The rise and fall of ten venture groups

New product strategy: Key characteristics that distinguish leading innovators in selected large South African manufacturing industries

“…To date, most academic research has concentrated on specific sub-activities within the span of product development tasks. There have been studies into new product idea generation techniques (Sowrey, 1990); into screening procedures and practices (Lambkin, 1988); into alternative management structures (Edwards, 1989); and into different ways in which the newly developed products might best be launched (Dunn, 1977;Takeuchi & Nonaka, 1986). However, very few academic researchers have considered all the elements involved in an integrated way.…”

Auditing product innovation activities in manufacturing firms

“…Not surprisingly such teams have high visibility within the organisation. What differentiates them from the ill-fated experimental New Venture Divisions of the 1970s, described admirably by Dunn (1977), is that top management has not provided them from their inception with an openended commitment for a continued existence. Under the intrapreneurial system a team is disbanded if it fails to exploit a particular business proposition successfully; even though the leader may start again with another team on another project if he can prepare a convincing business plan.…”

Formal analysis versus trial-and-error in strategic innovation: A business model approach.

“…Hill & Hlavacek (1972) refer to venture teams and list their characteristics: diffusion of authority, with loose job descriptions and unstructured relationships; broad mission, with considerable discretion to pursue results and often focusing on areas of rapid growth; flexible life span, free from pressures imposed by strict deadlines. Dunn (1977) conducted a research over ten venture groups and found that the mission statements were very broad and vague and there was too little direction; none rewarded with part of the profits or stock; the venture -if successful-was considered a career opportunity in the sense that the venture manager could become the business general manager; it was not clear what to do with people involved in case of a failure; killing reasons by senior management were: "the venture don't fit the company structure"; lack of support from senior management manifested on over-cautiousness and hesitancy to approve projects. He recommends that senior management clearly define: types of new business areas to be investigated, products and markets excluded, corporate strengths to be capitalized upon, minimum size and growths rates for new businesses, procedures to allocate funds and people.…”