The contribution of IT-leveraging capability for collaborative product development with suppliers

Abstract

This paper investigates how Information Technology (IT) leveraging capability supports buyersupplier collaboration in New Product Development (NPD). IT-leveraging capability is defined as the ability to effectively use IT functionalities to support IT-enabled NPD activities. We consider three dimensions of this capability: effective use of Project and Resource Management Systems (PRMS), effective use of Knowledge Management Systems (KMS) and effective use of Cooperative Work Systems (CWS). We consider the dynamics between these three dimensions, which have usually been treated as equal. Using an in-depth case study approach, we show that effective use of KMS and CWS are key dimensions to support collaboration, creating a unique source of competitive advantage. On the other hand, while effective use of PRMS does not help to create differentiation it is important to support the coordination of KMS and CWS. Furthermore, the three dimensions have different intensities of contribution depending on the NPD stage and supplier involvement configuration.

Industry 4.0 technology provision: the moderating role of supply chain partners to support technology providers

“…Our results showed that collaborating with these two actors will negatively impact Industry 4.0 solution provision in terms of cost reduction. Such a collaboration demands more time to build trust and negotiate the expected outcomes (Ayala et al, 2020), elevating the technological cost of solution development, as suggested by our results. On the other hand, as shown in our findings and summarized in our final theoretical framework (Figure 3), the involvement of both R&D centers and Customers has a direct effect on differentiation through innovation and loyalty, respectively.…”

“…Suppliers can play two major roles in the inbound OI strategy for integrated Industry 4.0 solutions, contributing to vertical technology collaboration and technology sourcing. The general literature on the supply chain has argued that suppliers can be involved in the co-design of a buyer's solution development (Ayala et al, 2020;Enrique et al, 2018). In this sense, suppliers can act as an external source of knowledge on product capabilities that are not well developed internally by the central company (Ayala et al, 2017).…”

Adopting service suppliers for servitisation: which type of supplier involvement is more effective?

“…The grey box was also the best configuration to obtain higher servitisation performance. In the grey box configuration, collaboration between partners is more intensive, and knowledge flows in both directions (Le Dain and Merminod, 2014; Ayala et al , 2020). Contrary to the other configurations, the grey box is the only one where the services within the PSS solution are developed by both actors working together, thus creating a better fit to the customer's real need (Ayala et al , 2017).…”

Managing glitches in collaborative product development with suppliers

“…Practices of aligning effort in white box configuration allow the buyer to closely follow the supplier and coordinate programmed interactions with him, which helps ensure that the project will be executed as expected (Van Echtelt et al , 2008; Martinsuo and Ahola, 2010). It also helps to share information about the evolution of the project execution and to maintain an alignment between both parties (Ayala et al , 2020). Moreover, practices of sharing identity are fundamental because the supplier needs to understand the design specifications and characteristics and needs also to understand what the buyer expects during the project execution as to respect his governance position (Abbott et al , 2013; Revilla and Villena, 2012).…”

“…On the other hand, practices of interacting face to face and practices of supporting participation are limited in white-box because of the nature of this configuration, which can be against such practices. These practices are oriented to build synergy among the stakeholders, fostering discussions and relationships, while companies that adopt white box configuration aim for little interaction and quick execution of the supplier’s manufacturing activities (Ayala et al , 2017; Ayala et al , 2020). Ayala et al (2020) provide an example of an agriculture company.…”