IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijimxx/v21y2017i02ns1363919617500116.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors Affecting Organisational Acceptance Of Formal Npd Processes

Author

Listed:
  • KAI HOLZWEISSIG

    (Baden-Wuerttemberg Cooperative State University Stuttgart, School of Business, Paulinenstr. 50, 70178 Stuttgart, Germany)

  • JONAS RUNDQUIST

    (Halmstad University, School of Business and Engineering, Center for Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Learning (CIEL), Box 823, 30118 Halmstad, Sweden)

Abstract

Formal new product development (NPD) processes have become an important tool in NPD management. However, our understanding of what makes formal NPD process implementation successful in terms of acceptance and performance is still limited. This paper contributes to an improved understanding of factors affecting the acceptance and use of formal NPD processes. Our results show that acceptance of formal NPD processes is determined by several factors, such as ease of use, transparency of discourse, continuous improvement, involvement of NPD actors, and the ability to bridge differences in thinking. Furthermore, that acceptance of formal NPD processes affects NPD performance positively. These results draw on data from a survey posted to employees working for nine large manufacturers of commercial vehicles worldwide. The results should encourage managers to consider and enhance the factors affecting acceptance. This could be done through using new media for publication to increase transparency and perceived ease of use of the NPD process. Further acceptance of the formal NPD process is increased if it mirrors an operative reality and if organisational structures for improvement of the process are implemented and inclusive to employees involved in NPD.

Suggested Citation

  • Kai Holzweissig & Jonas Rundquist, 2017. "Factors Affecting Organisational Acceptance Of Formal Npd Processes," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(02), pages 1-24, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijimxx:v:21:y:2017:i:02:n:s1363919617500116
    DOI: 10.1142/S1363919617500116
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1363919617500116
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S1363919617500116?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
    ---><---

    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. Jonas Rundquist & Aron Chibba, 2004. "The Use Of Processes And Methods In Npd — A Survey Of Swedish Industry," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(01), pages 37-54.
    2. Deborah Dougherty, 1992. "Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 179-202, May.
    3. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    4. Beth A. Bechky, 2003. "Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 312-330, June.
    5. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2002. "Knowing in Practice: Enacting a Collective Capability in Distributed Organizing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 249-273, 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. Anirban Ganguly & Debdeep Chatterjee & John Vail Farr, 2018. "Evaluating Barriers To Knowledge Sharing Affecting New Product Development Team Performance," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(06), pages 1-26, August.

    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. Torsten Ringberg & Markus Reihlen, 2008. "Towards a Socio‐Cognitive Approach to Knowledge Transfer," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 912-935, July.
    2. Cacciatori, Eugenia, 2008. "Memory objects in project environments: Storing, retrieving and adapting learning in project-based firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1591-1601, October.
    3. Deborah Dougherty & Danielle D. Dunne, 2012. "Digital Science and Knowledge Boundaries in Complex Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1467-1484, October.
    4. Hong, Jacky Fok Loi & Snell, Robin Stanley & Easterby-Smith, Mark, 2009. "Knowledge flow and boundary crossing at the periphery of a MNC," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 539-554, December.
    5. Caccamo, Marta & Pittino, Daniel & Tell, Fredrik, 2023. "Boundary objects, knowledge integration, and innovation management: A systematic review of the literature," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    6. Pier Vittorio Mannucci, 2017. "Drawing Snow White and Animating Buzz Lightyear: Technological Toolkit Characteristics and Creativity in Cross-Disciplinary Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 711-728, August.
    7. Davide Nicolini & Jeanne Mengis & Jacky Swan, 2012. "Understanding the Role of Objects in Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 612-629, June.
    8. Ceci, Federica & Prencipe, Andrea, 2013. "Does Distance Hinder Coordination? Identifying and Bridging Boundaries of Offshored Work," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 324-332.
    9. Beth A. Bechky, 2006. "Gaffers, Gofers, and Grips: Role-Based Coordination in Temporary Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 3-21, February.
    10. Marco Tortoriello & Ray Reagans & Bill McEvily, 2012. "Bridging the Knowledge Gap: The Influence of Strong Ties, Network Cohesion, and Network Range on the Transfer of Knowledge Between Organizational Units," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1024-1039, August.
    11. Anca Metiu, 2006. "Owning the Code: Status Closure in Distributed Groups," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 418-435, August.
    12. Maggie Chuoyan Dong & Yulin Fang & Detmar W. Straub, 2017. "The Impact of Institutional Distance on the Joint Performance of Collaborating Firms: The Role of Adaptive Interorganizational Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 309-331, June.
    13. D'Adderio, Luciana, 2008. "The performativity of routines: Theorising the influence of artefacts and distributed agencies on routines dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 769-789, June.
    14. Paola Perez-Aleman, 2011. "Collective Learning in Global Diffusion: Spreading Quality Standards in a Developing Country Cluster," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 173-189, February.
    15. Luciana D’Adderio, 2014. "The Replication Dilemma Unravelled: How Organizations Enact Multiple Goals in Routine Transfer," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1325-1350, October.
    16. Becker, Markus C. & Rullani, Francesco & Zirpoli, Francesco, 2021. "The role of digital artefacts in early stages of distributed innovation processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    17. Deborah Dougherty & Danielle D. Dunne, 2011. "Organizing Ecologies of Complex Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1214-1223, October.
    18. Samer Faraj & Yan Xiao, 2006. "Coordination in Fast-Response Organizations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(8), pages 1155-1169, August.
    19. Davide Nicolini, 2011. "Practice as the Site of Knowing: Insights from the Field of Telemedicine," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 602-620, June.
    20. Sung‐Choon Kang & Scott A. Snell, 2009. "Intellectual Capital Architectures and Ambidextrous Learning: A Framework for Human Resource Management," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 65-92, January.

    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:wsi:ijimxx:v:21:y:2017:i:02:n:s1363919617500116. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijim/ijim.shtml .

    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.