No abstract

No abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore how the emphases given to the levers of control when monitoring product development (PD) are combined with each other, with the type of PD strategy formation and with the degree of innovativeness experienced by the firm. Moreover, the paper aims at identifying those configurations that are equifinal and superior to others in terms of PD and organizational performance. Design/methodology/approach Data (n = 468) are collected through a structure written questionnaire and analyzed through cluster analysis. Robustness tests investigate the stability of the results across different cluster method choices. Findings The paper unravels three configurations: A framing firms cluster, a fatalist firms cluster and a meticulous firms cluster. The first and the third cluster outperform the second cluster in terms of performance. Research limitations/implications Limitations of the paper relate to the possible response bias, the measurement of the variables, the subjectivity in cluster method choices and the static and non-causal nature of results. Future studies are called to validate the findings. Practical implications Firms with a partially intended and partially emergent PD strategy formation process and high innovativeness should place high emphasis to the PD beliefs and boundary systems. Firms with a prevailing intended PD strategy formation and a medium innovativeness should emphasize diagnostic and interactive control systems for PD. Originality/value In contrast to previous studies, this paper addresses the peculiarities of one specific control problem, i.e. the conflicting control demands that management has to address in PD.

No abstract

Purpose This paper aims to explore drivers of the effectiveness of risk assessments in risk workshops. Design/methodology/approach This study uses an agent-based model to simulate risk assessments in risk workshops. Combining the notions of transactive memory and the ideal speech situation, this study establishes a risk assessment benchmark and then investigates real-world deviations from this benchmark. Specifically, this study models limits to information transfer, incomplete discussions and potentially detrimental group characteristics, as well as interaction patterns. Findings First, limits to information transfer among workshop participants can prevent a correct consensus. Second, increasing the required number of stable discussion rounds before an assessment improves the correct assessment of high but not low likelihood risks. Third, while theoretically advantageous group characteristics are associated with the highest assessment correctness for all risks, theoretically detrimental group characteristics are associated with the highest assessment correctness for high likelihood risks. Fourth, prioritizing participants who are particularly concerned about the risk leads to the highest level of correctness. Originality/value This study shows that by increasing the duration of simulated risk workshops, the assessments change – as a rule – from underestimating to overestimating risks, unraveling a trade-off for risk workshop facilitators. Methodologically, this approach overcomes limitations of prior research, specifically the lack of an assessment and process benchmark, the inability to disentangle multiple effects and the difficulty of capturing individual cognitive processes.