Benefits of Ambiguity in New Product Development

Abstract

In this paper we challenge the traditional notion of ambiguity as an undesirable element in New Product Development (NPD) and explore how companies sometimes sustain or even increase ambiguity during their NPD projects. Based on qualitative analysis of case data from four NPD projects in the medical-device industry, we present a model by which this process can be better understood. We identify four ways that NPD projects can benefit from temporarily sustaining ambiguity: retaining fallback options, saving costs, saving time, and retaining ideas.

Modeling innovative search processes with PR landscapes

“…A common, and often unstated, assumption in the product development literature is that uncertainty and ambiguity should be reduced as quickly and efficiently as possible, but this assumption is so simplistic as to be misleading. Our assumption here is that ambiguity can be beneficial [6] [15] [46] [47]. In fact, some thrive in the face of ambiguity, perceiving it as desirable, interesting and challenging [18].…”

“…A series of ethnographic studies of innovation efforts in the medical technology industry found that outcomes tended to vary-at least in part-dependent on how innovation teams tolerated ambiguity [4] [5] [6] [7] [46] [47]. In one example, a small team embracing ambiguity and divergent interpretations of a cue led to outcomes that were initially likely to be rejected, but ultimately proved highly successful.…”

Managing Ambiguity When Evaluating and Selecting New Ideas in Project Portfolio Management

“…This is because of its focus on maximization of value, seeking clear de¯nitions of alternatives and predetermined decision criteria [Christiansen and Varnes (2008); Stilling and Eskerod (2008); Brun et al (2009)]. It is assumed that decisions lead to actions that are consistent with the objectives of the decision.…”

“…However, ambiguous situations, in which people experience confusion or con°icting interpretations when evaluating ideas, have not been thoroughly addressed in PPM literature [Bergman et al (2007); Brun et al (2008Brun et al ( , 2009Engwall et al (2003); Verganti (2011)]. …”

“…It does not take into consideration ambiguous situations in which ideas are not fully understood by the people involved in their evaluation, or there are opposing opinions about how to classify them according to certain decision criteria. For example, people might experience con°icting interpretations about a product idea or a market need [Brun et al (2008[Brun et al ( , 2009], or they might feel that they are not able to understand or formulate what an idea for a new product is about ].…”