The Marketplace Variables in Successful and Unsuccessful NPD Projects in Technology Intensive Companies
AbstractWe present an exploratory investigation of how managers conceptualize and perceive ‘marketplace’ variables in successful and unsuccessful New Product Development (NPD) projects, and explore the role that marketplace variables play in differentiating between successful and unsuccessful NPD outcomes. Limitations and future research directions are also discussed.
Our findings indicate that managers perceive the marketplace in multiple ways during the NPD process and also that differences exist in metric equivalence across successful and unsuccessful NPD projects. Also, although half of the marketplace variables are positively related to NPD success, managers in Finnish technology companies appear to attach higher relative importance to market attractiveness rather than market competitiveness variables. Marketplace variables appear to be less important than in the Korean and Chinese samples, and much more important than in the Canadian sample in the Mishra et all study (1996), and similarly much more important than in the Cooper study (1979b).
AH OLA, E. (2006), Secrets of Finnish competitiveness, Technology Innovation Center of Finland (Tekes). http://www.tekes.fi/eng/news/uutis tiedot.asp?id=5250 [Accessed 30 June 2008].
ANDERSON, J.C., Gerbing, D.W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 41 1-423.
BLUNDELL, R., Griffith, R., Van Reenen, J. (1999). Market share, market value and innovation in a panel of British manufacturing firms. Review of Economic Studies, 66(3), 529-554.
BYRNE B. M., Watkins, D. (2003). The issue of measurement invariance revisited. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34(2), 155-175.
CAPON, N., Farley, J. U., Hoenig, S. (1990). Determinants of financial performance: A meta-analysis. Management Science, 36(10), 1143-1159.
CHEUNG, M. W.-L, Chan, W. (2002). Reducing uniform response bias with ipsative measurement in multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(1), 55-77.
CHURCHILL, G.A. Jr. and lacobucci, D. (2005). Marketing research: Methodological foundations. 9th ed. Thomson, Ohio.
COOPER, R. G. (1979a). Identifying new product success and failure. Journal of Marketing 8(2), 124-1 35.
COOPER, R. G. (1979b). The dimensions of industrial product success and failure. Journal of Marketing, 43(3), 93-103.
COOPER, R. G. (1979c). Identifying new product success: The project NewProd. Industrial Marketing Management, 8(2), 124-135.
COOPER, R. G. (1985). New product strategies: What distinguishes the top performer. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2(3), 151 -164.
COOPER, R. G., Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1987). New products: What separates the winners from losers. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 4(3), 169-184.
COOPER, R. G., Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1995). Benchmarking the firms' critical success factors in new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 12(5), 374-391.
COSTELLO, A. B. Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 10(7), 1-9.
DIEKHOFF, G. (1992). Statistics for the social and behavioral sciences: Univariate, bivariate, multivariate. Wm C. Brown Publishers, Dubuque, IA.
ERNST, H. (2002). Success factors of new product development: A Review of the Empirical Literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(1), 1-40.
GARDNER, D.M., Johnson, F., Lee, M., Wilkinson, I. (2000). A contingency approach to marketing high technology products. European Journal of Marketing, 34(9/10), 1053-1077.
HAIR, J. F., Black, B.C., Babin, B. J., Anderson. R. E., Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. 6th edition. Pearson International Edition.
HAVERILA, M. (2009). The factors affecting new product success in technology companies: Case Finland. International Journal of Product Management, 12(2), 176-198.
HECK, R.H. (1988). Factor analysis: Exploratory and confirmatory approaches. In: Marcoulides, G.A. (Ed.), Modern methods for business research, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, 117-215.
HENARD, D. H., Szymanski, D. M. (2001). Why some new products are more successful than others. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(3), 362-375.
HERSTATT, C, LettI, C. (2004). Management of "technology push" development projects. International Journal of Technology Management, 27(2-3), 155- 175
HOFFMAN, K., Parejoa, M., John Bessant, J., Perrena, L. (1998). Small firms, R&D, technology and innovation in the UK: A literature review. Technovation, 18(1), 39-55.
HURLEY, A. J., Scandura, T. A., Schriesheim, C.A., Brannick, M.T., Sears, A., Vandenberg, R.J., Williams, L.J. (1997). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Guidelines, issues, and alternatives. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(6), 667-683.
JIANG, Z., Zeyuan. L, Wei, Z. (2006). Dynamic model of knowledge growth of the OECD Countries and knowledge capacities measuring, Dynamic model of knowledge growth of the OECD Countries and knowledge capacities measuring. In: Proceedings International Workshop on Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics, Seventh COLLNET Meeting, Nancy (France).
KIM, J., Mueller, C.W. (1978). Factor analysis: Statistical methods and practical issues. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
MISHRA, S., Kim, D., Hoon Lee, D. (1996). Factors affecting new products success: Cross-country comparisons. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 13(6), 530-550.
MOHNEN, P. (2005). The importance of R&D: Is the Barcelona 3% a reasonable target? http://www.unimaas.nl/bestand.asp?id=3826 [Accessed 30 June 2008].
MOHR, J. M. (1996). The management and control of information in high-technology firms. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 7(2), 245-268.
MOHR, J. M., Sengupta, S., Slater, S. F. (2004). Marketing of high-technology products and innovations. Pearson Education.
MONTOYA-WEISS, M., Calantone, R. (1994). Determinants of new product performance: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 11(5), 397-417.
MYERS, S., Marquis, D. G. (1969). Successful industrial innovations. National Science Foundation, NSF 69-17.
NUNNALLY, J.C. (1972). Educational measurement and evaluation. 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
OECD Factbook 2005. High-technology exports. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/42/28/34416149.pdf [Accessed 20 March 2010].
ROBERTS, R.W., Burke, J.E. (1974). Six new products -What made them successful. Research Management, 16(3), 21-24.
ROGERS, E.M. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations. 3rd ed.The Free Press, New York.
SONG, X. M., Parry, M. E. (1997a). A cross-national comparative study of new product development processes: Japan and the United States", Journal of Marketing, 61(2), 1-18.
SONG, X. M., Parry, M. E. (1997b). The determinants of Japanese new product success. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(1), 64-76.
STREINER, D. L, Norman, G. R. (1989). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use. Oxford University Press, New York.
TABACHNICK, B.G., Fidell, L.S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. 4th ed. Allyn and Bacon, Needham Heights, MA.
TROTT, P. (2001). The role of market research in the development of discontinuous new products. European Journal of Innovation Management, 4(3), 117-126.
URBAN, G. L, Hauser, J. R. (1993). Design and marketing of new products. 2nd ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
WANG, Z. (2007). Technological innovation and market turbulence: The dot-com experience. Review of Economic Dynamics, 10(1), 78-105.
YOON, E., Lilien, G. L (1985). New industrial product performance: The effects of market characteristics and strategy. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2(3), 134-144.
ZIRGER, B. J., Maidique, M. A. (1990). A model of new product development: An empirical test. Management Science, 36(7), 867-883.
Accepted October 29, 2010
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).