Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Questions to Analyze
Theoretical Background
Objectives
Goal-Question-Metric (GQM) Method
Goal-Question-Indicator-Metric (Gqim) Method
Outputs Financial Results
Materials
Results
Review of Research Goals
Methods
Business Case for the Assessment
Objective
References
All Topics
Engineering

Assessment of performance in the domain of product development

Profile image of Ziya Deniz EralpZiya Deniz Eralp

2012

Abstract

Improvement of business performance is an enduring subject of research across a diverse set of disciplines such as accounting, operations management, marketing, finance, economics and even psychology and sociology. In any discipline the ability to create self-awareness, a capacity to evaluate and compare their own behavior to internal standards and values, is a pre-requisite of improvement. In an organization, selfawareness is created with assessments. The results of assessments can help the organization to adapt to changing market conditions by defining more valuable objectives to direct its new businesses as well as to restructure its operations for eliminating deficiencies that limit its abilities to achieve its business goals at lower costs. For an organization with core businesses in product development (PD), assessment of PD is an essential element of all business improvement initiatives. However, in order to perform a focused PD assessment, the analysis needs to be structured...

Related papers

Measuring performance in new product development projects: A case study in the aerospace industry
Valentina Lazzarotti

Project Management Journal, 2007

View PDFchevron_right
Product Development and Management Association's 2012 Comparative Performance Assessment Study
Steve Markham

Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2013

View PDFchevron_right
Performance Measurement in Global Product Development: The selection and application of key performance indicators
Saeema Ahmed-Kristensen (nee Ahmed)

2016

An organisation looking to form collaborations across borders is a consequence of an increasingly competitive world market. Recent studies highlighted key challenges and success factors organisation’s face when globalising stages of product development. To optimize performance along these factors there is a requirement for the process to be monitored and measured relative to the business strategy of an organisation. It was found that performance measurement is a process that helps achieve sustainable business success, encouraging a learning culture within organisations. To this day, much of the research into how performance is measured has focussed on the process of product development. However, exploration of performance measurement related to global product development is relatively unexplored and a need for further research is evident. This paper contributes towards understanding how performance is measured in global product development. More specifically, results from a survey a...

View PDFchevron_right
Measuring Results of New Product Development
Krasimir Marinov

Economic Alternatives, 2013

It is necessary to measure the results of new product development in order to establish the current level of product innovation and define what has to be done for its improvement. The subject of research in the article is measuring the results of product innovation. The article is aimed at identifying the directions in terms of which the measuring of results is to be considered. Our goal is to shed light on the different points of view thereon. The need of measuring results of new product development is justified. It is shown that each determinant of product innovation performance serves three functions: of a goal; of an indicator and of grounds for personnel motivation. It is proved that, albeit different, the said three functions are interrelated. The article defines the difficulties in measuring the results of new product development. It is proved that the main difficulties in measuring results are related to their use by a broad circle of managers, to the intangible nature of th...

View PDFchevron_right
New Product Development Assessment for Smes: A Review
Roberto Panizzolo

abepro.org.br

The organizational and management innovation routes require suitable supporting actions capable of developing the ability to think critically and to determine personal evolution. To this purpose, assessment is an important concept, that is,, the use of models that measure ...

View PDFchevron_right
Innovation Compass: A Self–audit Tool for the New Product Development Process
Hannah Noke

Creativity and Innovation Management, 2002

This paper presents a diagnostic tool referred to as the innovation ‘compass’. The innovation compass uses self–audit methodology to identify gaps between current and desired performance of individual organisations. The innovation compass aids organisations in identifying where problems lie within the organisation. This information can then be used in developing an action plan to improve their new product development performance. The compass acts as a support tool to the linear and mechanistic processes of managing new product development, such as the Stage Gate Model. The compass comprises of five core themes; structure, leadership, output, teams and context representing the fundamentals of the innovation process. A combined methodological approach was used, by means of both qualitative and quantitative techniques with organisations. The methodology adopted has allowed for benchmarking of these themes to occur, with additional depth added from the qualitative semi–structured interv...

View PDFchevron_right
Models for organizational self-assessment
Matthew Ford

Business Horizons, 2002

business world is the corporate practice of evaluating behavioral or work processes using little or no external help. Conducting such a self-assessment helps managers answer essential questions such as "How are we doing?" "What are our strengths?" and "What areas require improvement?" Although organizational assessments have been conducted for decades, outside consultants (often scholars) have traditionally managed the process for clients. The rise in self-assessment suggests that companies are now more apt to internalize the activity.

View PDFchevron_right
Use and impact of performance measurement results in R&D and NPD: an exploratory study
Klas Eric Soderquist

R & D Management, 2004

& Lefkados, 8th floor, GR-113 62 Athens, Greece. soderq@aueb.gr Performance measurement of R&D and new product development (NPD) activities is gaining increased importance because the effectiveness and efficiency of these activities not only determine a firm's competitive advantage, but its very survival. The literature is rich on descriptions of measurement techniques and methods, but pays less attention to the actual use of the performance results in operations and decision-making. In this paper, reporting results from interviews conducted in three large companies in the electronics industry, we validate and further specify key areas of use and impact of R&D and NPD performance measurement results including ensuring better coherence and relevance of product portfolios, reorienting projects before failure, deciding on corrective actions, supporting the launching decision, enhancing staff motivation, and facilitating well-balanced decision-making. We identify implications for practice and research and propose a framework for future empirical work focusing on the interplay between the operation of the performance measurement system, the use and the impacts of measurement results.

View PDFchevron_right
PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT: PAST RESEARCH. PRESENT FINDINGS, AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
Debraj Bhattacharjee

The literature on product development continues to grow. This research is varied and vibrant, yet large and fragmented. In this article we firBt organize the burgeoning product-development literature into three streams of research: product development as rational plan, com> munication web, and disciplined problem solving. Second, we synthesize reseorch findings into • model of factors affecting the Buccess of product development. This model highlights the distinction between process performance and product effectiveness and the importance of agents, including team members, project leaderB, Benior management, customers, and suppHerB, whose behavior affects theBe outcomes. Third, we indicate potential paths for future research based on the concepts and links that are missing or not well defined

View PDFchevron_right
Okudan Kremer, G.E. and Akman, G. (2013). “A Product Development Performance Monitoring Tool for Alignment with Competitive Priorities”, International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making, Vol. 12, No. 6, pp. 1333-1360
Gul Kremer

International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making, 2013

Product Development Process (PDP) has been recognized as a source of competitive pro¯ts, and thus, it has received increasing attention. The existing methods for monitoring PDP performance, however, are either cumbersome or fail to connect the competitive priorities to the performance management process. Accordingly, in this paper, a model to evaluate PDP performance is considered as a multi-criteria decision-making problem; and a solution method, based on DEMATEL and ANP, is proposed. The evaluation criteria set was developed using the concept of competitive priorities, and the overall model was applied to an actual data set from a group of machine manufacturers in Turkey. The use scenarios for the model are also discussed.

View PDFchevron_right

References (35)

  1. Bibliography and References
  2. Ackoff, R. L. (1999). Design of Management Systems. Ackoff's best: his classic writings on management (pp. 268-290). New York: Wiley.
  3. Ackoff, R. L., & Rovin, S. (2003). Redesigning society. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.
  4. American Society for Quality. (2012). SIPOC Diagram. Retrieved July 15, 2012, from http://asq.org/service/body-of-knowledge/tools-sipoc
  5. Andy, N., Mike, G., & Ken, P. (2005). Performance measurement system design: A literature review and research agenda. International journal of operations & production management, 25(12), 1228.
  6. Basili, V., Caldiera, G., & Rombach, D. (1994). Goal Question Metric Paradigm. Encyclopedia of Software Engineering, 1.
  7. Boyd, A. J. (2005). The evolution of goal-based information modeling: literature review. Aslib Proceedings, 57(6), 523-538.
  8. Braun, B. (2004). 125 Years of Siemens Medical Solutions -125 Years of Siemens Medical Solutions.
  9. Cedergren, S., Wall, A., & Norstr6m, C. (2010). Evaluation of performance in a product development context. Business Horizons, 53(4), 359-369. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2010.03.001
  10. Chatterjee, S. (2005). Core objectives: clarity in designing strategy. California Management Review, 47(2), 33.
  11. Cross, K. F., & Lynch, R. L. (1988). The "SMART" way to define and sustain success. National Productivity Review, 8(1), 23-33. doi:10.1002/npr.4040080105
  12. Goethert, W. B., & Fisher, M. (2003). Deriving Enterprise-Based Measures Using the Balanced Scorecard and Goal-Driven Measurement Techniques ( No. CMU/SEI-2003-TN-024). CMU SEI.
  13. Hammer, M. (2010). What is business process management? Handbook on Business Process Management 1, 3-16.
  14. Jackson, M., & Petersson, P. (1999). Productivity -an overall measure of competitiveness. Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Intelligent Manufacturing Systems Leuven Belgium, 573-581.
  15. Julian Birkinshaw, & Suzanne Heywood. (2009). Too Big to Manage. The Wall Street Journal, Business Insights, R.3.
  16. Kaplan, R. S, & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard-measures that drive performance. Harvard business review, 70(1), 71-79.
  17. Kaplan, Robert S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). The Strategy-Focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment. Harvard Business Press.
  18. Kerssens-van Drongelen, I., Nixon, B., & Pearson, A. (2000). Performance measurement in industrial R&D. International Journal of Management Reviews, 2(2), 111-143. doi:10.1111/1468-2370.00034
  19. Knoblinger, C. (2011). PDSAT -A new Product Development Self-Assessment Tool. Technische Universitat Minchen.
  20. Lynch, R. L., & Cross, K. F. (1999). Measure up!: yardsticks for continuous improvement. Malden: Blackwell.
  21. Marca, D. A., & McGowan, C. L. (2006). IDEFO and SADT: a modeler's guide. Auburndale, MA: OpenProcess, Inc.
  22. Marr, B., & Neely, A. (2003). Automating the balanced scorecard -selection criteria to identify appropriate software applications. Measuring Business Excellence, 7(3), 29-36. doi:10.1 108/13683040310496480
  23. Meyer, M. (2007). Finding Performance: the new discipline in management. Business Performance Measurement: unifying theories and integrating practice (Second ed., pp. 113-124). Cambridge Univ. Press.
  24. Mills, D. Q., & Kurz, J. (2003, November 10). Siemens Medical Solutions: Strategic Turnaround. Harvard Business School.
  25. Neely, A. (2007). Business performance measurement: unifying theories and integrating practice. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge Univ. Press.
  26. Neely, A., Adams, C., & Crowe, P. (2001). The performance prism in practice. Measuring Business Excellence, 5(2), 6-12.
  27. Neely, A. D., Adams, C., & Kennerley, M. (2002). The performance prism: the scorecard for measuring and managing business success. London [u.a.]: Prentice Hall Financial Times.
  28. O'Donnell, F. J., & Duffy, A. H. B. (2002). Modelling design development performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(11), 1198-1221.
  29. OMG. (2008). Business Process Maturity Model. Retrieved March 12, 2012, from http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMM/1.0/
  30. Park, R. E., Goethert, W. B., & Florac, W. A. (1996). Goal-Driven Software Measurement -A Guidebook ( No. CMU/SEI-96-HB-002). Software Engineering Institute.
  31. Rasiel, E. M. (1999). The McKinsey way using the techniques of the world's top strategic consultants to help you and your business. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  32. Rohloff, M. (2009). Case Study and Maturity Model for Business Process Management Implementation. In U. Dayal, J. Eder, J. Koehler, & H. Reijers (Eds.), Business Process Management, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 5701, pp. 128-142). Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.
  33. SEI. (2010). CMMI for Development. Retrieved March 12, 2012, from http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/solutions/dev/index.cfm
  34. Simons, R. (1995). Levers of control: how managers use innovative control systems to drive strategic renewal. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
  35. Sink, S., & Tuttle, T. (1990). The Performance Management Question In the Organization Of the Future. Industrial Management; Norcross, 32(1), 4.

Related papers

Performance Measurement in Product Development Research
Gustavo Cazeri

Annals of Business Administrative Science, 2013

This paper reviews product development research with focus on performance indicators. The following are the four primary indicators of product development performance: (1) degree of success, (2) survival, (3) product competitiveness, and (4) development productivity and development lead-time. From 1960 to 1980, when the field of product development research was established, most studies adopted indicator (1). In contrast, after 1990, indicator (4) became mainstream. The trigger for this transition was the comparative study of international product development projects in the automobile industry by Harvard University's Kim Clark and Takahiro Fujimoto (Clark & Fujimoto, 1991). They proposed the groundbreaking empirical research method of statistically analyzing organizational structure, process, and strategies that influence the three product development performance indicators: development productivity, development lead-time, and total product quality.

View PDFchevron_right
Performance measurement in product development process (PDP): literature review and gaps for further research
Edilson Alves Rodrigues

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management

Goal: this paper performs a literature review to identify and analyze the main themes related to PDP performance measurement and presents the gaps for further exploration. Design / Methodology / Approach: this paper searches the main bases of academic data in order to find scientific papers related to PDP performance measurement and classify them on five main themes: design performance; human resources; knowledge resources; financial performance, and literature review. Results: the results show that more than fifty percent of the papers are associated with knowledge resource issues and the principal gaps to be explored are associated with design performance, human resources, financial performance and literature review. Limitations of the investigation: the main limitation is related to the bases of academic data. Additional papers available on different bases can lead to different results. Practical implications: this paper intends to make a contribution to academia and practitio...

View PDFchevron_right
Product development and organizational performance
Josh Gladson

Product development is an important element of the marketing arsenal of any organization. Unfortunately many firms do not seem to realize it. Consequently, they develop strong arteries to innovation which rubs their performance really rough. This study, therefore, examined product development and corporate performance in the Nigerian brewing industry. Data were gathered from 32 officials drawn from marketing, R&D and production departments in four breweries in the south-south and south east geographical regions of Nigeria through the use of questionnaire. The data were analyzed using appropriate statistical tool (spearman rank order correlation co-efficient). The data revealed among other things that product development facets of product quality and product lines/ product mix were positively and significantly correlated with the corporate performance facets of profitability, sales volume and customer loyalty. The study also revealed that the relationship between product size, product design and profitability, sales volume and customer loyalty was not significant. The study concludes that a positive and significant relationship exists between product quality product lines/product mix and profitability, sales volume and customer loyalty. To this end, it was recommended among other things that high product quality should be maintained and that the breweries should continuously develop new market segments and develop appropriate product accordingly.

View PDFchevron_right
Measuring product development performance in manufacturing organisations
Kulwant Pawar

International Journal of Production Economics, 2000

E!ectively managing and measuring the product development process is widely seen as a means of ensuring business survival through reduced time to market, increased quality and reduced costs. Research carried out at the University of Nottingham over the last three years has led to the development of the performance measurement for product development (PMPD) methodology to guide managers in the use of performance measures to improve decision-making during the product development process. This paper focuses on the results from two international surveys of academics and industrialists that indicate current practice and future intentions in this area. Follow up cases and a longitudinal case study are also described.

View PDFchevron_right
Proposal of an Assessment Model for New Product Development
Monica Rossi

IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 2013

In last decades, New Product Development (NPD) process has become crucial for the company success. Many efforts have been paid in order to identify methods and tools able to improve NPD, but successful models are still missing or not easily followed. Companies find difficult to implement comprehensive models for improving their NPD process, and often they aren't even aware on how they actually are performing it. Which are the main critical areas affecting NPD performances inside the organization? Which are the main opportunities of improvement? Which are the gaps to be fulfilled by a company for acting as a best practice? Both at industrial and academic level, there is the need of a global assessment model able to answer to theseand similarquestions. This paper proposes a tentative model.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Engineering
  • Computer Science
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved