05 02 NPD Process Notes
05 02 NPD Process Notes
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Innovation creates the future by directly creating the material means and conditions of
human existence. This not only applies to the near future but also lays the foundations
upon which the more distant future will be based. Technological innovations and their
related socio-economic and political implications have totally dominated and shaped
our world since the industrial revolution. The same also applies throughout the human
history but at a slower pace. This is qualified by the fact that history itself is classified
by the types of means and materials which we have used to advance the conditions of
our lives. However, the pace of scientific and technological innovation has been
gathering an increasing pace since the industrial revolution, and has been globalising
competition between states and companies. The advances in materials, production
processes and communications have added new dimensions to the quality and
magnitude of competition.
In the years since World War II, competition between companies has passed through
various phases where cost and then quality played a major role in providing the
competitive edge for the companies that could efficiently and reliably provide good
quality products at a reasonable price for a given market segment. Prior to that, the
world markets were based on availability where demand exceeded the supply of
commodities, industrial products and consumer goods. The capability to produce was
the dominant factor and the industrialised countries, their companies and individuals
enjoyed a competition free domination of the markets. However, in the world of over
production, competition for the available and tomorrow's markets has become more
expansive and intensive.
The design and development and introduction of new products to satisfy customers
has come to play a critical role in the success or failure of companies and
communities. The most influential stage during this cycle is now correctly recognised
to be the design stage. Thus the process of managing this crucial activity of
recognising the customer needs and wants, conceptualising them, materialising those
concepts into concrete designs of products and processes in a way that they can
economically and reliably be produced and introduced to the market at the right time,
is the most critical activity of modern industrial activity.
Page 1
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Page 2
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Page 3
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Strategic Advantages
Preem pting competitors
Setting s tandards
Initial Monopoly
Nam e recognition
Company performance
Operational advantage
- Lower cos t
-Skill / capability
developm ent
-Potential econom ies
- Brand im age
Page 4
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
e) Decline
Volume/
Profit sales
volume profit New product
Margins profit
Page 5
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Here the rate of demand is almost constant. The market at this stage is chiefly one of
replacement, due to deterioration of existing products or substitution of one group of
customers by another. The demand is nearly constant and starts to decline with time in
this phase. The competition is mainly focused on price. This again explains for the
declining nature of the profit margins [10].
Page 6
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
right business at the right time. This necessitates the need for new product planning to
sustain and increase the profit of the organisation. [10]
The shape of sales curve has been the basis for the formulation of marketing strategy.
More important is the formulation of product strategy. The out of phase relation
between the sales curve and profit curve highlights the need for formulating the
product strategy based on the profit curve. As seen from fig 3, it is advantageous to
introduce a new product just after the existing product has completed the growth
phase.
Page 7
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Page 8
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
The transition from the SOTA stage to the advanced stage of the TLC is characterised
by a rapid increase in market size and the emergence of substantial profits (figure 4).
This transition away from the SOTA represents the end of high tech phases of TLC.
At this stage the firm is no longer technologically different from its competitors.
The death of these high technology stages (cutting edge and SOTA) is often traumatic
to the firm whose self image is intensively high technology. Market shake out, Market
share fluctuation, and market segmentation are among other factors that effect the
rapid and drastic changes between SOTA and advanced phases of the TLC.
Industry profitability
Number of firms
Fig 4. TLC Stage Effects on Industry Population and Profits. Source:[13, 14]
Page 9
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
technological attributes. The skills needed to develop the product may be sufficient to
market the products. In the advanced phase the emergence of large market, less
sophisticated and demanding customer requirements which are generally aimed at
bottom line benefits (profits), warrant the firm to modify its competitive marketing
strategy. This is because the firm approaches a position in the TLC where the
marketing efforts are more necessary than the technical efforts. The technical efforts
and marketing efforts at various stages of TLC is represented in figure 5.
One of the option for a firm entering advanced phase from SOTA phase is to re-
orientate itself as a market oriented firm. The case of APPLE COMPUTERS
highlights this aspect. Stephen Jobs, one of the two engineers who founded the
company and was responsible for its early growth and success was replaced by John
Scully, an experienced consumer marketing manager from Pepsico. This changed
reflected the different needs Apple faced as it entered the advanced phase of the TLC.
It is often observed that the potential market for the advanced stage are overstated.
This results from the focusing on the "newness" of the technologies and widely
proclaiming the revolutionary impact they will have on the market.
100
Marketing
Relative Efforts
effort
Allocation
Engineering
Efforts
STAGES OF TECHNOLOGY
Fig 5. Marketing- Engineering Balance at the different stages of TLC Source [13, 14]
Page 10
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
competitor to catch up, unless the competitor can move into market share leadership
position. Thus, even with head on competition the firm with lowest marginal cost can
flood the market with a price above the cost but below the cost of their competitors.
Thus the market leader earns profit while removing competition. This aspect makes
market segmentation (or niche strategies) critical to firms who cannot compete on
price.
All the above factors like managerial transition, market overestimation, and
experience curve pricing lead to a market "Shake out". Eventually, market growth
fails to meet expectations or new entrants into the industry erode the market share
among market leaders. Either case can trigger a market shake out. Two distinct
approaches can be adopted by firms.
The first of these is the participation of the firm in "Price Wars" (i.e., price reduction
to solve the marketing problems). As prices rapidly fall, only those firms with the
lowest marginal cost survive. The industry as a whole loses money enduring the price
war. The firms which survive, gain large market shares for long run profitability.
Participation in such price wars can be disadvantageous for the fear of running out of
money before the competitor. The other disadvantage is that caused by the
deterioration in product quality which is generally accompanied by such price
reductions. This could also erode the company image in a longer term. The price war
may also train customers to be price sensitive and expect prices to fall over time. The
market place of personal computer highlights case.
The alternate approach for a firm is to segment the market and pursue niche strategy to
survive the shakeout and to gain competitive edge.
Page 11
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
The mature technological stage of the TLC is characterised by the lack of strategic
production advantages. Competition shifts to customer service as price stabilise and
product approaches undifferentiated "commodity" status. Producers compete to
establish any point of difference that could help market the product. At this point the
firm's technology becomes a platform on which other technologies will be based. At
the same time the firm's product, while technologically mature, may still face
significant growth opportunities as market applications increase. Thus the
technologically mature product may not yet have reached maturity in the PLC.
Page 12
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
form that customers need. Hence, based on markets and technology, there are varying
degrees of newness in each of the two dimensions as shown in figure 6.
In the technological dimension, the requirements may range from no new technical
knowledge, machinery or plant, to an entirely new spectrum of technical and
production knowledge. The marketing requirements also range from no change in
customers, selling or channels of distribution to a need for developing new customers,
a new sales force, and new distribution channels.
Increasing technical requirements
No Improved New
Technical change Technology Technology
No
M Market
a
r Change
k
e
t
i
n Expanded
g Product
Market Improved
line
n Products
e extension
e
d
s
New
Market
Market Diversification
Extension
b Next Generation
Next Generation Processes or Platform
e Alliance or
Partnered
Proj ects
Page 13
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Page 14
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Technology
Assessment Technology
Strategy
and
Forecasting
Project
Management &
Execution
Market
Assessment Product/Market
and Strategy
Forecasting
Page 15
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Technology Strategy
Technology
Assessment
and
Forecasting
Dev elopment Proj ect Post Project
Aggregate
Goals & Management & Learning
Proj ect Plan
Obj ectiv es Execution and
Improvement
Market
Assessment
and
Forecasting
Product/Market
Strategy
Page 16
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Shipping
Investigations Development Products
The nature of the funnel is defined by the way in which an organisation generates,
screens, reviews, and converges on the contents of a development project as it moves
from idea to design, prototype, production, and to the final customer.
In effect, the development funnel clarifies and sets the formal methods and channels
by which an organisation takes the critical decisions, including the criteria for decision
making, that an organisation needs to rapidly develop products and introduce them to
the market place.
In practice development funnels are not smooth and the inputs / outputs of each stage
are more convoluted than depicted in the diagram. But clarifying these, provides a
basis to improve on a given situation and it is very useful for an organisation to model
its own funnel with respect to various activities that are to be completed at various
stages of product development.
Wheelwright and Clark generalise two different models of funnel which are dominant
in the reality as illustrated in figure 11(a) and 11(b).
A) Model 1: R&D Driven Survival of the Fittest. B) Model 2: A Few Big Bets.
Page 17
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Page 18
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Poor organisation
Inadequate resources Market changes structure
Inadequate knowledge
Too many projects Changes in of the capabilities
requirement
of other functions
POOR PRODUCT
DEVELOPMENT
Inadequate focus Not unique
Overestimating
technical Low entry barriers
capabilities for competitors
Fig. 12. Cause and effect diagram for poor product development
7.3 Model of effective development
The model of effective product development is illustrated in figure 13. The model
consists of three distinct stages they are illustrated as the front the middle and the rear
in figure 13.
The objective of the "front end" is to provide a vision to the organisation. The vision
is provided by arriving at the strategy for the organisation. All the functional strategies
are derived from the business strategy of the organisation. The business strategy is
formulated after a detailed SWOT (Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, Threat) analysis
of the business.
The model of effective product development addresses the following issues [15]
a) Priority for the company - Strategy
b) Process & organisation for development - Other front end activities
c) Approach for development - Middle phase or the development phase.
d) Results - Rear end of the model
Typically functional strategy can be classified as Engineering strategy, Manufacturing
strategy and Marketing strategy. The important step after the evolution of the strategy
for the organisation is the integration of the strategies to the product development
initiatives. The final step in the front end process is the planning and organising for
product development.
Page 19
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Page 20
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
the approach for developing weapons with its suppliers. Thus a number of
organisations ended up using PPP process.
The Phased Review Process broke development into discrete phases. There were
review points at the end of each phase. The tasks in the next phase was taken up only
after successfully completing the previous phase. Funding was also linked to the
completion. Thus it was more of a measurement and control methodology to ensure
that the project was proceeding as it should.
History has given mixed reviews to this PPP process. The system did bring discipline
to an otherwise chaotic, ad hoc activity. It reduced technical risk and ensured
completion of task. Some units of Hewlett Packard still use a modified version of this
Phased Review Process[16]. On the other hand PPP process was cumbersome because
of the laborious "check off" of numerous tasks at each point. It was also slow and
projects could be held up in a queue for management review or could be put on a
"hold" at the review point awaiting the completion of one behind the schedule task.
The scope was narrow as it addressed the issue of development rather than focusing
on the entire process from idea to launch. The process was usually engineering driven.
This also created barriers for communication which is of paramount importance in a
new product development. As this was developed at NASA with the objective of
dealing with technical risk, it was not effective in dealing with the business risk faced
by organisations who adopted this technique.
To draw an analogy, this process can be compared to the organisation which have
specialised process layouts. Here a group of machines with similar characteristics are
grouped together (for Example, a milling centre consists of number of milling
machines and a drilling centre consists of number of drilling machines). The material
travels from one centre to another and is inspected after each operation. In the PPP
process the information or idea travelled from one department to another.
The above discussions does not suggest that PPP is an inefficient process, it only
represents that the PPP process cannot be applied directly for the development of
products which are largely influenced by the uncertain market conditions. As cited by
Cooper [16] "..generation of managers and engineers did manage to put a man on the
moon in less than a decade using the system (PPP)- a feat that we have yet to repeat..".
A number of authors [12] suggest the use of faster phased approach. The approach
aims at promoting integration between different departments. For example, functional
members can be brought physically close and encouraged to communicate openly and
co-operate closely. More control over product development can be delegated to
project teams and decisions at the end of each phase can be given priority.
Page 21
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Over the last few decades many success factors have been uncovered like the factors
that separate successful projects and firms from less successful ones, practices that
result in shorter time to market etc. [12]. These findings suggested the cross functional
project team approach for an effective product development.
Concurrent engineering or simultaneous engineering is an approach in which each
function is represented in the project team. Functional representative are closely
integrated into project teams. These teams are given broad and ambitious goals and
delegated considerable control over product development [12]. Such a process has
been started at the Hewlett Packard's computer peripherals factory at Bristol (UK)
which manufacturers proprietary products for its own systems [17].
Multi-functional team members are physically close and share information about
market needs, technical feasibility, product costs, manufacturing capabilities, etc.
These teams work closely with customers, watch competitors and involve suppliers
early in product development. Team members also agree on specific plans, schedules
and design specification as a group [12].
Many companies have successfully implemented concurrent approach to effectively
develop products. For example AT&T used concurrent approach to cut development
time for their cordless phone in half while lowering cost and increasing quality[12].
Since product development team approach require people from different function to
work together intensely, it is important to balance team members skills and
personalities. The people need to be technically sound and broad enough to recognise
the other functions [18, 3]. This approach increases risk by reducing confidence in the
quality of information as both design of product and manufacture take place
simultaneously, and requires flatter organisations with devolved responsibility. The
concurrent approach may not be suitable for all product development situations. [12].
It is suggested that superiority of one approach over the other depends on the needs of
the product development situation. To draw an analogy, it is effective to use faster
phased approach in situations that resemble a relay race but it is advantageous to use a
concurrent approach for situations that resemble rugby or football. The faster phased
approach appears to be more appropriate for situations that do not call for a structure
capable of processing many concurrent product solutions. This appears to be true in
the case of minor product change that requires very few inter functional solutions.
This also appears to be true in the case of radical product innovations (breakthrough
innovations), where the emphasis is on upstream solutions. On the other hand the
concurrent approach appears more appropriate for situations that call for a structure
capable of processing many concurrent product solutions. This is often true in the case
of incremental product innovations and process innovations. If a faster phased
approach is used it may result in so many overlooked functional requirements [12].
Page 22
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
HIGH
USE
CONCURRENT
APPROACH
Organisational
needs for
concurrent
product
development
From the above, it can be summarised that the faster phased approach is more
appropriate for low and high levels of product innovations, while concurrent approach
is more appropriate for moderate levels of product innovation. This is illustrated in
figure 14.
Page 23
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
reduced cost, improved quality. The disadvantages of this approach is the isolation of
the team members from the rest of the organisation may increase cost by duplicating
resources, may create integration problems for members of the project team returning
to the parent organisation and may reduce co-operation between these units and the
rest of the organisation [12]. The other risk is that of overlooking few vital steps in the
process of faster development and lack of experience [6]
Page 24
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Business case
Prelimenary preparation
Assessment
Review
Stage Gate Stage Gate Stage
5 5 4 4 3
Page 25
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Projects must go through all stages and all gates, irrespective of the risk involved
in the product development. This is time consuming and undesirable.
The system does not lead to project priority and focus. This does not address the
issues of resource allocation.
Some new product processes are spelled out in far too much detail. For example
IBM's "red book" new product scheme spells out every minute detail in eleven leaf
binders compared to Polaroid's user friendly and manageable document. The
problems with the detailed manual is that they are rarely read and the system is
never totally understood and may never get universally accepted and implemented.
The second deficiency is that detailed procedures get followed blindly. The need
for thinking does not exist.
Some new product process tend to be bureaucratic.
.. etc
Idea
prelim Test and
investigation Business case Development
validate
Page 26
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
be made consciously at the gates and with full recognition of the risks involved. For
example, the ordering of production facility before testing the product involves risk
and the decision must be made with utmost care. It is often logical to cut down the
long lead time activities to match the lead time of the other activities even before
formulating a stage gate system.
8.5.3 Focused
At each gate the project is not only judged against the standard set of criteria but also
with the other projects in the pipe line and against company historic norms. This is
done to review the resource allocation across the different projects. Additionally, the
real time versus calendar time resource commitment decisions will be directly
addressed. This results in better priority and sharper focus.
8.5.4 Flexibility
In the third generation stage gate process all gates need not be necessary. For example
in Procter and Gamble (P&G) the teams decide on the stages and gates necessary for a
particular project [16]. It is recommended for a new organisation to follow rigid rules
and gates during the initial stages until they gain experience in the full system. As
professionalism develops, they can move towards a flexible process. [16].
The third generation process too has some disadvantages. The third generation process
introduces much more freedom to the project teams. Freedom and discretion is closely
followed by risk of making mistakes. Given the fact that project teams are more
familiar with the details and intricacies than any other group, senior managers must
increasingly rely on the team for reasoned arguments and recommendations. Because
the process is delicate, sophisticated and sensitive, an experienced and professional
management approach is necessary.
Page 27
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
required by the customer. Historically these skills have been amassed in the domain of
functional specialist, working in separate departments. Development projects
necessarily pass through various phases and a clear understanding of the problems
encountered at each phase, is of utmost importance at the early stages of
conceptualisation and design for an effective development process. One way of
bringing the blend of the required expertise together, is to form a project team
consisting of various necessary skills and knowledge.
One of the advantages of a project team is that a group (team) can produce ideas in
larger quantity and quality than those produced by the average individual[21]. Recent
studies [22] (1993) indicate that over 76% of the companies use multi-disciplinary
teams to develop products (study was carried out to encompass wide range of
companies).
With the ever increasing awareness of cross functional teams, the structure of the team
has been focused in numerous studies. Fujimoto [23] highlights that project activities
can be organised in four dominant structures (as illustrated in figure 16), they are
Page 28
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
Functional
FM FM Manager FM FM FM
(FM)
FM FM FM FM FM FM
Market
ENG MFG MKG ENG MFG MKG
C
o
n
c
e
L L L p Market
t
C
PM o
n
c
e
PM
L L L p
t
Page 29
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
b) Strengths
The strengths of this structure is similar to the strengths of the functional arrangement.
Another important advantage of this structure is the existence of a project co-ordinator
(project manager) who ensures that the project is carried out as planned and expedites
the project when necessary. Thus improved communication at the interfaces of the
different function and overall project co-ordination are some of the strengths of this
structure.
c) Weakness
The weakness of the functional structure are prevalent in this structure also except for
the reduction in delays at the interfaces. Another weakness of this approach is caused
Page 30
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
by the inadequate authority given to the project manager. The inadequate authority can
often lead to lack of ownership and motivation on the part of project manager.
9.3 Heavy weight team structure
a) Organisation
In contrast to the light weight project manager, the heavy weight project manager has
authority to control the resources and are generally senior managers in the
organisation having relevant expertise in the development activities. The core group
of people are generally located together in one place. The short term assessment is
carried out by the project leader, while in a longer term the career development is
planned and monitored by the respective functional managers because the individuals
are not assigned to a project team on a permanent basis. The team consists of few
specialists and more people with general skills in problem solving. The high
performance work teams "HPWT" introduced by Compaq computers is a good
example of such a team structure, studies indicate that Compaq's HPWT took just 39
days to develop a working prototype of mother board[24].
b) Strengths
One of the most cited advantage of the heavy weight team is related to the
aspects of ownership and commitment of the team members to the project. These
aspects help in adhering to the schedule.
The interfaces between functions are reduced or even eliminated to a large
extent, thus the problems associated with delays in the interface between
function is reduced. The reduced delays helps in developing the product in a
shorter period of time.
c) Weakness
The lack of in-depth knowledge of the team members in their respective fields
may be disadvantageous.
The introduction of the new product to the manufacturing can also be a difficult
task.
The role of representatives from the functional groups after the development is
difficult to predict.
Page 31
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
teams formulate their own organisational practices and procedures. These are also
referred to as new venture units [19].
b) Strengths
The primary strength lies in the focus created by the formation of such team. The
project team is totally responsible for delays and are given enough authority.
They are also accountable for the results. These three factors fosters a strong
sense of ownership.
c) Weakness
These teams can expand the bounds of the project definition and tackle redesign
of the entire product instead of looking for opportunities to utilise existing
design.
As in the heavy weight team the process of introducing new projects in
manufacturing is a difficult task.
Page 32
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
corporate power. In Epson, there are number of groups in charge of the same model's
circuitry, casing, operating system, and language. There are few conflicts over
specification, costs and deadlines. The Epson's strategy aids such a process and tends
to nurture such conflicts in order to achieve the objectives. The EP101 dot-matrix
printer is one of the successful outcomes of these conflicting teams. Some companies
like Fuji Xerox developed the FX 3500 by adopting a sequential stage approach or
PPP approach (referred to as 'Sashimi approach' by Fuji). The PPP approach was
however modified and tailor made to suit their conditions [21].
10.0 SUMMARY
Understanding the individual components of the product development process is of
utmost importance, but the way they in which they interact with each other and work
as a whole is even more important and they way they are organised and managed is
what provide a competitive advantage to an organisation.
Today's competitive environment demand a customer focused technology and market
/product strategy that allows a firm to continually and systematically introduce
products to the market. This requires clear goals and objective which then have to be
crystallised in an aggregate product and process plan, which have to be executed with
great efficiency to produce high quality goods for customers when they require them.
A company has to assess its position to set clear goals and objectives; effectively
generate the ideas and concepts; put in place means and criteria by which it screens
these ideas and selects appropriate ones to its development strategy; and execute them
efficiently with respect to cost, and time, producing high quality products that satisfy
the intended customers. Furthermore an organisation must be able to learn from itself
and the outside world to continually respond to the required changes that are
necessitated by changes in customer demands and technological progress.
This necessitates a company to adopt organisational forms and structures that are
appropriate to the current and planed development requirements.
11.0 REFERENCES
1- Gupta, A. K, and Wilemon, D. L., Accelerating the development of technology
based new products, California Management Review, Page 24-44, Winter 1990.
2- Wheelwright, S. C., and Clark, K.B., Revolutionizing Product Development,
Quantum Leaps in Speed, Efficiency, and Quality, The Free Press, 1992.
3- Perry, T. S., Teamwork plus technology cuts development time, IEEE Spectrum,
Page 61 - 67, October 1990.
4- Stalk, G. Jr., Time the next source of competitive advantage, Harvard Business
Review, Page 41 - 51, Aug. 1988.
Page 33
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
5- Whiting, R., Product development as a process, Electronic business, June 17, Page
30 -36, Year 1991.
6- Rosneau, M. D. Jr. , From experience: Faster new product development, The
Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol.5, Page 150-153, Year 1988.
7- Billie J O Zirger, B. J. O., and Maidique, M. A., A model of new product
development: an empirical test, Management Science, Vol.36, Page 867-883, No 7,
July 1990.
8- Griffin, A., Metrics for measuring product development cycle time, The Journal of
Product Innovation Management, Vol. 10, Page 112-125, Year 1993.
9- Shaker A Zahra, S. A., and Ellor, D., Accelerating new product development and
successful market introduction, SAM Advanced Management Journal, Page 9-15,
Winter 1993
10- Booz Allen & Hamilton, Management of new products, Booz.Allen & Hamilton
Inc., USA, 1968.
11- Millson, M. R., Raj, S. P., and Wilemon, D., A survey of major approaches for
accelerating new product development, The Journal of Product Innovation
Management, Vol.9, Page 53-69, Year 1992.
12- Cordeo, R., Managing for speed to avoid product obsolescence: A study of
techniques, The Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol.8, Page 283 - 294,
Year 1991.
13- Popper, E., and Buskirk, B. D., Technology life cycles in industrial markets,
Industrial Marketing Management; Vol. 21, Page 23- 31, Year 1992.
14- Stalk, G. Jr. and Hout, T. M., Competing against time - How time based
competition is shaping global markets, Free Press 1990.
15-Kennard K B, From experience: Japanese product development process; The
Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol.8, Page 184-188, Year 1991.
16- Cooper, R. G., Third generation new product processes, The Journal of Product
Innovation Management, Page 3-14.
17- Costanzo, L., Knocking down walls, Engineering, Page 14-15, November 1993.
18- Uttal, B., Speeding new ideas to market, Fortune, Page 54-57, March 2, 1987.
19- Bart, C. K., New venture units: Use them wisely to manage innovation, Sloan
Management Review, Page 35 to 43, Summer 1988.
20- Cooper, R. G., Stage gate systems: A new tool for managing new products,
Business Horizons, Page 44-55, May-June 1990.
21- Nonka, I., Redundant overlapping organisation: A Japanese approach to
managing the innovation process, California Management Review, Page 27 -37,
Spring 1990.
Page 34
Product Designa nd Development Management New Product Development
22- Page, A. L., Assessing new product development practices and performance:
Establishing crucial norms, The Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 10,
page 273-290, Year 1993.
23- Fujimoto, T., Organisation for effective product development, DBA Dissertation,
1989.
24- Webb, D., HP and COMPAQ make empowerment work, Electronic Business,
Page 54 to 57, Dec. 1992.
Page 35