Improvisation is an important firm competence in product innovation as firms increasingly face inherent uncertainty in new product development (NPD) process and frequent jolts in the external environment. While there is some empirical and conceptual work on the value of improvisation for several new product outcomes, there is lack of empirical research on the antecedents of improvisation in innovation studies. We attempt to address this gap by studying the role of team variation and team convergence traits in the occurrence of improvisation in a sample of 118 NPD teams from manufacturing firms.

The purpose of this paper is to understand how customer relationship termination (i.e., preparation and process), alone or in combination with customer involvement, contributes to the new product development outcome. While termination preparation has a synergistic effect with customer involvement, the termination process has a trade-off relationship with customer involvement.

빠르게 변화하는 해외 시장 환경 및 소비자 니즈의 변화에 발맞춰, 기업의 혁신 전략의 중요성이 강조되고 있음에도 불구하고, 경쟁전략과 신제품개발속의 관계에 관한 연구가 많이 이루어지지 않 은 실정이다. 특히, 대기업에 비해 유무형 자원의 부족에 한계를 가지고 있는 중소기업에게 있어, 해외 시장 환경의 변화에 대처하는 경쟁전략의 선택은 중요한 의사결정 요소이며, 이러한 경쟁전략 은 신제품개발속도에 영향을 미치는 주요한 전략적 요인으로 작용한다. 이에 본 연구는, 차별화전 략과 비용우위전략이 신제품개발속도에 미치는 영향을 알아보고, 시장역동성이 이러한 관계에 어 떠한 조절효과를 미치는지 살펴보고자 한다. 이를 위해 한국 중소수출업체를 대상으로 설문을 진행 하였으며, 차별화전략과 비용우위전략이 신제품개발속도에 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것을 확인하였 다. 나아가, 시장역동성이 높을수록, 차별화전략이 신제품개발속도에 미치는 긍정적인 영향은 커지 지만, 비용우위전략이 신제품개발속도에 미치는 긍정적인 영향은 약해지는 것을 확인하였다. 본 연 구는, 경쟁전략이 신제품개발속도에 미치는 영향을 제안하고 검증하였으며, 시장이 빠르게 변화할 경우, 경쟁전략의 긍정적인 효과가 달라질 수 있음을 확인하였다는 점에서 학문적 및 실무적 시사 점이 있을 것으로 기대된다.

AI가 시장의 패러다임을 바꾸는 새로운 혁신 기술로 주목받고 있다. 기업은 AI 의 기술적 이점이 잘 반영되면서 동시에 시장의 수요를 충족하는 방법을 적용하여 신제품을 개발해야 한다. 하지만 업계에는 이러한 요건을 충족하는 방법론이 부재하다 보니 기업들은 기존 제품개발 방법론을 이용해 AI 기반 제품개발을 추진하고 있다. 이로 인해 AI의 기술적 이점이 충분히 반영되지 못하거나 AI의 기술적 잠재성이 시장 가치로 연결되지 못하게 된다. 이러한 한계를 극복하기 위해 이 연구는 AI 기반의 신제품을 개발하기 위한 새로운 방법론을 제시한다. AI 혁신이 기존 방식과 다른 차별적 속성을 확인하고, 이러한 속성이 반영된 제품 설계 프로세스와 방법론을 제시한다. 이 연구는 AI 제품개발이 양손잡이 접근(Ambidexterity approach)을 지향해야 함을 강조하며, 테크놀로지 푸시(Technology push) 기반의 아이디어 생성, 마켓 풀(Market pull) 기반의 소비자 요구조건 분석, 제품 설계 구체화 등을 포함하는 AI 기반 제품의 설계(Design) 프로세스 및 구체적인 개발 방법을 제안했다. 이 방법론의 현 실 적용 가능성을 검증하기 위해 사례연구를 실시, AI 기반의 차량용 인포테인먼트 시스템 개발 전략을 도출한다. 기술적 가능성에 기반하여 13개의 혁신 아이디어를 생성했고, 카노 (KANO) 분석과 TOPSIS의 결합에 의한 소비자 요구조건 분석을 통해 총 6개의 신제품 개 발 전략을 도출했다. 이 연구제서 제안하는 방법론은 기업이 AI 기반의 혁신제품을 통해 신 시장을 개척하거나 기존 제품의 고도화를 통해 시장 확장을 펼치는 데 유용하게 활용될 수 있다.

The nature of NPD is conducive to SMEs improvising at all stages of the process. This has the potential to create new knowledge, which, if retained and harnessed, can then be applied at higher strategic levels within the firm. This paper examines this phenomenon, through a preliminary qualitative study.

The purpose of this study is to provide the priority of the front-loading factors in the design stage of the automotive parts development process in order to efficiently and effectively respond to the demands of the car maker (customer). Front-loading is defined as a strategy in order to improve development performance by shifting the identification and solving of design problems to earlier phases of a product development process. Two approaches of the front-loading are project-to-project knowledge transfer and rapid problem solving. For the study, a survey was conducted on the R&D department in the automobile parts company and analyzed by AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) method. The result of the survey shows the cost savings is the highest weight in terms of front-loading effect and in terms of front-loading factors, it gives priorities as “the problems of past project” first, “Design Review” second, “CAE (Computer Aided Engineering)” third, “FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis)” fourth, “benchmarking” and SR (Sourcing of Requirements). The results of the study will be helpful to provide practical value for improving product design of component development.

In this paper, we identify risk factors that are likely to occur during the lifecycle of a new product development (NPD) project from the literatures, and identify the three objectives or three constraints that will ultimately be achieved for project success in the ICT industry : performance (scope/quality), schedule (time), and cost. Firstly, we interviewed the project experts to classify the risk factors according that the final project objectives are changeable based on scope/quality, time and cost budget constraints. Secondly, the survey for pairwise comparisons between the risk factors was asked to the project managers and members who had ever actually participated in the NPD projects of ICT industry to determine the priority ranks on relative importance using AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process). The risk factors negatively affecting the goals of projects were analyzed by using the AHP respectively in four project stages during the life cycle of the project. The comparison of risk factors within each stage is a different approach unlike the literatures which have covered project’s overall risk assessment. There is an advantage that risk management can be effectively performed with priorities according to each stage from the start to the end of the project. In other words, it is necessary to identify what risk factors will occur in each stage, and to have ideas at each stage with the priorities so that they can be mitigated and eliminated before actual occurrence. As a result, risks on scope & quality changes were found to be the most important considerations for initiative stage of NPD projects in the ICT industry, whereas in the final stage, risks on schedule (time) changes were the most important priorities. Among the ICT industry product categories, ‘communication and broadcasting devices’ and ‘IT and communication based devices’ generally have a high priority in terms of risks on scope & quality changes when initiating the project. At the closing stage of the project, however, considering that schedule (time) changeable risk is getting higher, these products tend to target at B2B market rather than B2C because the new products must be delivered and launched in time as customer firm required.

The global apparel manufacturers have produced apparel and textiles to meet consumers’ needs. Recently, they have applied the sophisticated technologies and more effective organizational systems to improve the efficiencies in apparel product development and their applications have led to enhancement of consumers’ satisfaction (Kunz, Karpova, & Garner, 2016). In this study, we identified novel approaches of product innovation strategies including technological innovation and organizational effort which a representative mass-scale Bangladeshi apparel manufacturer, Ananta Group has practiced. For data collection, in-depth interviews were conducted with four managerial staffs who were managers and assistant managers working at the research and development (R&D), production, marketing and quality control departments in Ananta Group. The interviewees were male employees having degrees higher than bachelor’s degree in textile engineering. Their work experience years ranged from 5 to 15 years within their respective fields and their ages ranged from 28 to 55 years (m=40). Qualitative approach was used to analyze the data. It was found that Ananta Group has used innovative technologies such as advanced softwares, process systems and machineries in new product development and its organizational effort of running specialized teams of design, new product development, and marketing activities has enhanced technological innovation. These findings provide global apparel manufacturers with valuable information on how product innovation strategies for new apparel development are important and what technological approaches can be used to accomplish it.

The impact of customer involvement in NSD on customer loyalty is still unknown, because most studies examine loyalty perceptions of only active participants in co-creation, while the few studies involving co-creation observers provide conflicting results. Research is also limited, as it measures user participation only at the design level, while customers are empowered to participate at all NSD stages. This study contributes to the literature by developing a model capturing the various levels of customer involvement in NSD co-creation and then, measuring its impacts on two type of user loyalty: brand loyalty and loyalty on innovation community. Data were collected from users of the Domino’s Mogul pizza toolkit empowering them to participate in all NSD stages and also to become pizza entrepreneurs by designing and selling their pizzas. Findings comparing the brand loyalty and the innovation community loyalty perceptions of users with various levels of co-creation involvement provide useful insights.

Cewebrity is somebody who is only, or perhaps mostly famous through their presence on the Internet, an internet person who crosses over to the mainstream, so called web celebrity or Internet celebrity. Recognizing that Internet celebrities’ participation will bring about improvements of company performance, marketers have considered them to be new source of innovation dedicating to company’s success. For example, fashion companies believe that Internet celebrities have good innovation ideas on clothing collocation or even fashion design. Given the relevance of Internet celebrity in practice, researchers have begun to address its merits (Stever and Lawson, 2013). However, it is not yet a well-established field of academic inquiry, because Internet celebrity’s specific characteristics has not been well developed yet. Based on the nature of Internet celebrity as consumer, the theory of customer value co-creation is appropriate to explain these new generated celebrities’ activities in new product development. Activities of Internet celebrities in value co-creation can be shown as communication, idea conception, and product design (Genc and Benedetto, 2015). The current study mainly focuses on the effects of fashion internet celebrities on whole process of product development including product design, production, and commercialization by developing the scale of internet celebrity’s attributes under the perspective of customer value co-creation. Theoretically, the study fills up the research gap that no prior research develops the scales of Internet celebrity and test its effects on new product development. Practically, our work is highly useful for marketers understand the effects of Internet celebrity, thus developing appropriate strategies to utilize them.

The new businesses started by the companies usually results in being unsuccessful. The main reasons for that are either aiming targeting wrong customers, unsatisfaction of customers’ requesting quality standards, or taking wrong actions against the competitors in the market. Therefore, companies should aim the targets for the newly developing products based on the fulfilling values for the customers when they start the new businesses, and should take good cares for risk managements at the each step of the new business to prevent the failure in advance. In addition to that, the companies starting new businesses not only need to take the customers attributes (CA) into account, but they also should apply the new technologies as one system to initiate a new business to satisfy the basic wants of the customers. This article suggests the New Product Development Pursuing Model using the Indicative Planning methodology and the Quality Management tools. The New Product Development Pursuing Model would be completed by the following steps as below; 1. Drawing the CTQ (Critical To Quality) for setting up the new product development objectives by : i) using the VOC (Voice Of Customers) obtained by the QFD (Quality Function Deploypment) if the market is mature, ii) applying AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) to information in the QIS (Quality Information System) if the market is unmature to get enough need information of the customers. 2. Risk Management in NPD : The NPD pursuing model consisted of the IP (indicative planning) is suggested not by the process of top-down-way mandatory planning process, but by the tools used in the administrative science and economic fields, namely by governance. The companies could apply innovative methodology for new products development processes to fulfil the customers satisfaction in the fields, through the CA (Contingency Approach) of the NPD (New Product Development) process.

본 연구는 국내 수출중소기업의 시장지향성, 브랜딩역량, 신제품개발역량 및 경쟁우위 간의 관계를 살펴보고 이들의 관계가 수출하는 제품유형에 따라 상이하게 나타나는지 살펴보고자 하였다. 이를 위해 대한상공회의소의 DB를 바탕으로 수출중소기업을 대상으로 설문조사를 실시하였으며 총 407부가 실증분석에 이용되었다. 경로분 석을 실시한 결과, 시장지향성은 신제품개발역량 및 수출경쟁우위를 제고하였으며, 신제품개발역량은 경쟁우위에 긍정적인 영향력을 미쳤으나 브랜딩역량은 유의한 영향력을 미치지 않는 것으로 나타났다. 제품유형에 따른 변수 간 관계의 차이를 검증하기 위해 다중집단 경로분석을 실시한 결과, 신제품개발역량, 브랜딩역량 그리고 경쟁우 위에 대한 시장지향성의 긍정적 영향력은 산업재 수출기업보다 소비재 수출기업에 대해 더 높은 것으로 나타났으 나, 경쟁우위에 대한 브랜딩역량의 영향력은 소비재 보다 산업재 수출중소기업에게 더 높은 것으로 드러났다. 또 한 산업재와 소비재 기업 모두에 신제품개발역량은 수출경쟁우위를 차지하기 위한 중요 요인으로 밝혀졌다. 본 연구결과는 수출중소기업의 해외시장 경쟁력 제고를 위한 시사점을 제언한다는 점에서 의의가 있다.

The New Product Development (NPD) in the textile industry is peculiar, as it follows constraints that are particular to the fashion business. A qualitative study comprising 45 interviews were conducted in a South American textile industry and results showcase that fashion forecast, pressure for newness, and cost reduction are relevant matters. Introduction The textile industry follows a particular cycle for New Product Development (NPD) as it answers the demand from the fashion industry. Fashion supply chain is fragmented, as the production process is fragmented with companies playing different roles in the production cycle. There are companies that uses the raw material to produce yarns that will be transformed into fabrics, which then it is transformed into clothes, through process that may be a single sewing to complex process that demands intermediate process such as industrial washes. These clothes are sold to consumers through various selling channels, such as stores, retailers, e-commerce, and even door-to-door. Usually one company plays only one of these roles in the supply chain, what makes the production plan to be fragmented amongst several different companies in the supply chain (Şen, 2008). After globalization, this supply chain became even more complex as each chain may be located in different parts of the world, due to production costs and optimization. This scenario results in a supply chain that demands several planning skills, that works, sometimes, with extensive production cycles. (Thomassey, 2014). But, as Christopher, Lowson, & Peck (2004) noted, the supply chain in the fashion business must be agile to respond to changes in demand from consumers, which often occurs, and it can be also very complex as clothing is a way for consumers to either differentiate or fit in society, and the rules to be in or out of society patterns changes fast (Cholachatpinyo, Fletcher, Padgett, & Crocker, 2002a, 2002b). Due to this complexity and richness of information, the production cycle in fashion business has been extensively studied in the literature (Alexander & Contreras, 2016; Aung & Sha, 2016; Oxborrow & Brindley, 2014) but authors often use a wide perspective to grasp an overview of the supply chain they are studying, using market data and information, or gathering general information from companies that are present in the fashion supply chain. Authors focused their analysis in the supply chain itself, and we could not find studies that focused on the perspective of the product development task in the challenging context of fashion business. There are some characteristics from the fashion business that differentiate New Product Development (NPD) from a classical Business to Business (B2B) scenario. In a brief description of the fashion business production system, we see that it starts with the production of raw materials that varies from natural fibers (e.g. cotton, silk, linen) or artificial fibers (e.g. polyester, nylon, elastane) that are then spinning into threads that may contain one or more different fibers. These threads are then transformed into fabrics through several different weaving techniques, and then it may go through some finishing treatments (e.g. dying, washing), and then it goes to garment manufacturing where garment makers produce clothes for their own brands or for third-parties brands. These clothes are then sold to consumers through various channels (e.g. retail stores, electronic stores). If we analyze this brief description we can see that fashion may influence in all parts of the production cycle, including the demand for raw materials: if denim products are in vogue, then there is a growing demand for cotton products, if sportswear is in vogue, then the demand improves for artificial fibers, and so on. One other thing that should be noted is that usually each part of the production cycle is performed by a different company: the most common scenario we see in the textile industry includes companies that produce only threads, and sell these threads to textile companies that produce fabrics to sell to garment makers that produces clothes to sell to brands to sell them to consumers. There are some companies that integrates two or more parts of the production cycles but they are the exception, not the rule. This fragmented production process combined with the fashion influence result in long production cycles: a designer’s idea may take from three to eighteen months to be available to consumers, depending on the production channels assessed by the designer. These characteristics showcase how NPD in the fashion business may be complex and therefore it should be investigated further in the literature, and this is the objective of this study. In order to do that, we researched the specific literature in NPD that is vastly discussed in literature as it is responsible for creating, managing and releasing products that are both appealing to customers and profitable to the company. (Brown & Eisenhardt, 1995). Understanding what makes an NP succeed in the market has been on the marketing agenda for a long time, including the fashion business (Alexander & Contreras, 2016; Clarke, 2012; Thompson & Haytko, 1997). One interesting point of view is to understand the predecessors of NP success in the market. Henard & Szymanski (2001) conducted a meta-analysis of 60 studies focused on the antecedents of NP success and proposed a list of 24 predictors of NP performance, which they grouped into four categories: (i) product characteristics, (ii) firm strategy characteristics, (iii) firm process characteristics and (iv) marketplace characteristics. We selected the most relevant predecessors discussed by Henard & Szymanski (2001) and Song & Xie (2000) to use as a basis for a script for interviews with NPD professionals. Methodology We conducted in-depth interviews with 45 professionals from different areas that participate in, or are impacted by, NPD process in a South American textile industry. From now on we will call this company “Southex”. These interviews offered a deep understanding of the perspective of NPD professionals, both insiders (professional that work in the NPD team) or outsiders (professional from departments that work as an internal supplier or client for the NPD team). Southex is one of the biggest textile producers in the world, with producing units in Latin America, commercial offices in Europe, Asia, and America. Sales are over U$ 1 bi/year, and the company employed more than 8,000 people in 2012, when this study was performed. Their main market is Latin America where fashion seasons are in opposition to the ones in the North part of the globe, home of the fashion trendsetters for global macro trends (Europe, USA, and Japan). This leads to a one-year postponement of fashion trends, so when something is released as a fashion trend for summer in Europe, it will be considered a trend for summer one year later in Latin America. Southex NPD team had 12 exclusively dedicated professionals as of 2012. Southex launches products in the market with the concept of collections, when the company releases a group of NPs in the market. Every year, the company releases two collections in the market. It usually takes up to six months for NPD team to complete and launch a new collection. Research into fashion trends, commercial needs and technological improvements available in the market are the main sources the company uses to develop NP. Prior to launching a product in the market, the NPD team needs to test its production process in order to guarantee that the product can be produced on a large scale at competitive costs. Every collection is launched as a sample of fabrics that will be produced 4-6 months in the future. If a collection is released in January, the products that Southex is launching will start to be produced in June. So their clients, mainly garment makers and fashion brands, need to coordinate their production chain to start receiving these fabrics after June. Considering the production cycle in these garment makers, it is estimated that the clothing produced with the fabric launched by Southex in January will be delivered to retail stores (and then available to the consumer) in November, almost one year after Southex has launched the fabric in the market. In order to gather a deep perspective of all matters related to NPD we interview 45 professionals, totaling over 1,600 hours of recorded interviews. 12 insiders, comprising 100% of the team available at that moment, and 33 outsiders from departments such as Marketing, Sales, and Technical Support. Their positions ranged from analysts to directors.. All interviews followed a predefined script of topics. Interviews were transcribed and sent to the corresponding professional for validation, during which they could ask for adjustments. 12 professionals asked for changes in the transcription and we used the changed and approved text, together with the 33 unchanged texts in this analysis. Results and Discussion All texts were then codified according to content, which involved identifying similar topics and applying codes to facilitate analysis of the interviews. Using the predecessors of NP success has facilitated our understanding of the matters related to NPD at Southex. By formatting the presentation of information gathered in the interviews with the predecessors we were able to see the main issues found in NPD. In total, there were 421 mentions codified. After analyzing the codification of the interviews, we can see that Cross function is the main topic addressed by respondents. This is due to the relationship that the flow of NPD activities in the company. As we can see, there were several issues related to the relationship of NP team with the outsiders and that communication amongst insiders and outsiders needs to be improved. There are some context-specific content that appeared as relevant in the analysis of these interviews: insiders are worried with the pressure they feel to forecast fashion preference for products. They say that fashion industry is constantly demanding new technologies, new products, and this has been creating a pressure to accelerate product development they think it is not healthy to the system. Also there is a general worry (insiders and outsiders) with the pressure for price reduction in basic products. Some products are considered basic and are included for several collections (interviewees mentioned that some products are included in more than 15 successive collections) and for these products instead of demanding for innovation, there is a demand for price reduction which leads outsiders to perform tests to substitute materials or changes in the production to reduce costs without prior knowledge from NPD team, which causes several problems in the organization. It is important to point out that even though we used only one company in this study, it was a complete and deep perspective, as we were able to collect high quality data with all 45 professionals that are directly or indirectly related to NPD in the company. Also, as Southex works as a thread and fabric producer, it showed us an insider perspective about the textile supply chain in the fashion business. Even though the exploratory study presented the reality of a firm in an extensive and very detailed way, it may not reflect the full complexity of other organizations in the market; thus, caution is advised if applied in a market that differs deeply from the scenario presented in this study. However, it is also important to remember that this is a qualitative approach where generalization is not expected, and the attention for details is important.

본 논문에서는 한국 제조기업들을 대상으로 역동적인 환경 하에 공급사와 구매 사의 신제품 개발 기술협력이 구매기업의 신제품 개발 프로젝트의 운영성과에 미치는 영향 에 관하여 고찰하였다. 한국생산성본부와 지식경제부가 공동으로 조사한 2012년도 한국 600 개 제조기업 조사 자료를 기반으로 회귀분석 방법을 사용하여 분석하였다. 독립 변수로 구매 사와 구매사의 주요공급사와의 신제품 개발에서의 기술협력을 사용하였고 종속변수로 구매 사의 신제품 개발 프로젝트의 품질달성률(quality), 비용절감(cost), 개발일정준수률(time)의 세 가지 운영 성과를 사용하였다. 환경의 역동성을 조절 변수로 사용하였다. 실증분석 결과 공급사와 구매사간의 기술협력이 신제품 개발 프로젝트 품질 달성율 제고에 긍정적인 영향 을 주는 것으로 나타났다. 그러나 예상과 달리 환경의 역동성은 오히려 공급사 구매사의 기 술협력의 신제품개발 프로젝트 성과에 모두 부정적으로 작용하는 것으로 나타났다. 이에 환경의 역동성이 높은 산업(통신기기산업)과 낮은 산업(조선산업)으로 분리하여 사후분석을 실 시하였다. 사후분석결과, 역동성이 낮은 산업에서는 구매사-공급사의 기술협력이 신제품 개 발 프로젝트 운영성과에 긍정적인 작용을 하지만 역동성이 높은 산업에서는 구매사-공급사 의 기술협력이 구매사의 신제품 개발 프로젝트의 운영성과에 부정적인 영향을 주고 있음을 발견하였다. 역동성이 높은 산업은 새로운 기술이 요구되는 경우가 많아 기존에 지속적으로 거래를 하고 있는 특정 공급업체와의 협력을 통한 축적된 학습효과 및 시너지를 누리기가 어 렵고 이에 주공급업체와의 협력이 프로젝트 운영의 효율성으로 연결되지 못하는 것으로 보 인다. 반면에 환경의 역동성이 낮은 환경에서는 기존의 공급업체와의 협력을 통한 축적된 협 력 역량 프로젝트 운영성과 향상에 긍정적으로 작용하는 것으로 보인다. 이는 신제품 개발 프로젝트의 속성과 횟수는 기업이 처한 환경과 밀접히 관련되어 있고 주 공급업체와의 기술 협력의 효과는 환경에 따라 다르게 나타나고 있음을 시사한다.

차량산업의 기술 패러다임이 소비자의 편의 및 안전기능의 증가와 기술융합 (Convergence)과 더불어 소프트웨어가 핵심적 역할을 하는 시스템기반의 융합 아키텍처 형 태로 진화하고 있다. 이처럼 소프트웨어가 핵심 혁신요소로 대두되는 환경에 따라 R&D 개 발 프로세스를 기계, 품질, 소프트웨어 등 이질적 프로세스를 통합하려는 시도가 있어왔지만, 실제 산업현장에서는 각각의 개발 프로세스가 개별적으로 운영되고 있어 이러한 혼란을 방 지하기 위한 실용적 통합 R&D 프로세스의 개발이 요구되고 있다. 본 연구에서는 프로세스 통합관련 기존 연구를 토대로 주요한 프로세스 통합 요건들을 분 석하고, 실제 차량 산업현장의 문제점 조사 및 분석을 통해 차량 전장품에 적합한 R&D 프로세스의 통합 모형 및 통합 프로세스를 제시하였다. 특히, 부품 단계에서부터 완성차 단계까 지 연결된 통합 프로세스를 개발하기 위하여 실제 산업계의 완성차와 전장품 업체에서 적용 하고 있는 개별 프로세스의 장단점을 비교 분석하였고, 전장품의 구성요소인 시스템, 소프트 웨어, 하드웨어 등 분야별 프로세스의 상관관계 연구를 통해 수행하였다. 마지막으로 본 연 구에서 제시한 통합 프로세스 모델은 현재 일부 전장품 업체에 적용되고 있으며, 모델 개선 을 위한 모니터링을 진행하고 있다.

While the necessity of closing the marketing capabilities gap is an important issue, little is known about the mechanisms that enable firms create and refine marketing capabilities to market new products. Although it is suggested that market knowledge enables firms to create and refine marketing capabilities, little is known about why some firms are better at generating market knowledge or the extent market knowledge development impacts marketing capabilities. We advance the literature by showing that the development of market knowledge through internal processes is not sole or main foundation, external ties are also required to facilitate closing the marketing capabilities gap. Building on the literature on organizational ambidexterity, relational governance, and positional advantages, we examine the extent that external ties facilitate the effect of the firm’s market knowledge development processes (MKD) on exploratory and exploitative marketing capabilities. We use the positional advantage principle (Day & Wensley, 1988) to uncover the path that exploratory and exploitative marketing capabilities drive new product success through. Data from a sample of 169 industrial firms using a multi-informant design shows that the interplay between MKD and external ties provide the foundation to build exploratory and exploitative marketing capabilities to successfully market new products. Given the differences in the nature (e.g., goal convergence, longevity) and knowledge embedded in business and political ties, we draw attention to the different impacts that business and political ties have in helping to build exploratory and exploitative marketing capabilities. Our findings reveal that business ties promote the positive effect of MKD on exploitative marketing, indicating that business ties promote a firm’s capacity to improve its existing marketing routines. Political ties, however, enhance the positive effect of MKD on exploratory marketing, indicating that political ties provide support required to create new marketing initiatives (e.g., new distribution channel). Further, we show that distinct positional advantages, differentiation and cost efficiency, help explain how exploratory and exploitative marketing capabilities may be more or less effective in driving new product success. Our results suggest that while both new product differentiation and cost efficiency are significant drivers of NPP, their antecedents are different. Hence, achieving fit between the preferred positional advantage(s) and the type of marketing capabilities represents a critical determinant of new product success.

How to manage these marketing and R&D functions is very important in the new product development (NPD) process. Which function should have more power to make more decisions? Previous study seldom touched this question. Further, according to strategic contingent theory, perceived uncertainty is very important determinant for power structure in the NPD process (Hickson, Hinings, Schneck, & Pennings, 1971). However, Pfeffer and Salancik (1978) argued that there is indeterminacy between environment and power structure. Thus, is external environmental uncertainty related to power structure in the NPD process? Resource dependence theory gives us a hint to solve this puzzle, that is, the concept of institutionalization (Pfeffer, 1981; Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978). The current study tends to adopt NPD duration reflected institutionalization (Pfeffer, 1981) to examine the moderating effect of NPD duration on the relationship between environmental uncertainty and marketing-R&D power structure in the NPD process. In general, power is defined as that the relation among social actors in which a specific social actor can potentially influence the decision to achieve his or her desire outcomes (Dahl, 1957; Emerson, 1962; Pfeffer, 1981; Salancik & Pfeffer, 1977). This definition also suggested that power is the structure in human aggregates like complex organization (Pfeffer, 1981). Thus, the power structure in the NPD process is defined as the proportion of decision making by marketing and R&D functions in the NPD process. When a NPD team faces the high market uncertainty, marketing function can gather more resources because of its special ability. A new product team has the limited resources, so another important function like R&D will have fewer resources than marketing function. Thus, our first hypothesis is that the higher market uncertainty, the more power marketing function has. R&D members have background knowledge to overcome the difficult of processing technological language and decide the main resolutions. The team will tend to allot more resources to deal with the problems of technological change as such the R&D members can buy the license of new technologies to apply it on their new products and to create the disruptive innovation like smartphones or tablets successfully. Therefore, the second hypothesis is that the higher technology uncertainty, the more power R&D function has. According to resource dependence theory, however, the relationship between environmental uncertainty and power structure does not always exist (Pfeffer, 1981; Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978). Pfeffer and Salancik (1978) indicated that the perceived environmental uncertainty of a subunit is weakly related to subunit’s power structure when an organization is highly institutionalized. When one subunit has more power than others, it tends to maintain the current power structure. So, the subunit makes rules or norm to formalize its power legally. This process is so called institutionalization (Pfeffer, 1981; Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978). In general, as time goes by, organizations will form their own social norms, and some of these norms will become the principles or rules in organizations (Pfeffer, 1981). As a result, when NPD time is long, marketing and R&D functions form norms or official rules. Then, the relationship between their perceived environmental uncertainty and power structure in the NPD process is weaker than the relation in the shorter duration of NPD. Therefore, our hypothesis is that the relationship between environmental uncertainty and power structure in the long-run project time is weaker than the relationship in the short-run project time. The current study used questionnaire survey and purposive sampling method to collect data. In order to eliminate the bias of common method variance (CMV), this study conducted multiple sources including project managers, the member charging marketing, and the member charging R&D to administrate questionnaires differently. In order to avoid selection bias, this study, moreover, asked the informants select the most recent new products developed and launched for minimum of twelve months. We sent three types of questionnaires to project managers, the member charging marketing, and the member charging R&D respectively. The current study sent questionnaires to 112 firms, and 69 firms are returned. The response rate is 61.61%. At new product level, there are 207 new product projects, and 100 firms are returned. The response rate is 48.31%. We also do tests of bias due to nonresponse which were conducted by using a comparison of early to late respondents’ all variable means (Armstrong & Overton, 1977). No evidence of a bias was found. Our variables are included market and technology uncertainty, and power structure which the left side is totally decided by marketing and the right side is totally decided by R&D. Moreover, NPD time is from star-up projects to launch it. In order to rule out other effects, we controlled industrial category, firm age, the number of marketing and R&D members involved in the NPD process, environmental hostility, and NPD process formalization. Every overall fit index in our measurement model is shown that χ(55)^2=71.5259,p-vaule=.066，χ^2/df=1.30<2, goodness of fit index=.90，adjusted goodness of fit index=.84，comparative fit index=.97，normed fit index=.87，non-normed fit index=.95, and root mean square error of approximation=.06. In general, all fit indexes in our measurement model are acceptable, and the average variance extracted (AVE), composite reliability (CR), and Cronbach’s α of all constructs are acceptable. Their ranges are .45-.70, .70-.93, and .75-.93 respectively. The overall model showed that the higher market uncertainty, the more power marketing has (β=-.279, t-value=-3.11, p-value<.050) but technology uncertainty is not significantly related to power structure. We used the mean of the NPD time as the cutting point to split short-run and long-run project time, and the mean is about one year and half in our sample. The result showed that in the short-run group the higher market and technology uncertainty, the more power marketing and R&D function have (β=-.355, t-value=-2.53, p-value<.050; β=.296, t-value=2.23, p-value<.050) . However, in the long-run group the relationship between environmental uncertainty and power structure is statistically insignificant. Additionally, in the long-run group the more NPD process formalization, the more power R&D function has (β=.277, t-value=2.33, p-value<.050). Back to the original puzzle, that is, does external environmental uncertainty determine power structure in the new product development process? The empirical evidence is shown that it is dependent on how long an organization develops new products to the market. Because the dominant subunit involved in the NPD process tends to maintain it power, it institutionalizes rules or norms to have legitimacy in the organization, and this argument is consistent with resource dependence theory (Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978). We also found that in short-run perceived environmental uncertainty are positively related to power structure in the NPD process. Consistent with strategic contingent theory’s proposition, the one subunit enable to reduce or respond external environment pressure, and it can have more power in the organization (Hickson, et al., 1971; Hinings, et al., 1974). We additionally found that in long-run group process formalization is positively related to R&D power. R&D function plays a main role in the NPD process as especially in the manufacturing industry; therefore, R&D function has much motive to maintain its power (Workamn, 1993). So R&D function can use formal rule to maintain its power when R&D function formalize the NPD process. As a consequence, formalizing the NPD process helps R&D function to gain more power in the long run. The contribution of our study is that we tested the proposition in strategic contingent theory, and the empirical evidences supported our hypotheses. Furthermore, our study also is the first study to test and find the support evidence with the institutionalization proposition in resource dependence theory. We not only explored the relationship between environmental uncertainty and power structure in the NPD process, but also extended strategic contingent theory and resource dependence theory to the NPD research. The further study can follow our definition of power structure to find what strategy marketing and R&D function will used to take back or maintain their power (Eisenhardt & Bourgeois, 1988; Li & Atuahene-Gima, 2001; Pfeffer, 1981).