跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.192.247.184) 您好!臺灣時間:2023/02/06 10:52
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:吳美芳
研究生(外文):Mei-Fang Wu
論文名稱:創新性新產品開發方法論:關鍵成功路徑法
論文名稱(外文):An Innovative Methodology of New Product Development—Key Success Paths Approach
指導教授:張保隆張保隆引用關係
指導教授(外文):Pao Long Chang
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:逢甲大學
系所名稱:商學研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:一般商業學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2012
畢業學年度:100
語文別:英文
論文頁數:136
中文關鍵詞:關鍵成功路徑兩階段調整程序關鍵失敗路徑關鍵成功因素關鍵成功路徑法新產品開發
外文關鍵詞:Key failure pathsTwo-stage adjustment processKey success factorsKey success paths approachKey success pathsNew product development
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:801
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:150
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
  快速發展的科技與高度競爭的全球市場,突顯新產品開發在企業永續經營上的重要地位。新產品開發創造市場競爭優勢並且提供廠商存活的機會。釵h文獻指出新產品開發的成功關鍵因素(KSFs)對於研發成果的成敗具有決定性的影響。可以用來探索關鍵成功因素與成果之間的因果關聯以及創造成功機會的NPD 策略,包括回歸分析法(RA)、組態比較分析法(CCA)、質性比較分析法(QCA)、模糊質性比較分析法(Fuzzy Set QCA)與粗集合理論(RST)。
  本論文主要的目的在於探索關鍵成功因素與NPD 成功結果之間的關聯性,將如何有效促進公司整體的利益。於是本論文建構由模糊質性比較法(f/s QCA)衍伸而來的
關鍵成功因素法(Key Success Paths Approach)。成功關鍵路徑法是探索關鍵成功因素組合與其特定研發成果因果關聯的重要方法論。
由特定各層級績效表現的全部關鍵成功因素組合,將引導NPD 邁向成功的成果。當特定的關鍵成功因素與成功的NPD 成果所形成的組合,稱之為關鍵成斥纁|(Key Success Paths, KSPs);而特定關鍵成功因素與失敗的NPD 成果所形成的組合,則稱之為關鍵失敗路徑(Key Failure Paths, KFPs)。關鍵成功或失敗路徑是引領新產品策略邁向良好績效表現的重要指引方針,例如市場、社區或顧客關係管理。
  本論文進一步以實務研究法驗證KSPs 方法的可行性與再現性。利用問卷訪談國內製造業者與專家,蒐集到537 個NPD 案例。根據資料分析與研究,得出42條成功關鍵路徑(KSPs)與197 條關鍵失敗路徑(KFPs)。基於關鍵路徑,本論文提出若干論述:1.) 存在一條以上的關鍵成功或失敗路徑。換言之,”條條大路通羅馬”。 2.)根據實務研究得知,NPD 想要得到成功的結果,六項關鍵成功因素之中,必須至少要有兩項以上績效表現達到高水準,以及其他項目維持中等以上的水準。3.) 只要有一項關鍵成功因素的績效表現是低水準,即便其他項目達到中等水準,NPD將呈現失敗結果。4.) 沒有任何一項特定關鍵成功因素是達成關鍵成功路徑或失敗路徑的必要因素。5.) 部分特定關鍵成功或失敗路徑是由某些特定的關鍵成功因素組合而成。這些論述提醒企業必須藉由路徑慎選與監控關鍵成功因素及其績效表現。
最後本論文提出兩階段調整程序,分別在短期與長期間逆轉勝,由關鍵失敗路徑轉換為成功路徑。在短期中,只要將關鍵失敗路徑中的兩至三項關鍵成功因素的績效向上提高一個層級,將有19 調關鍵失敗路徑可以轉換為5 條短期關鍵成功路徑;同樣在長期中,只要將這5 短期關鍵成功路徑中的兩至三項關鍵成功因素的績效向上提高一個層級,將可以轉換為14 條長期關鍵成功路徑。
本論文對於學術的貢獻有四項:第一,建構關鍵成功路徑法,以探索策略管理關鍵成功因素與特定成果之間的關聯性;第二,辨識關鍵成斥纁|,以確保策略的成央F
第三, 辨識關鍵失敗路徑,謹防誤觸失敗路徑,防止並消除有限資源分配錯誤的風險。最後,提出兩階段調整程序以避免危機、提升企業的整體利益。
ABSTRACT
Highly developed technology and a highly competitive global market highlight the important role of new product development (NPD) in sustainable company operation. Only through continuous new product development can companies create competitive market advantage and improve chances for survival. Literature indicates that the success and failure of NPD are affected by key success factors (KSFs), such as the support and commitment of senior managers, resource spending, excellent NPD processes, synergy and strategy focus, outstanding cross-team work, and well-communicated mechanisms. Scholars use regression analysis method, configuration comparison analysis method (CCA), qualitative comparison analysis method (QCA), fuzzy set qualitative comparison analysis (f/s QCA), and rough set theory (RST) to explore the relationships among KSFs and NPD outcomes as well as create NPD strategies that improve success opportunities.
The main purpose of this paper is to explore the relationships among KSFs and specific success outcomes for strategy management that can promote overall business benefits. This paper, therefore, explores and constructs the key success paths (KSPs) approach based on f/s QCA. The KSPs Approach provides the methodology to explore the strong explanatory power relationships among the KSFs and their specific successful outcomes.
Combining these relationships with the entire KSF in various specific performance levels lead to specific successful outcomes. Such relationships between KSFs and successful outcomes are called KSPs, and the relationships among KSFs and failed outcomes are called key failure paths (KFPs). Success or failure paths are important guidelines that lead strategy management to well-performed outcomes, such as market, community development, or customer relationship strategy management.
The paper uses empirical study to verify the feasibility and reproducibility of KSPs approach. Questionnaire surveys and expert interviews are used to collect data from 537 manufacturing industry domestic respondents. This paper proposes arguments based on explored 42 KSPs and 197 KFPs. 1.) There is more than one KSP/KFP. In other words, “all roads lead to Rome.” 2.) Among the six KSFs in the empirical study, there are at least three high-performance levels, and other performances should be within intermediate levels or more to reach success outcomes. 3.) As long as there is one low-performance level, the performance level of the others in the intermediate level or less tend to result in failure. 4.) No specific key success factor is necessary in either success or failure paths. 5.) A part of specific success/failure paths is combined with specific KSFs in various performance levels. These statements argue that the company must carefully select and monitor cautiously the causal relationship as well as handle and control the performance levels of KSFs.
Finally, a two-stage adjustment process in the short and long-run periods of NPD is proposed to transform failure into success. After upgrading the performance level of 2 or 3 KSF items, 19 KFPs transform into 5 short-run KSPs in short run period; and these 5 short-run KSPs transform into 14 long-run KSPs in long run period.
This paper has a three-fold contribution to academic research: first, it constructs the KSP Approach so as to explore the relationships among KSFs and specific outcomes of strategic management; second, it identifies KSPs that help ensure the success of strategy management; and third, it identifies causal relationships for KFPs so as to avoid mistakes and eliminate the risk of allocating limited resources; and finally, to propose a two-stage adjusting process in short and long-run NPD period to avoid crisis and promote overall benefits of the business.
CONTENTS
致謝詞(ACKNOWLEDGEMENT) I
摘要 II
ABSTRACT IV
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 RESEARCH MOTIVATION 1
1.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 3
1.3 RESEARCH FLOW 5
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7
2.1 NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 7
2.2 KEY SUCCESS FACTORS (KSFS) 10
2.3 NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT (NPD) PERFORMANCE 15
2.4 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN KSFS AND NPD PERFORMANCE 19
2.5 REGRESSION ANALYSIS METHOD 24
2.6 CONFIGURATION COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS (CCA) METHOD 27
2.7 QUALITATIVE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS (QCA) METHOD 31
2.8 FUZZY SET QUALITATIVE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS (FS QCA) METHOD 34
2.9 ROUGH SET THEORY 44
CHAPTER 3 KEY SUCCESS PATHS APPROACH 53
3.1 SELECT AND DEFINE KEY SUCCESS FACTORS (KSFS) 55
3.2 DATA COLLECTION 55
3.3 SET UP FUZZY RANGE SCOPE 56
3.4 CALCULATE MEMBERSHIP SCORES 57
3.5 CONVERT INTO TRUTH TABLE 58
3.6 CALCULATE CONSISTENCY AND COVERAGE VALUE 59
3.7 KEY SUCCESS PATHS AND KEY FAILURE PATHS (KSPS AND KFPS) 62
3.8 ARGUMENTS OF KEY SUCCESS PATHS APPROACH 64
3.9 TWO-STAGE NPD ADJUSTMENT PROCESS 66
CHAPTER 4 EMPIRICAL STUDY AND FINDINGS 72
4.1 SELECT AND DEFINING KEY SUCCESS FACTORS (KSFS) 72
4.2 DATA COLLECTION 76
4.3 SET UP FUZZY RANGE SCOPE 76
4.4 CALCULATE MEMBERSHIP SCORES 77
4.5 FUZZY TRUTH TABLE WITH CONSISTENCY VALUE 79
4.6 KEY SUCCESS PATHS AND KEY FAILURE PATHS 80
4.7 ARGUMENTS VERIFICATION 84
4.8 TWO-STAGE ADJUSTMENT PROCESS OF NPD STRATEGY 97
4.9 SUMMARY IN EMPIRICAL STUDY 109
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION 111
5.1 CONCLUSION 111
5.2 LIMITATIONS AND DISCUSSION 114
REFERENCE 116
REFERENCE
Anthony and Benedetto, 1999. Identifying the Key Success Factors in New Product Launch, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16(6), 530-544.
Bullen CB, and Rockart JF, 1981. A Primer on Critical Success Factors, CISR Working Paper # 69, Center for Information Systems Research, Sloan School of Management, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Calantone R, Vickery S, and Deoge, C., 1995. Business performance and strategic new product development activities: an empirical investigation. Journal of Product Innovation Management 12(3), 214–223.
Clark K, Chew WB, and Fujimoto T., 1987. Product development in the world auto industry. Brookings Papers on Economic Activities, 729–771.
Cooke P, Uranga MG, and Etxebarria G, 1997. Regional innovation systems: institutional and organizational dimensions. Research Policy 26, 475–491.
Cooper RG, 1994. New Products: The Factors that Drive Success, International Marketing Review, 11(1), 60 – 76.
Cooper RG, 1996. Overhauling the new product process. Industrial Marketing Management. 25(6), 465–482.
Cooper RG and Edgett SJ, 2006. Stage-Gate and the Critical Success Factors for New Product Development. Product Development Institute. July, 1-6.
Cooper RG, and Kleinschmidt EJ, 1986. An investigation into the new product process: steps, deficiencies, and impact. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 3(2), 71–85.
Cooper RG, and Kleinschmidt EJ, 1987a. What makes a new product a winner: Success factors at the project level R., R & D Management, 17(3), 175-189.
Cooper RG, and Kleinschmidt EJ, 1987b. Success factors in product innovation. Industrial Marketing Management 16(3):215-223
Cooper RG, and Kleinschmidt EJ, 1991b. New product processes at leading industrial firms. Industrial Marketing Management. 20(2), 137–148.
Cooper RG, and Kleinschmidt EJ, 1993. Major New Products: What Distinguishes the Winners in the Chemical Industry? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 10(2), 90–111.
Cooper RG, and Kleinschmidt EJ, 1995. Benchmarking the firm''s critical success factors in new product development, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 4(3), 169-184.
Cooper RG, and Kleinschmidt EJ, 2007. Winning Businesses in Product Development: The Critical Success Factors. Research-Technology Management ( http: / /www. p rod- dev.com/down loads/working_ papers/wp_26.pdf); downloaded on 10 December 2009.
Crawford CM, 1991. New Products Management. Richard D. Irwin Inc., Homewood, Ill.
Di Benedetto CA, 1999. Identifying the Key Success Factors in New Product Launch. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 16(6), 530-544.
Duysters and J. Hagedoorn, 2001. Core competencies and company performance in the world-wise computer industry, Journal of High Technology Management Research 11 (1), pp. 75–91.
Dwyer LD, Mellor R, 1991. New product process activities and project outcomes. R&D Management 21(2), 31–52.
Epstein J, Duerr D, Kenworthy L, and Ragin C. 2008. Comparative Employment Performance: A Fuzzy-Set Analysis, in Kenworthy, L. & Hicks, A. (Eds.), Method and Substance in Macrocomparative Analysis. Houndmills etc.: Palgrave Macmillan, 67-90.
Faure C, 2009. Attribution Biases in the Evaluation of New Product Development Team Members. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26(4), 407–423.
Griffin A, and Page A, 1993. An interim report on measuring product development success and failure. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 10(4): 291-308
Hagedoon J, and Cloodt M, 2003. Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators? Research Policy, 32 (1), 1365–1379.
Hellström, E. 2001. Conflict cultures: Qualitative Comparative Analysis of environmental conflicts in forestry. Silva Fennica Monographs 2, 109.
Henderson R, and Cockburn I, 1994. Measuring competence: exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management Journal 15 (1), 63–84.
Holland, Gaston, and Gomes, 2000. Critical success factors for cross-functional teamwork in new product development, International Journal of Management Reviews, 2(3), 231-259.
Hopkins DS, 1981. New product winners and losers. Research Management, 12, 12–17.
House RJ, 1971. A Path Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness, Administrative Science Quarterly, 321-338.
House RJ, 1996. Path-Goal Theory of Leadership: Lessons, Legacy, and a Reformulated Theory, Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 323-352.
Järvinen J, Lamberg J-A, Murmann J-P, and Ojala J, 2009. Alternative Paths to Competitive Advantage: A Fuzzy-Set Analysis of the Origins of Large Firms, Industry and Innovation, Vol. 16, No. 6, 545–574.
Ketelhöhn W, 1998. What is a key success factor? European Management Journal. 16(3): 335-340.
Lester DH, 1998. Critical success factors for new product development, Research Technology Management, 41(1), 36-44.
Levy, and Schwartz, 1973. Key factors and events in the innovation process. Research Management, 16, 8–15.
Lu Yang, 2004. The R&D and marketing cooperation across new product development stages: An empirical study of Taiwan’s IT industry. Industrial Marketing Management. 33(7), 593– 605.
Lynn, Abel, Valentine and Wright, 1999. Key Factors in Increasing Speed to Market and Improving New Product Success Rates, Industrial Marketing Management, 28(4), 319-326.
Mariona, and Simpson, 2009. New product development practice application to an early-stage firm: the case of the PaperPro® StackMaster™”, Design Studies, 30, 561-587.
McQuarrie, and McIntyre, 1986. Focus groups and the development of new products by technologically driven companies: some guidelines. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 3(1), 40-47.
Millson MR, and Wilemon D, 2006. Driving new product success in the electrical equipment manufacturing industry, Technovation. 26(11), 1268-1286. .
Myers S, Marquis DG, 1969. Successful industrial innovations. National Science Foundation, Technical Report NSF 69–17. 1–117.
Parry ME, and Song XM, 1994. Identifying new product successes in China. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 11(1), 15-30.
Pinto and Prescott, 1988. Variations in critical success factors over the stages in the project life cycle, Journal of Management, 14(1), 5-18.
Ragin CC, 2000. Fuzzy-set Social Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. USA
Ragin CC, 2007. Fuzzy Sets: Calibration Versus Measurement. NB: Forthcoming in David Collier, Henry Brady, and Janet Box Steffensmeier (eds.), Methodology volume of Oxford Handbooks of Political Science.
Ragin CC, 2008. Redesigning Social Inquiry Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.
Ries A, and Ries L, 2004. The Origin of Brands: Discover the Natural Laws of Product Innovation and Business Survival. Harper Business, New York.
Roberts, and Burke, 1974. Six new products—what made them successful. Research Management, 16, 21–24.
Selinger PG, Astrahan MM, Chamerlin DD, Lorie RA and Price TG, 1979. Access Path Selection in a Relational Database, Management System, 23-34.
Sixotte H, and Langley A, 2000. Integration’s mechanisms and R&D project performance. Journal of Engineering and Technology Managemen,t 17(1), 1–37.
Song XM, and Parry ME, 1997. A cross-national comparative study of new product development processes: Japan and the United States. Journal of Marketing, 61(April), 1–18.
Stefanovitz JP, Nagano MS, and Santos FCA, 2010. Influence of the technological innovation degree on knowledge creation: Evidence from a Brazilian firm, African Journal of Business Management, 4(5), 631-643, (April)
Strauss A, and Corbin J, 1990. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage, London, UK.
van der Panne G, and van Beers C, Kleinknecht A, 2003. Success and failure of innovation: a literature review. International Journal of Innovation Management, 7, 309–338.
von Hippel E, 1986. Lead users: a source of novel product concepts. Management
Wang CH, Chin YC, and Tzeng GH, 2009. Mining the R&D innovation performance processes for high-tech firms based on rough set theory, Technovation. 30(7-8), 447-458.
Woodside AG, 2010. Key Success and Failure Paths in Fashion Marketing Strategies. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing. 1(1), 1-8.
Wu MF, and Chang PL, 2011a. Assessing Mechanism for Pre-Development Stage of New Product Development by Stage-Gate Model, African Journal of Business Management, 5 (6). 2445-2454.
Wu MF, and Chang PL, 2011b. An innovative new product development strategy: The key success paths approach, International Journal of the Physical Sciences, 6(25), 5922-5936.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊