Development time and new product sales: A contingency analysis of product innovativeness and price

Langerak, Fred; Rijsdijk, Serge A.; Dittrich, Koen

doi:10.1007/s11002-009-9078-1

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Dependent variable. The measure for new product performance was the cumulative sales of each product, which also was available in the division's database (Langerak, Rijsdijk, and Dittrich, 2009).…”

Section: Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Boh, Slaughter, and Espinosa, 2007). Third, another variable controlled for the product's average selling price, as price is an important driver of new product sales (Langerak et al, 2009). In addition, to minimize concerns that the estimation results are affected by product line differences, the data were standardized by forcing the variables to have a mean of zero and an SD of one within each product line prior to analysis.…”

Section: Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Stage‐Wise Approach to Exploring Performance Effects of Cycle Time Reduction

Eling¹,

Langerak²,

Griffin³

2013

J of Product Innov Manag

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on reducing new product development (NPD) cycle time has shown that firms tend to adopt different cycle time reduction mechanisms for different process stages. However, the vast majority of previous studies investigating the relationship between new product performance and NPD cycle time have adopted a monolithic process perspective rather than looking at cycle time for the distinct stages of the NPD process (i.e., fuzzy front end, development, and commercialization). As a result, little is known about the specific effect of the cycle times of the different stages on new product performance or how they interact to influence new product performance. This study uses a stage‐wise approach to NPD cycle time to test the main and interacting effects of fuzzy front end, development, and commercialization cycle times on new product performance using objective data for 399 NPD projects developed following a Stage‐Gate® type of process in one firm. The results reveal that at least in this firm, new product performance only increases if all three stages of the NPD process are consistently accelerated. This finding, combined with the previous research showing that firms use different mechanisms to accelerate different stages of the process, emphasizes the need to conduct performance effect studies of NPD cycle time at the stage level rather than at the monolithic process level.

show abstract

Section: Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Stage‐Wise Approach to Exploring Performance Effects of Cycle Time Reduction

Eling¹,

Langerak²,

Griffin³

2013

J of Product Innov Manag

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Others studies have shown that radical innovation reduces the chances of firm survival as a result of the increased level of uncertainty (Buddelmeyer et al, 2009) but others have shown that firms that adopt radical innovation are more likely to survive because of higher returns from adoption as a result of gaining a larger market share (Langerak et al, 2009;Sinha and Noble, 2008). On the other hand, having patents or copyright shows that a firm has a unique resource protected from potential competitors.…”

Section: Internal Determinants Of Firm's Survivalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Business Survival, a Literary Review of Internal and External Determinants

Garavito-Hernández¹,

Galvis²,

Capacho³

2021

criteriolibre

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous studies have analyzed the factors that influence the survival of companies, which is why the objective of this article is to review the internal and external determinants from the literature that most influence the permanence over time of companies in the market. Therefore, a descriptive literature review was carried out on the main findings on the positive effects of innovation, level of training in R&D employees, and collaboration between companies, proposing a moderating effect between these factors and business survival.

show abstract

“…Introduction P rior research in new product development (NPD) concludes that development cycle time helps determine new product profitability (e.g., Griffin, 1997;Kessler and Chakrabarti, 1999) through its effects on development costs (e.g., Langerak, Hultink, and Griffin, 2008) and positive association with new product sales (e.g., Bayus, 1997;Langerak, Rijsdijk, and Dittrich, 2009). These effects also are contingent on the extent to which the new product offers unique benefits to customers that make it superior to competing products (Atuahene-Gima, 1995;Li and Calantone, 1998).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Escalation, De‐escalation, or Reformulation: Effective Interventions in Delayed NPD Projects

Oorschot

Langerak

Sengupta

2011

J of Product Innov Manag

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At the start of any project, new product development (NPD) teams must make accurate decisions about development time, development costs, and product performance. Such profit-maximizing decision making becomes particularly difficult when the project runs behind schedule and requires intervention decisions too. To simplify their decision making, NPD teams often use heuristics instead of comprehensive assessments of trade-offs among the aforementioned metrics. This study employs a simulation based on a system dynamics approach to examine the effectiveness of different decision heuristics (i.e., time, cost, and product performance). The results show that teams are better off if they decide to intervene rather than do nothing (escalation of commitment), but in making these interventions there is no single best decision heuristic. The most effective interventions combine decision heuristics, and the most effective combination is a function of the development time elapsed. For teams that discover schedule problems relatively early on in the development process, the best possible intervention is to increase both team size and product performance (combining the time and product performance heuristic). When teams discover schedule problems relatively late, the best intervention option is to decrease product performance and increase team size (combining the time and cost heuristic). In both situations, however, the best intervention combines two heuristics, with a trade-off across time, cost, and performance. In other words, trading off three project objectives outperforms trading off only two of them. These findings contribute to the extant literature by suggesting that, when the project is behind schedule, the choice extends beyond just escalating or de-escalating commitment to initial project objectives. Other than sticking to a losing course of action or cutting losses, there is an alternative: Commit to renewing the project. In this case, project lateness represents an opportunity to reformulate project objectives in response to new market information, which may lead to new product ideas and increased product performance.

show abstract

Development time and new product sales: A contingency analysis of product innovativeness and price

Cited by 4 publications

References 14 publications

A Stage‐Wise Approach to Exploring Performance Effects of Cycle Time Reduction

A Stage‐Wise Approach to Exploring Performance Effects of Cycle Time Reduction

Business Survival, a Literary Review of Internal and External Determinants

Escalation, De‐escalation, or Reformulation: Effective Interventions in Delayed NPD Projects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About