Enhancing New Product Development (NPD) Portfolio Performance by Shaping the Development Funnel
AbstractNew product development (NPD) projects are typically managed through a series of screens, or gates, where ideas compete for resources. Ideas are carved into projects, and these projects are reviewed, and approved or terminated through the screening process so that only the best performing projects continue to subsequent stages of design, development and testing, and are released into the market place (Krishnan and Ulrich 2001; Terwiesch and Ulrich 2009). Most large innovative organizations deal with more than one NPD project at a time and typically engage in product pipeline management (PPM), where a set of active projects are evaluated together while they traverse through a sequence of such screens. Key decisions in a R&D pipeline are: screen thresholds, complexity of projects, resource allocation and capacity adjustment biases. We explore the impact of structural and behavioral aspects of these decisions through a simulation based analysis of a pharmaceutical dataset. Results establish concave relationships between value created at the end of pipeline and the resource allocation and complexity allocation biases, indicating optimizability and a limit for front loading practices.
ADLER, P. S., Mandelbaum, A., Nguyen, V., & Schwerer, E. (1995). From project to process management - An empirically-based framework for analyzing product development time. Management Science, 41(3), 458-484.
ANDERSON, E. G., Morrice, D. J., & Lundeen, G. (2005).The “physics”’ of capacity and backlog management in service and custom manufacturing supply chains. System Dynamics Review, 21(3), 217-247.
ANDERSON, E. G., Morrice, D.J (2006). “Stochastic Optimal Control of Centralized Staffing and Backlog Policies in a Two-Stage Customized Service Supply Chain.” Production and Operations Management, 15 (2): 263-278.
BHUIYAN, N., Gerwin, D.,Thomson,V., (2004) Simulation of the New Product Development Process for Performance Improvement. Management Science, 50(12): 1690-1703.
BROWNING T., Yassine, A. (2008). Analyzing Multiple Product Development Projects Based On Information and Resource Constraints. MIT Working paper. http://libaxis5.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/1670/multi-DSM.pdf?sequence=1
BANERJEE, S., Hopp,W. J. (2001).The Project Portfolio Management Problem. Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Sciences, Northwestern University, June.
CHAO, R. O., Kavadias, S., Gaimon, C. (2009) Revenue Driven Resource Allocation: The Effects of Organization Design and Incentives on NPD Portfolio Management. Management Science. 55(9): 1556-1569.
CLARK, K. B., Wheelwright, S. C. (1993). Managing New Product and Process Development. Free Press, NY.
COOPER, R.G., Edgett S.J., Kleinschmidt E.J. (1998): Portfolio Management for New Products. 2nd Ed. Perseus Publishing, MA.
CUSUMANO, M. J. and Selby, R.W. (1995) Microsoft Secrets, HarperCollins.
CUSUMANO, M. & Nobeoka K. (1998). Thinking Beyond Lean, Freepress.
DAHAN, E., and Mendelson, H. (2001). An extreme-value model of concept testing. Management Science, 47(1), 102-116.
DAVIS, J.P., Eisenhardt, K.M. and Bingham, C.B. 2007. Developing theory with simulation methods.Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 580-599.
DEEDS, D. L., & Rothaermel, F. T. (2003). Honeymoons and liabilities: The relationship between age and performance in research and development alliances. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 20(6), 468-484.
FIGUEIREDO, P., E. Loiola (2012): A Coflow structure to Screen Projects in a Product Pipeline. UFBA.BR Working paper. Available from the author.
FIGUEIREDO,P. Joglekar, N. (2007): Dynamics of Project Screening in a Product Development Pipeline. In: 25th International Conference of The System Dynamics Society, Boston.
http://www.systemdynamics.org/conferences/2007/proceed/papers/JOGLE201.pdf [accessed July 2012]
FORD, D. & Sterman, J. D. (1997) Dynamic modeling of product development processes. System Dynamics Review, 14, 31-68.
FORRESTER, J. W. and Senge, P. M. (1980). Tests for building confidence in system dynamics models. TIME Studies in the Management Science 14, 209-228.
FREDERICK, S., Loewenstein, G. & O’Donoghue, T. (2002). Time discounting and time preference: A critical review. Journal of Economic Literature. 40, 351-401.
GALAMBOS, Janos (1978). The asymptotic theory of Extreme Order Statistics. John Wyley and Sons.
GINO, F., Pisano, G. (2005). Do Managers’ Heuristics Affect R&D Performance Volatility? A Simulation Informed by the Pharmaceutical Industry. Harvard Business School Working Paper.
GIROTRA, K., C. Terwiesch, K. T. Ulrich (2004). “New Drug Development at Merck & Co.,” Case Study, The Wharton School.
GIROTRA, K.,Terwisch, C., Ulrich, K.T. (2005). Managing the Risk of Development Failures: A Study of Late-Stage failures in the Pharmaceutical Industry.The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, January.
GIROTRA, K., Terwiesch, C. and Ulrich, K., Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea (June 15, 2009). INSEAD Business School Research Paper No. 2009/32/TOM. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1082392
GREENE, W.H. (1997). Econometric Analysis, 3rd Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
GRIFFIN, A. (1997). PDMA research on new product development practices: Updating trends and benchmarking best practices. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14(6), 429-458.
GUMBEL, E. J. (1958): Statistics of Extremes. Columbia University Press, New York.
KAVADIAS S. and Loch, C.H. (2004). Project Selection Under Uncertainty: Dynamically Allocating Resources to Maximize Value. Hillier International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Kluwer Academic Publishers (now Springer-Verlag), Boston, MA.
HESKETT, J.L., Sasser, W.E., Schlesinger, L.A. (1997). The Service Profit Chain. New York: Free Press.
HURTADO, C.N. (2009): “Biogenéricos: Un Estudio de Vigilancia Tecnológica para el Caso de La Situación en Chile” J. Technol. Manag. Innov.,Volume 4, Issue 3.
JUGEND, D. and Silva, S.L. (2012): “Integration in New Product Development: Case Study in a Large Brazilian High-Technology Company”. J.Technol. Manag Innov.,Volume 7, Issue 1.
KHURANA, A., & Rosenthal, S. R. (1997). Integrating the fuzzy front end of new product development. Sloan Management Review, 38(2), 103-120.
KLEIJNEN (1995). “Sensitivity Analysis and optimization of System Dynamics models: Regression Analysis and Statistical Design of Experiments”. System Dynamics Review, Vol 11, n.4, 275-288.
KRISHNAN V., Ulrich, K. (2001). Product development decisions: a review of the literature. Management Science. 47 i1. 1-21.
LAW, A.M., Kelton, W.D. (2000). Simulation Modeling and Analysis (3rd ed.) McGraw-Hill: New York.
LOCH, Christoph H., Christian Terwiesch, (1999). “Accelerating the Process of Engineering Change Orders: Capacity and Congestion Effects”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16(2): 145-159.
MARUJO, L.G. (2009). “Rework Impacts Evaluation through System Dynamics Approach in Overlapped Product Development Schedule”, J. Technol. Manag. Innov.Volume 4, Issue 2.
MCCORMACK, A., Verganti R., and M. Iansiti (2001), “Developing Products on “Internet Time”: The Anatomy of a Flexible Development Process”, Management Science, 47(1): 133-150.
MOORTHY, K. S., I. P. L. Png.(1992) “Market segmentation, cannibalization, and the timing of product introductions”, Management Science, 38(3): 345-359.
REINERTSEN D.G. (1997). Managing the Design Factory. Simon and Schuster, New York, New York.
REPENNING, N. (2001). Understanding Fire Fighting in New Product Development, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(5): 285-300.
REYCK, B., Degraeve, Z. and Crama, P. (2004):“Project Portfolio Management at Novartis Pharma”. London Business School case.
SANTOS, P.M.R. and Santos, M.I.R (2008). Using subsystem linear regression metamodels in stochastic simulation. European Journal of Operational Research.Vol. 5, N. 5.
SCHMIDT, J.B., Sarangee, K., Montoya-weiss, M.M. (2008). Exploring New Product Development Project Review Practices and Performance. Draft, being revised at Journal of Product Innovation Management.
STERMAN, J. (2000) Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. New York: Irwin/ McGraw-Hill.
TERWIESCH, Christian, Christoph H. Loch (1999). “Measuring the Effectiveness of Overlapping Development Activities”, Management Science, 45(4): 455-465;
TERWIESCH, Christian, Karl T. Ulrich (2009). Innovation Tournaments: Creating and Selecting Exceptional Opportunities, Harvard Business School Press.
THOMKE, S., & Fujimoto,T. (2000).The effect of “front-loading” problem-solving on product development performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17(2): 128-142.
ULRICH,K.T., Eppinger, S.D. (2004). Product Design and Development.Third Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York.
WHEELWRIGHT, S.C. and Clark, K. B. (1992). Revolutionizing Product Development: Quantum Leaps in Speed, Efficiency and Quality.The Free Press.
YU,A.S.O., Figueiredo, P.S, de Souza Nascimento, P.T. (2010): Development Resource Planning: Complexity of Product Development and the Capacity to Launch New Products. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 27(2): 253-266
ZAPATA, A.R.P, Cantú, S.O. (2008): “Gestion Estrategica De La Tecnologia En El Predesarrollo De Nuevos Productos”. J. Technol. Manag. Innov.Volume 3, Issue 3.
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).