IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02312029.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Art of Piloting New Initiatives

Author

Listed:
  • Bettina Buchel

    (EM - EMLyon Business School)

  • Rhoda Davidson

Abstract

Successful multinationals get that way by finding progressively better ways to leverage good operational improvements across the entire company. But developing such superior processes is not easy. As few as one in three new process initiatives succeeds. Each failure can cost the company as much as $10 million in development costs not to mention foregoing the hundreds of millions of dollars that a successful initiative might have generated. New operational ideas fail for many reasons. However, the experience and research of these authors suggests that one of the most common is not that the idea was bad, but that the developers set up a pilot that failed to persuade managers in the units that the process was an improvement. If the pilot covers business units, customer types, or products and services that the managers who are expected to roll out the innovation don't see as analogous to their own units situation, the working template may be viewed as insufficient to be considered a reliable experiment. Many of these failures can be avoided. Specifically, the authors find that successful pilots share three qualities: credibility, replicability and feasibility. The pilot location must seem credible in that the situations and challenges seem familiar to the managers who are expected to eventually adopt it into their own units. It needs to be replicable as well, and capable of being turned into a template that can be rapidly introduced in a variety of locations. Finally, its results must meet the expectations of multiple stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Bettina Buchel & Rhoda Davidson, 2011. "The Art of Piloting New Initiatives," Post-Print hal-02312029, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02312029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:hal:journl:hal-02312029. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.