13389-5, December.
    10. Morris A. Cohen & Jehoshua Eliasberg & Teck-Hua Ho, 1996. "New Product Development: The Performance and Time-to-Market Tradeoff," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(2), pages 173-186, February.
    11. Francesco Luna, "undated". "Computable Learning, Neural Networks and Institutions," Computing in Economics and Finance 1996 _037, Society for Computational Economics.
    12. Shantanu Dutta & Om Narasimhan & Surendra Rajiv, 1999. "Success in High-Technology Markets: Is Marketing Capability Critical?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 547-568.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Edoardo Mollona & Andrea Marcozzi, 2009. "Self-emerging coordination mechanisms for knowledge integration processes," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 8(2), pages 223-241, December.
    2. Lim, Wei Shi & Tang, Christopher S., 2006. "Optimal product rollover strategies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(2), pages 905-922, October.
    3. Jan HRON & Tomas MACAK, 2011. "Adaptive organization design based on system integration," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 57(12), pages 565-572.
    4. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2021. "Race meets bargaining in product development," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(3), pages 702-709, April.
    5. Tay, Nicholas S.P. & Lusch, Robert F., 2005. "A preliminary test of Hunt's General Theory of Competition: using artificial adaptive agents to study complex and ill-defined environments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(9), pages 1155-1168, September.
    6. Chan, Lai-Kow & Wu, Ming-Lu, 2002. "Quality function deployment: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 143(3), pages 463-497, December.
    7. Andreas Mild & Alfred Taudes, 2007. "An agent-based investigation into the new product development capability," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 315-331, September.
    8. Ali M. Mouazen & Ana Beatriz Hernández-Lara & Farid Abdallah & Muhieddine Ramadan & Jawad Chahine & Hala Baydoun & Najib Bou Zakhem, 2023. "Transformational and Transactional Leaders and Their Role in Implementing the Kotter Change Management Model Ensuring Sustainable Change: An Empirical Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-34, December.
    9. Benedikt Müller-Stewens & Klaus Möller, 2017. "Performance in new product development: a comprehensive framework, current trends, and research directions," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 157-201, May.
    10. Brian Sallans & Alexander Pfister & Alexandros Karatzoglou & Georg Dorffner, 2003. "Simulation and Validation of an Integrated Markets Model," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 6(4), pages 1-2.
    11. Edoardo Mollona & Andrea Marcozzi, 2009. "FirmNet: the scope of firms and the allocation of task in a knowledge-based economy," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 109-126, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leigh Tesfatsion, 2002. "Agent-Based Computational Economics," Computational Economics 0203001, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 15 Aug 2002.
    2. Giovanni Dosi & Luigi Marengo, 2007. "Perspective---On the Evolutionary and Behavioral Theories of Organizations: A Tentative Roadmap," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 491-502, June.
    3. Theoharakis Vasilis & Vakratsas Demetrios & Wong Veronica, 2004. "The Relationship between Market Share and Information in a High-Tech Industry," Review of Marketing Science, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-14, January.
    4. Hyoung Jun Kim & Su Jung Jee & So Young Sohn, 2021. "Cost–benefit model for multi-generational high-technology products to compare sequential innovation strategy with quality strategy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Taudes, Alfred & Trcka, Michael & Lukanowicz, Martin, 2002. "Organizational learning in production networks," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 141-163, February.
    6. Theoharakis, Vasilis & Vakratsas, Demetrios & Wong, Veronica, 2007. "Market-level information and the diffusion of competing technologies: An exploratory analysis of the LAN industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 742-757, June.
    7. Liao, Shuangqing & Seifert, Ralf W., 2015. "On the optimal frequency of multiple generation product introductions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(3), pages 805-814.
    8. Ilan Lobel & Jigar Patel & Gustavo Vulcano & Jiawei Zhang, 2016. "Optimizing Product Launches in the Presence of Strategic Consumers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(6), pages 1778-1799, June.
    9. Franses, Ph.H.B.F. & Hernández-Mireles, C., 2006. "When Should Nintendo Launch its Wii? Insights From a Bivariate Successive Generation Model," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2006-032-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    10. Fei Gao & Shiliang Cui & Morris Cohen, 2021. "Performance, Reliability, or Time‐to‐Market? Innovative Product Development and the Impact of Government Regulation," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(1), pages 253-275, January.
    11. Ted Klastorin & Weiyu Tsai, 2004. "New Product Introduction: Timing, Design, and Pricing," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 302-320, August.
    12. Sivakumar, K. & Feng, Cong, 2019. "Patterns of product improvements and customer response," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 27-43.
    13. Scott A. Shane & Karl T. Ulrich, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: Technological Innovation, Product Development, and Entrepreneurship in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 133-144, February.
    14. Nur Sunar & John R. Birge & Sinit Vitavasiri, 2019. "Optimal Dynamic Product Development and Launch for a Network of Customers," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 770-790, May.
    15. Steffen S. Bettin, 2020. "Electricity infrastructure and innovation in the next phase of energy transition—amendments to the technology innovation system framework," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 371-395, November.
    16. Christina Fang, 2012. "Organizational Learning as Credit Assignment: A Model and Two Experiments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 1717-1732, December.
    17. Druehl, Cheryl T. & Schmidt, Glen M. & Souza, Gilvan C., 2009. "The optimal pace of product updates," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(2), pages 621-633, January.
    18. Giovanni Dosi & Marco Faillo & Luigi Marengo & Daniele Moschella, 2011. "Toward Formal Representations of Search Processes and Routines in Organizational Problem Solving. An Assessment of the State of the Art," LEM Papers Series 2011/04, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    19. Terrence August & Marius Florin Niculescu, 2013. "The Influence of Software Process Maturity and Customer Error Reporting on Software Release and Pricing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(12), pages 2702-2726, December.
    20. Giovanni Dosi & Marco Faillo & Luigi Marengo, 2006. "Modeling Routines and Organizational Learning. A Discussion of the State-of-the-Art," LEM Papers Series 2006/10, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:47:y:2001:i:8:p:1029-1045. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.