IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v22y2011i4p1000-1025.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organizing for Product Development Across Technological Environments: Performance Trade-offs and Priorities

Author

Listed:
  • Laura B. Cardinal

    (C. T. Bauer College of Business, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204)

  • Scott F. Turner

    (Moore School of Business, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina 29208)

  • Michael J. Fern

    (Fern Strategy Development, Inc., Santa Clara, California 95056)

  • Richard M. Burton

    (Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708)

Abstract

This study examines how designing for product development influences project performance in distinct technological environments. Drawing on a series of computational experiments and paired-case comparisons of six product development projects, we specifically examine how new product development performance is affected by project design and the technological environment. By triangulating across the computational experiments and case studies, we find the existence of performance trade-offs in product development as well as the importance of performance priorities in influencing project design. These findings permit us to elaborate on existing contingency-based perspectives of new product development and put forward a novel mediating model. In this mediating model of product development, we suggest that the technological environment shapes performance priorities, which in turn influence project design and ultimately the performance outcomes of new product development efforts. This model further highlights that project designs can evolve as a function of performance outcomes, although this process can be inhibited by the presence of design evolution constraints. This research contributes significantly to our understanding of designing projects for new product development.

Suggested Citation

  • Laura B. Cardinal & Scott F. Turner & Michael J. Fern & Richard M. Burton, 2011. "Organizing for Product Development Across Technological Environments: Performance Trade-offs and Priorities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 1000-1025, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:22:y:2011:i:4:p:1000-1025
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0577
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0577
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.1100.0577?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. George P. Huber & C. Chet Miller & William H. Glick, 1990. "Developing More Encompassing Theories About Organizations: The Centralization-Effectiveness Relationship as an Example," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(1), pages 11-40, February.
    2. Zhiang (John) Lin & Xia Zhao & Kiran M. Ismail & Kathleen M. Carley, 2006. "Organizational Design and Restructuring in Response to Crises: Lessons from Computational Modeling and Real-World Cases," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(5), pages 598-618, October.
    3. Utterback, James M. & Suarez, Fernando F., 1993. "Innovation, competition, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, February.
    4. Andrew H. Van de Ven, 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 590-607, May.
    5. Fernando F. Suárez & James M. Utterback, 1995. "Dominant designs and the survival of firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(6), pages 415-430.
    6. Donald Gerwin & Nicholas J. Barrowman, 2002. "An Evaluation of Research on Integrated Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(7), pages 938-953, July.
    7. Pavitt, Keith, 1998. "Technologies, Products and Organization in the Innovating Firm: What Adam Smith Tells Us and Joseph Schumpeter Doesn't," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 7(3), pages 433-452, September.
    8. Mohan V. Tatikonda & Mitzi M. Montoya-Weiss, 2001. "Integrating Operations and Marketing Perspectives of Product Innovation: The Influence of Organizational Process Factors and Capabilities on Development Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 151-172, January.
    9. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    10. Deborah Dougherty, 1992. "Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 179-202, May.
    11. Laura B. Cardinal & Sim B. Sitkin & Chris P. Long, 2004. "Balancing and Rebalancing in the Creation and Evolution of Organizational Control," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 411-431, August.
    12. John R. Kimberly & Hamid Bouchikhi, 1995. "The Dynamics of Organizational Development and Change: How the Past Shapes the Present and Constrains the Future," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 9-18, February.
    13. William H. Glick & George P. Huber & C. Chet Miller & D. Harold Doty & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe, 1990. "Studying Changes in Organizational Design and Effectiveness: Retrospective Event Histories and Periodic Assessments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 293-312, August.
    14. Richard L. Daft & Robert H. Lengel, 1986. "Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 554-571, May.
    15. Kim B. Clark & W. Bruce Chew & Takahiro Fujimoto, 1987. "Product Development in the World Auto Industry," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 729-782.
    16. Rajshree Agarwal & Constance E. Helfat, 2009. "Strategic Renewal of Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 281-293, April.
    17. V. Krishnan & Karl T. Ulrich, 2001. "Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, January.
    18. Gary P. Pisano, 1994. "Knowledge, Integration, and the Locus of Learning: An Empirical Analysis of Process Development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 85-100, December.
    19. Constantine Andriopoulos & Marianne W. Lewis, 2009. "Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 696-717, August.
    20. Christian Terwiesch & Christoph H. Loch, 1999. "Measuring the Effectiveness of Overlapping Development Activities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(4), pages 455-465, April.
    21. K. Pavitt & M. Robson & J. Townsend, 1989. "Technological Accumulation, Diversification and Organisation in UK Companies, 1945--1983," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 81-99, January.
    22. Van de Ven, Andrew R., 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Agricultural Research Policy Seminar 139708, University of Minnesota Extension.
    23. Dosi, Giovanni, 1988. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 1120-1171, September.
    24. von Hippel, Eric, 1990. "Task partitioning: An innovation process variable," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 407-418, October.
    25. Nadia Bhuiyan & Donald Gerwin & Vince Thomson, 2004. "Simulation of the New Product Development Process for Performance Improvement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(12), pages 1690-1703, December.
    26. Laura B. Cardinal, 2001. "Technological Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Industry: The Use of Organizational Control in Managing Research and Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 19-36, February.
    27. Richard M. Burton, 2003. "Computational Laboratories for Organization Science: Questions, Validity and Docking," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 91-108, July.
    28. Mark Lehrer, 2005. "Science-driven vs. market-pioneering high tech: comparative German technology sectors in the late nineteenth and late twentieth centuries," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 14(2), pages 251-278, April.
    29. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Marsili, Orietta, 2006. "The fruit flies of innovations: A taxonomy of innovative small firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 213-229, March.
    30. Daniele Archibugi, 2001. "Pavitt'S Taxonomy Sixteen Years On: A Review Article," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(5), pages 415-425.
    31. Carlo Salvato, 2009. "Capabilities Unveiled: The Role of Ordinary Activities in the Evolution of Product Development Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 384-409, April.
    32. Aaron J. Shenhar, 2001. "One Size Does Not Fit All Projects: Exploring Classical Contingency Domains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(3), pages 394-414, March.
    33. J. Myles Shaver, 1998. "Accounting for Endogeneity When Assessing Strategy Performance: Does Entry Mode Choice Affect FDI Survival?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(4), pages 571-585, April.
    34. Tim Carroll & Richard M. Burton, 2000. "Organizations and Complexity: Searching for the Edge of Chaos," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 6(4), pages 319-337, December.
    35. Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw & Gilbert Probst & Michael L. Tushman, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 685-695, August.
    36. Brusoni, Stefano & Prencipe, Andrea, 2001. "Unpacking the Black Box of Modularity: Technologies, Products and Organizations," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 10(1), pages 179-205, March.
    37. Raymond E. Levitt & Jan Thomsen & Tore R. Christiansen & John C. Kunz & Yan Jin & Clifford Nass, 1999. "Simulating Project Work Processes and Organizations: Toward a Micro-Contingency Theory of Organizational Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(11), pages 1479-1495, November.
    38. Keith Pavitt, 2002. "Innovating routines in the business firm: what corporate tasks should they be accomplishing?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(1), pages 117-133, February.
    39. Yuqing Ren & Kathleen M. Carley & Linda Argote, 2006. "The Contingent Effects of Transactive Memory: When Is It More Beneficial to Know What Others Know?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(5), pages 671-682, May.
    40. Nightingale, Paul, 2000. "Economies of Scale in Experimentation: Knowledge and Technology in Pharmaceutical R&D," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 9(2), pages 315-359, June.
    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. Ronald Klingebiel & Peter Esser, 2020. "Stage-Gate Escalation," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 311-329, December.
    2. Busch, Christian & Barkema, Harry, 2022. "Align or perish: social enterprise network orchestration in Sub-Saharan Africa," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115350, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Hicham Sebti & Narjes Sassi & Benoît Gerard, 2017. "Performance des équipes temporaires: Analyse des interactions et de l'usage de la matérialité dans la construction de rôles," Post-Print hal-01907478, HAL.
    4. Richard M. Burton & Børge Obel, 2011. "Computational Modeling for What-Is, What-Might-Be, and What-Should-Be Studies---And Triangulation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1195-1202, October.
    5. Sheen S. Levine & Michael J. Prietula, 2012. "How Knowledge Transfer Impacts Performance: A Multilevel Model of Benefits and Liabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 1748-1766, December.
    6. Chris P. Long & Sim B. Sitkin & Laura B. Cardinal & Richard M. Burton, 2015. "How controls influence organizational information processing: insights from a computational modeling investigation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 406-436, December.
    7. Xue Cheng & Qingpu Zhang, 2018. "How to Develop the Interdisciplinary Innovation Teams Sustainably?—A Simulation Model from a Perspective of Knowledge Fission and Fusion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-21, September.
    8. Barbara Brenner & Björn Ambos, 2013. "A Question of Legitimacy? A Dynamic Perspective on Multinational Firm Control," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 773-795, June.
    9. Busch, Christian & Barkema, Harry, 2022. "Align or perish: Social enterprise network orchestration in Sub-Saharan Africa," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 37(2).
    10. Samina Karim & Aseem Kaul, 2015. "Structural Recombination and Innovation: Unlocking Intraorganizational Knowledge Synergy Through Structural Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 439-455, April.
    11. John Joseph & Ronald Klingebiel & Alex James Wilson, 2016. "Organizational Structure and Performance Feedback: Centralization, Aspirations, and Termination Decisions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 1065-1083, October.

    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. Annika Lorenz & Michael Raven & Knut Blind, 2019. "The role of standardization at the interface of product and process development in biotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1097-1133, August.
    2. Karl Aschenbrücker & Tobias Kretschmer, 2022. "Performance-based incentives and innovative activity in small firms: evidence from German manufacturing," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(2), pages 47-64, June.
    3. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Chen, Min-Nan, 2016. "Service regime and innovation clusters: An empirical study from service firms in Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1845-1857.
    4. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    5. Chris P. Long & Sim B. Sitkin & Laura B. Cardinal & Richard M. Burton, 2015. "How controls influence organizational information processing: insights from a computational modeling investigation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 406-436, December.
    6. Onexy Quintana-Martinez & Antonio-Rafael Ramos-Rodriguez, 2016. "Changes in the Axes of Convergence of Innovation Management Research," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(5), pages 1-96, April.
    7. Sminia, Harry & Ates, Aylin & Paton, Steve & Smith, Marisa, 2019. "High value manufacturing: Capability, appropriation, and governance," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 516-528.
    8. Sylvain Lenfle, 2008. "Exploration and Project Management," Post-Print hal-00404168, HAL.
    9. Gopesh Anand & John Gray & Enno Siemsen, 2012. "Decay, Shock, and Renewal: Operational Routines and Process Entropy in the Pharmaceutical Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 1700-1716, December.
    10. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    11. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Marsili, Orietta, 2006. "The fruit flies of innovations: A taxonomy of innovative small firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 213-229, March.
    12. Bailetti, Antonio J. & Callahan, John R., 1995. "Managing consistency between product development and public standards evolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 913-931, November.
    13. Turner, Karynne L. & Monti, Alberto & Annosi, Maria Carmela, 2021. "Disentangling the effects of organizational controls on innovation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 57-69.
    14. Sylvain Lenfle & Jonas Söderlund, 2019. "Large-Scale Innovative Projects as Temporary Trading Zones: Toward an Interlanguage Theory," Post-Print hal-02390158, HAL.
    15. Burgers, J. Henri & Jansen, Justin J.P. & Van den Bosch, Frans A.J. & Volberda, Henk W., 2009. "Structural differentiation and corporate venturing: The moderating role of formal and informal integration mechanisms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 206-220, May.
    16. Markus Kreutzer & Laura B. Cardinal & Jorge Walter & Christoph Lechner, 2016. "Formal and Informal Control as Complement or Substitute? The Role of the Task Environment," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 235-255, December.
    17. Justin J. P. Jansen & Frans A. J. Van Den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2006. "Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1661-1674, November.
    18. Rauniar, Rupak & Rawski, Greg, 2012. "Organizational structuring and project team structuring in integrated product development project," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(2), pages 939-952.
    19. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    20. Havas, Attila, 2010. "Diversity in firms’ innovation strategies and activities: Main findings of interviews and implications in the context of the Hungarian national," MPRA Paper 55852, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:ororsc:v:22:y:2011:i:4:p:1000-1025. 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.