IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/19094.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Determinants of Staged Project Management and Success in Innovation: Empirical Analysis based on the Japanese National Innovation Survey

Author

Listed:
  • HANEDA Shoko
  • IKEDA Yuya

Abstract

This empirical study examines the impact of a staged approach to management of innovation projects. This approach incorporates the threat of termination at each stage of the product development process. Under these conditions, the present study identifies firms that have abandoned and/or still have ongoing projects using a unique firm-level dataset constructed from the 2015 Japanese National Innovation Survey (J-NIS2015). Combining J-NIS with a firm-level accounting and credit information dataset, the study explores the determinants and the effects of staging of innovation processes. The study results show that R&D-intensive firms with broad collaboration and a lower debt ratio are more likely to adopt a staged approach in the product development process. Success in innovation is measured by the propensity of a firm to produce innovative products (or processes) and the ratio of innovative product sales to the total sales. Additionally, the study compared firms that did not implement staging of projects to those that employed staged project management and found that staging significantly improved innovation performance and increased the degree of radicalness.

Suggested Citation

  • HANEDA Shoko & IKEDA Yuya, 2019. "Determinants of Staged Project Management and Success in Innovation: Empirical Analysis based on the Japanese National Innovation Survey," Discussion papers 19094, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
  • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:19094
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/19e094.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gustavo Manso, 2011. "Motivating Innovation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(5), pages 1823-1860, October.
    2. Holmstrom, Bengt, 1989. "Agency costs and innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 305-327, December.
    3. Birgit Aschhoff & Tobias Schmidt, 2008. "Empirical Evidence on the Success of R&D Cooperation—Happy Together?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 33(1), pages 41-62, August.
    4. Florian Ederer & Gustavo Manso, 2013. "Is Pay for Performance Detrimental to Innovation?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(7), pages 1496-1513, July.
    5. Frederique Savignac, 2008. "Impact Of Financial Constraints On Innovation: What Can Be Learned From A Direct Measure?," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 553-569.
    6. Wang, Susheng & Zhou, Hailan, 2004. "Staged financing in venture capital: moral hazard and risks," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 131-155, January.
    7. Ulrich Kaiser & Hans C. Kongsted & Keld Laursen & Ann‐Kathrine Ejsing, 2018. "Experience matters: The role of academic scientist mobility for industrial innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(7), pages 1935-1958, July.
    8. Chapman, Gary & Lucena, Abel & Afcha, Sergio, 2018. "R&D subsidies & external collaborative breadth: Differential gains and the role of collaboration experience," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 623-636.
    9. Du, Jingshu & Leten, Bart & Vanhaverbeke, Wim, 2014. "Managing open innovation projects with science-based and market-based partners," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 828-840.
    10. Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Rosina Moreno & Jordi Caralt, 2005. "Ownership structure and innovation: is there a real link?," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 39(4), pages 637-662, December.
    11. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius, 2009. "Capital control, debt financing and innovative activity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 372-383, August.
    12. Dahiya, Sandeep & Ray, Korok, 2012. "Staged investments in entrepreneurial financing," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 1193-1216.
    13. Bergemann, Dirk & Hege, Ulrich, 1998. "Venture capital financing, moral hazard, and learning," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(6-8), pages 703-735, August.
    14. William R. Kerr & Ramana Nanda & Matthew Rhodes-Kropf, 2014. "Entrepreneurship as Experimentation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(3), pages 25-48, Summer.
    15. Holmström, Bengt, 1989. "Agency Costs and Innovation," Working Paper Series 214, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    16. Tsinopoulos, Christos & Yan, Ji & Sousa, Carlos M.P., 2019. "Abandoning innovation activities and performance: The moderating role of openness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1399-1411.
    17. Alan MacCormack & Roberto Verganti & Marco Iansiti, 2001. "Developing Products on "Internet Time": The Anatomy of a Flexible Development Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 133-150, January.
    18. D'Este, Pablo & Amara, Nabil & Olmos-Peñuela, Julia, 2016. "Fostering novelty while reducing failure: Balancing the twin challenges of product innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 113(PB), pages 280-292.
    19. Zsuzsanna Fluck & Kedran Garrison & Stewart C. Myers, 2005. "Venture Capital Contracting and Syndication: An Experiment in Computational Corporate Finance," NBER Working Papers 11624, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Enrico Guzzini & Donato Iacobucci, 2017. "Project failures and innovation performance in university–firm collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 865-883, August.
    21. Lhuillery, Stéphane & Pfister, Etienne, 2009. "R&D cooperation and failures in innovation projects: Empirical evidence from French CIS data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 45-57, February.
    22. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius, 2009. "Capital control, debt financing and innovative activity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 372-383, August.
    23. Gompers, Paul A, 1995. " Optimal Investment, Monitoring, and the Staging of Venture Capital," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(5), pages 1461-1489, December.
    24. Grimpe, Christoph & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2016. "Complementarities in the search for innovation—Managing markets and relationships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2036-2053.
    25. Andries, Petra & Hünermund, Paul, 2014. "Staging innovation projects: (when) does it pay off?," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-091, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    26. Victoria Story & Gareth Smith & Jim Saker, 2001. "Developing Appropriate Measures Of New Product Development: A Contingency-Based Approach," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(01), pages 21-47.
    27. Benjamin Balsmeier & Achim Buchwald, 2015. "Who promotes more innovations? Inside versus outside hired CEOs," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(5), pages 1013-1045.
    28. D’Este, Pablo & Iammarino, Simona & Savona, Maria & von Tunzelmann, Nick, 2012. "What hampers innovation? Revealed barriers versus deterring barriers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 482-488.
    29. Bronwyn H. Hall & Pietro Moncada-Paternò-Castello & Sandro Montresor & Antonio Vezzani, 2016. "Financing constraints, R&D investments and innovative performances: new empirical evidence at the firm level for Europe," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 183-196, April.
    30. Chemmanur, Thomas J. & Tian, Xuan, 2018. "Do Antitakeover Provisions Spur Corporate Innovation? A Regression Discontinuity Analysis," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(3), pages 1163-1194, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eti:dpaper:19094. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (TANIMOTO, Toko). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.