From Preliminary Ideas to Corroborated Product Definitions: Managing the Front End of New Product Development

Abstract

Front-end activities largely influence the outcomes of new product development processes, because it is here that firms create new ideas, give them direction, and set them in motion. We show that the front end can be understood as comprising three core activities: idea/concept development, idea/concept alignment, and idea/ concept legitimization, which allow firms to create corroborated product definitions. This article provides important implications for managers interested in front-end management. It devotes specific attention to the differences between incremental and radical front-end development and to the front end in the light of increasingly open innovation processes.

Critical success factors in early new product development: a review and a conceptual model

“…Moreover, because the front end concludes with a go/no-go decision (i.e., when a robust product definition exists), we argue that a reasonable evaluation of front-end success depends on two conditions: the quality and status of the product definition when it Bleaves^the front end; and the usefulness of the product definition relative to enlightened decision-making about product development (Florén and Frishammar 2012).…”

“…Our understanding of the iterative aspects in the front end is insufficient. While prior research emphasizes the importance of probing and learning in the front end (e.g., Verganti 1997;Florén and Frishammar 2012), it not clear how the success factors in our conceptual framework relate to such activities or how iterations play out as a consequence of such activities. Therefore, we recommend that researchers examine the relationship between the success factors of probing and learning in the front end of NPD.…”

“…We agree with Kim and Wilemon (2002b) that the success of front-end activities depends on whether they lead to a robust product definition that, in turn, leads to product development. A robust or corroborated product definition is one that is clear, stable, and unambiguous, and has passed business and feasibility analysis (Florén and Frishammar 2012). Product concepts, which are at the core of robust product definitions, are Brepresentations of the goals for the development process^ (Seidel 2007, p. 523).…”

“…Rather, the literature suggests the relationship has an inverted u-shape: Too little as well as too much formalization seems to damage the chance of success of front-end activities (Khurana and Rosenthal 1998). In particular, too much formalization may lead to rigidity that dampens creativity (Gassmann et al 2006) that -in turn -may risk negative effects, particularly in cases of radical innovation (Florén and Frishammar 2012). Furthermore, recent research indicates that a low degree of formalization in the front end, in a climate that promotes psychological safety, is a possible avenue to frontend success (Nienaber et al 2015).…”

“…The article then uses these factors to create a conceptual framework that firms can use to manage the front end of NPD. Although the literature on the later stages of NPD is well developed (e.g., Brown and Eisenhardt 1995;Cooper et al 2002), we still lack a conceptual understanding of how firms that seek to enhance their front-end competence should proceed (e.g., Florén and Frishammar 2012;Chang et al 2007; Wilemon 2002a, 2002b). Our conceptual framework is intended to provide that assistance.…”