IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/proeco/v134y2011i1p212-223.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A model for R&D performance measurement

Author

Listed:
  • Lazzarotti, Valentina
  • Manzini, Raffaella
  • Mari, Luca

Abstract

R&D activities are increasingly costly and risky and, as a consequence, measuring their performance and contribution to value becomes critical. This paper illustrates a formal model for measuring R&D performance, based upon a balanced and synthetic evaluation of quantitative indicators from five different perspectives of performance: financial, customer, innovation and learning, internal business, alliances, and networks. The model is built in coherence with the suggestions coming from the theory of measurement in soft systems, which gives relevant guidelines for ensuring validity, objectivity and inter-subjectivity of the model. Then, an application in a real R&D setting is described, which helps to understand the model and to enlighten its main advantages and limits.

Suggested Citation

  • Lazzarotti, Valentina & Manzini, Raffaella & Mari, Luca, 2011. "A model for R&D performance measurement," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 212-223, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:134:y:2011:i:1:p:212-223
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925527311002842
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barry L. Bayus, 1998. "An Analysis of Product Lifetimes in a Technologically Dynamic Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(6), pages 763-775, June.
    2. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.
    3. John R. Hauser, 1998. "Research, Development, and Engineering Metrics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(12-Part-1), pages 1670-1689, December.
    4. Michalisin, Michael D., 2001. "Validity of annual report assertions about innovativeness: an empirical investigation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 151-161, September.
    5. Berg, Pekka & Leinonen, Mikko & Leivo, Virpi & Pihlajamaa, Jussi, 2002. "Assessment of quality and maturity level of R&D," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 29-35, July.
    6. Sandstrom, Jaana & Toivanen, Jouko, 2002. "The problem of managing product development engineers: Can the balanced scorecard be an answer?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 79-90, July.
    7. Merschmann, Ulf & Thonemann, Ulrich W., 2011. "Supply chain flexibility, uncertainty and firm performance: An empirical analysis of German manufacturing firms," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 43-53, March.
    8. Howells, John, 1995. "A socio-cognitive approach to innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 883-894, November.
    9. Pawar, Kulwant S. & Driva, Helen, 1999. "Performance measurement for product design and development in a manufacturing environment," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 61-68, April.
    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. Weiwei Wu & Yexin Liu & Tachia Chin, 2018. "The effect of technology management capability on new product development in China’s service-oriented manufacturing firms: a social capital perspective," Asia Pacific Business Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 212-232, March.
    2. Lee, Jun Gon & Park, Min Jae, 2020. "Evaluation of technological competence and operations efficiency in the defense industry: The strategic planning of South Korea," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    3. Braune, Eric & Sahut, Jean-Michel & Teulon, Fréderic, 2020. "Intangible capital, governance and financial performance," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    4. Lo Nigro, Giovanna & Morreale, Azzurra & Enea, Gianluca, 2014. "Open innovation: A real option to restore value to the biopharmaceutical R&D," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 183-193.
    5. Svetlana Klessova & Sebastian Engell & Catherine Thomas, 2022. "Assessment of the advancement of market-upstream innovations and of the performance of research and innovation projects," Post-Print hal-03636260, HAL.
    6. Salimi, Negin & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Evaluating firms’ R&D performance using best worst method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 147-155.
    7. Klessova, Svetlana & Engell, Sebastian & Thomas, Catherine, 2022. "Assessment of the advancement of market-upstream innovations and of the performance of research and innovation projects," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    8. Piaopeng Song & Yuxiao Gu & Bin Su & Arifa Tanveer & Qiao Peng & Weijun Gao & Shaomin Wu & Shihong Zeng, 2023. "The Impact of Green Technology Research and Development (R&D) Investment on Performance: A Case Study of Listed Energy Companies in Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-24, August.
    9. Wellington L. L. Rocha & Maria Fatima L. Almeida & Rodrigo F. Calili, 2022. "Measuring and Evaluating Organizational Innovation Capacity and Performance from Systemic and Sustainability-Oriented Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-37, December.
    10. Kseniia Boiko, 2022. "R&D activity and firm performance: mapping the field," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 1051-1087, December.
    11. João Nuno Morais Lopes & Luís Farinha, 2018. "Measuring the Performance of Innovation and Entrepreneurship Networks," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 9(2), pages 402-423, June.
    12. Behrooz Noori, 2014. "Prioritizing strategic business units in the face of innovation performance: Combining fuzzy AHP and BSC," Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 0802059, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    13. VAN CAMP, Jelle & BRAET, Johan, 2013. "Proposing a taxonomy for performance measurement systems' failures," Working Papers 2013004, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    14. Emad Harash & Suhail Nassir Al-Timimi & Fatima Jasem Alsaad & Abdulkhaliq Y. Zaier Al-Badran & Essia Ries Ahmed, 2014. "Contingency Factors and Performance of Research and Development (R&D): The Moderating Effects of Government Policy," Journal of Asian Scientific Research, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 4(2), pages 47-58, February.

    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. Rosanna Spano & Fabrizia Sarto & Adele Caldarelli & Riccardo Vigano, 2016. "Innovation & Performance Measurement: An Adapted Balanced Scorecard," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(6), pages 194-194, May.
    2. Alexander Tkotz & Jan Christoph Munck & Andreas Erich Wald, 2018. "Innovation Management Control: Bibliometric Analysis Of Its Emergence And Evolution As A Research Field," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(03), pages 1-34, April.
    3. Kibaek Lee & Jaeheung Yoo & Munkee Choi & Hangjung Zo & Andrew P Ciganek, 2016. "Does External Knowledge Sourcing Enhance Market Performance? Evidence from the Korean Manufacturing Industry," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, December.
    4. Kusa, Rafał & Suder, Marcin & Duda, Joanna, 2023. "Impact of greening on performance in the hospitality industry: Moderating effect of flexibility and inter-organizational cooperation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    5. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2017. "Investigating the dynamics of interdisciplinary evolution in technology developments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 12-23.
    6. Jianzhuang Zheng & Muhammad Usman Khurram & Lifeng Chen, 2022. "Can Green Innovation Affect ESG Ratings and Financial Performance? Evidence from Chinese GEM Listed Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-32, July.
    7. Carlino, Gerald & Kerr, William R., 2015. "Agglomeration and Innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 349-404, Elsevier.
    8. Susanne Meyer & Javier Revilla Diez, 2015. "One country, two systems: How regional institutions shape governance modes in the greater Pearl River Delta, China," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(4), pages 891-900, November.
    9. Pino G. Audia & Jack A. Goncalo, 2007. "Past Success and Creativity over Time: A Study of Inventors in the Hard Disk Drive Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 1-15, January.
    10. Stam, Wouter, 2009. "When does community participation enhance the performance of open source software companies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1288-1299, October.
    11. Hayat Khan & Liu Weili & Itbar Khan, 2022. "Environmental innovation, trade openness and quality institutions: an integrated investigation about environmental sustainability," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 3832-3862, March.
    12. Ren, Shenggang & Hu, Yucai & Zheng, Jingjing & Wang, Yangjie, 2020. "Emissions trading and firm innovation: Evidence from a natural experiment in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    13. Jianghua Zhou & Rui Wu & Jizhen Li, 2019. "More ties the merrier? Different social ties and firm innovation performance," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 445-471, June.
    14. Tammy L. Madsen & Michael J. Leiblein, 2015. "What Factors Affect the Persistence of an Innovation Advantage?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(8), pages 1097-1127, December.
    15. Hao, Miao & Lyv, Kangjuan & Li, Shiyuan & Hu, Wuyang, 2021. "How does environmental regulation affect firm innovation? Evidence based on corporate life cycle," MPRA Paper 110971, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. JinHyo Joseph Yun & EuiSeob Jeong & Xiaofei Zhao & Sung Deuk Hahm & KyungHun Kim, 2019. "Collective Intelligence: An Emerging World in Open Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-15, August.
    17. Angélica Pigola & Priscila Rezende Costa, 2022. "In search of understanding about knowledge and learning on innovation performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(7), pages 3995-4022, July.
    18. Edquist , Charles & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia , Jon Mikel, 2015. "The Innovation Union Scoreboard is flawed: The Case of Sweden – not the innovation leader of the EU – updated version," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/27, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    19. Salimi, Negin & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Evaluating firms’ R&D performance using best worst method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 147-155.
    20. Nejla YACOUB, 2012. "Brevetabilité des médicament, innovation et l’avenir de l’industrie pharmaceutique en Tunisie DRUGS PATENTABILITY INNOVATION AND THE FUTURE OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY IN TUNISIA THEORETICAL STUDY ," Working Papers 248, Laboratoire de Recherche sur l'Industrie et l'Innovation. ULCO / Research Unit on Industry and Innovation.

    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:eee:proeco:v:134:y:2011:i:1:p:212-223. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpe .

    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.