Uneven workloads cause backlogs in product development.
Case Study. Example provided by a large manufacturer of electronic components.
(View full citation)

One company established an NPD process with carefully staged decision-making, rigorous process reviews, and strict timelines. Yet, skillful project champions would maneuver to win continued support at each level of project review. The company then reassigned project managers so that the more empirically included truth seekers were in charge of early stage reviews, and more commercially included success seekers managed the later stages. That simple change improved NPD productivity.
Private sector experience in pharmaceutical industry.
(View full citation)

Use an aggregate development plan, which ranks each proposed project based on strategic importance and a rough estimate of the required resources to help avoid overburdening workloads.
Case Study.
(View full citation)

Knowledge Translation — A wide range of models contribute insights for increasing awareness, interest and use of knowledge generated through research activity, among targeted stakeholder groups. Categories of such models include: 1) Organizational Innovation; 2) Social Science Research Utilization; 3) Nursing Research Utilization; 4) Health Promotion.
Literature review, synthesis and author expertise.
(View full citation)

By setting up clear-cut screens or hurdles, new product cross-functional teams as well as management will know the ground rules during any step of the process.
Author experience
(View full citation)

Corporate management commitment influences the outcomes of NPD processes directly by resource allocation and sponsorship, or indirectly by structuring the organizational context in which the project occurs. High level commitment should be sought at each Decision gate.
Three case studies supported by 18 interviews.
(View full citation)

Effective control is required for new product success. To achieve this, new product development projects should be regularly monitored and should enjoy grace periods.
Survey with significant findings.
(View full citation)

Experiential. During the first three or four stages of the NPD process, management is relying primarily on one person to make a recommendation about whether to proceed.
(View full citation)

Knowledge Creation Cycle is depicted as having three generations descending through a funnel, to represent how knowledge is sifted and filtered so that only the most useful knowledge is left for application. First generation knowledge is that created through research activity or through experiential activity. Second generation knowledge results from a process for the identification, appraisal and synthesis of studies or information related to a specific question. Third generation knowledge is embodied in summaries, practice guidelines and decision aids, where the knowledge is available in formats that meet the needs of targeted stakeholder groups.
Summary of the Knowledge to Action Model and its application to knowledge translation.
(View full citation)

NPD begins when there is a commercial target and concept in mind that is strictly development and not research. Activity that precedes NPD is called Knowledge Build where project managers need flexibility to conduct research. For technologies and products completely new to the company, the Knowledge Build team may present the project's potential in a qualitative fashion. The technical leadership will make a Gate decision about sponsoring that research project. If no, the budgeted resources go back to other Knowledge Build activities. If yes, then the team develops the technology through the next stage. If the technology is far enough along, the team transfer the project to the business side and begins the normal Stage/Gate NPD activities.
Industry experience.
(View full citation)

NPD that involves new to the world technologies or product components, needs to go through a stage of fundamental research before initiating the product development process. The fundamental research route involves a project proposal followed by the research activity. The research activity feeds its results into the scoping and business case stages.
Literature review, author's industry experience with case study.
(View full citation)

Organizations should have coherent administrative procedures, including information-gathering systems reviewing new opportunities; flexible capital budgets that extend beyond two years; up-to-date capital budgeting manuals; full time capital budgeting staff; regular reviews of hurdle rates; and a capital appropriation committee to vet projects.
Survey with significant findings
(View full citation)

Senior management and the product development team review the work periodically at "review" points, when key managerial decisions are made. Such decisions include whether to finalize the specifications now or in a future review, and even whether to redirect or cancel the project because of the product's low profit potential.
Case Study. Researcher identified themes of the product development processes of three different firms.
(View full citation)

Sound evaluation methods are needed for new product success, including strategic screenings of new product proposals; utilization of market research; and primary and secondary valuation using a variety of methods such as net present value or Payback.
Survey with significant findings.
(View full citation)

Systems for addressing the problem have been investigated widely in both commercial and research literature. The findings cover requirements for the general population as well as for the target user group. The presence of this body of knowledge provided sufficient basis for moving directly to development activity.
Device design, development and testing project described in detail.
(View full citation)

To ensure compliance with the FDA's Quality System Regulation, medical device manufacturers should use a structured product development process to instill discipline in the product life cycle. A hierarchical approach arranges activity from Stages (phases) to Steps to Activities and finally to Tasks. Each Stage has a unique theme and set of deliverables. For example: Stage 0 - Concept Research. This stage identifies new market opportunities, determines customer needs and conducts high-level evaluations of the opportunity and its strategic fit. This activity concludes with the management approval of an integrated business plan for the project, which is then updated at the conclusion of each subsequent stage.
Summary of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's regulations for the research and development process underlying Medical Device manufacturing.
(View full citation)

Employ analogies of previous products to determine the potential success of new products. Must have similar market conditions to ensure accuracy. Also helpful in forecasting resource needs for development and production activities.
Literature Review
(View full citation)

Obtain expert opinions to inform early go/ no-go decisions. Experts can provide insight regarding changing market conditions and potential consumer acceptance of products. However, managers must be aware of the potential for biases.
Literature Review
(View full citation)

Results from Process Quality Assessment Instrument and the Output Quality Assessment Instrument can provide essential information to support risk-based go/no-go decisions during NPD product life cycles.
Single subject case study
(View full citation)

Strategic fit criteria are primarily employed for go/ no-go decisions at the concept definition stage. Criteria may include product quality, sales volume, project total cost, alignment with the firm's strategy, and window of opportunity.
Survey of 77 manufacturing companies
(View full citation)

Consider customer acceptance, product performance, market potential and technical feasibility at the concept screening (second) gate.
Survey of 166 managers from Dutch and UK companies. These were the top 4 criteria used at this gate, Percents of use ranged from 70 to 47.
(View full citation)

Critical factors at this stage include: Senior management endorsement; superior consumer fit; lucrative market potential; clearly defined promotional plan and brand strategy; alignment with product-led strategy; alignment with technological advantage; likely trade adoption and resistance to brand switching.
Survey of 314 new product projects.
(View full citation)

Designing appropriate screening and evaluation “gates” to help prioritize projects and select winners for advancement. Preliminary up-front homework may include such activities as broad screening based on key market and technical capabilities and a broad financial assessment. At a second stage this may include refining product concepts and specifications ensuring stronger customer input and assessment, improved technical evaluation, and financial analysis.
Survey. Manager implications drawn from results of study.
(View full citation)

Equivocality — the presence of multiple and conflicting interpretations about a phenomenon, with higher levels of equivocality representing confusion and a poor understanding of the referenced context. In situations of high equivocality seek to integrate information about both supplier products and about customer requirements. In situations of low equivocality, seek to integrate information about supplier processes.
Survey.
(View full citation)

Results show that placing importance on customer acceptance criteria correlates positively with project success at every stage of the process.
Survey. Customer acceptance dimension is positively associated with new product success at each and every of the review points (γGate1 = 0.26, p < 0.05; γGate2 = 0.30, p < 0.05; γGate3 = 0.24,p < 0.05; γGate4 = 0.26,p < 0.05).
(View full citation)

Knowledge Producers can facilitate the uptake of their research by addressing five questions: 1) What should be disseminated? 2) To whom should it be disseminated? 3) By whom should it be disseminated? 4) How should it be disseminated? 5) With what effect should it be disseminated?
Source: Lavis, J et at (2003). In: Graham, I.D., Logan, J., Harrison, M.B., Straus, S.E., Tetroe J., Caswell, W. et. al. (2006)

Organizations can deal with the tensions inherent in decision-making by focusing on meaning - the GOAL. The purpose or meaning of what the organization intends to accomplish can crate a vision that sets into motion the process through which multiple organizational interests become aligned.
Source: McGee, JV & Prusak, L (1993). In: Ho, K., Bloch, R.; Gondocz, T., Laprise, R., Perrier, L., Ryan, D., & et al. (2004)

Decision-making process regarding the funding of R&D proposals involves different people performing four different roles within the decision process: 1) Approvers; 2) Takers; 3) Shapers; 5) Influencers.
Source: Woodhead (2000). In: Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees (2007)

Diffusion of Innovations — Four main elements influence the spread of a new idea: 1) The idea; 2) Communication channels; 3) Time; 4) A Social System. When presented with new information/ideas, individuals progress through five stages when considering use: 1) Awareness; 2) Persuasion; 3) Decision; 4) Implementation; 5) Adoption. Once adopted by some members of a social system, the idea is shared over time with other members via communication channels.
Source: Rogers, E (12003). In: Estabrooks, C.; Thompson, D.S., Lovely, J.J.E., & Hofmeyer, A. (2006)

Customer acceptance criteria are important at all gates, particularly after launch.
Source: Hart, et al., 2003. In: Carbonell-Foulquie, P., Munuera-Aleman, J. L., & Rodriguez-Escudero, A. I. (2004)

Use market criteria during the concept screening gate 2, product related criteria during product testing gates 5 & 6, financial criteria during gates 8 & 9 (post production assessment and terminate production).
Source: Ronkainen (1992). In: Hart, S., Jan Hultink, E., Tzokas, N., & Commandeur, H. R. (2003)

Utilize data envelopment analysis (DEA) to categorize R&D projects into subgroups (accept, consider further, and reject) for assisting managers in identifying potential projects for selection and execution.
Source: Linton et al. (2002). In: Swink, M., Talluri, S., & Pandejpong, T. (2006)