Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer
Home / what other qualitative questions should be used to select new innovation projects?

what other qualitative questions should be used to select new innovation projects?

Post a Comment

Open admission peer-reviewed chapter

Key Issues to Improve Innovation Project Excellence

Submitted: September 19th, 2016 Reviewed: January 17th, 2017 Published: August 30th, 2017

DOI: 10.5772/67504

IntechOpen

IntechOpen Downloads

1,775

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Abstract

Present innovation becomes a focal point for corporate success and survival. Thus, in order to be more concurrent and to realize innovation that meets required goals and performance expectations, companies have to achieve excellence in managing the innovation process. Delivering innovations with unique benefits and existent value to customers separates winners from losers more often than whatever other single gene. Therefore, the excellence in innovation projects becomes a necessity, and it implies recognition of all critical success elements that tin affect and, in some way, practice the harm to the procedure. In that location are a lot of factors and bug that can influence innovation project success and excellence. In this paper, we chose some of the critical elements, such every bit innovation strategy, idea direction, innovation portfolio, innovation model, and risk direction.

Keywords

  • innovation
  • innovation project
  • innovation strategy
  • gamble management

ane. Introduction

Not many words are needed to explicate the importance of innovation and, consequently, innovation projects in today's chop-chop irresolute economical environment, where competitive pressures impose companies to continually innovate to sustain profitable growth and business organisation success. In other words, innovation becomes a necessity, not only through new product or service development but also through finding new business models which often implies irresolute the rules of the game, organizational innovation, through finding a new mode to improve the efficiency of production and overall business concern, process innovation, likewise as through implementation of new marketing methods [i].

Studies have shown that those companies who prioritize innovation are also those with the highest increase in turnover. In this regard, the inquiry conducted past European Committee revealed that some 79% of companies that introduced at to the lowest degree i innovation since 2011 experienced increase of their turnover by more than 25% by 2014 [2]. Therefore, innovation gained a status of a key driver and precondition for competitiveness [3, four], moreover, a primal chemical element of modern management and everyday civilisation.

Having in mind that a huge number of various factors, which potentially influence the innovation projection excellence, can be identified in different environments (higher up all, organizational context and level), this study will be related to those that appear to be the almost frequent and the almost of import. Achieving the project success is always a big challenge, which is even greater in the instance of innovation, so the aim will be to overcome the perils and brand the success possible. In this paper, we chose some bones elements that have to be included in the innovation process if a company wants to achieve excellence, and that, also, can be recognized in project excellence model presented in Ref. [5]. Those elements are innovation strategy, idea management, innovation portfolio, innovation model, and adventure management. Dissimilar project excellence models tin can be found in the literature and practice, and all of them evolve regarding continuous learning and accommodation.

Advertizing

two. The concept of innovation and innovation project

Today, information technology is commonly accepted concept with a large number of definitions. One of the most cited, giving the widely accepted innovation framework, is presented in Oslo Manual Guidelines [ane], explaining innovation as an implementation of a new or significantly improved product (skillful or service), or process, or a new marketing or organizational method. Having this in mind, in that location are four (conditionally) types of innovation and therefore innovation projects:

  1. Product/service innovations.

  2. Process innovations.

  3. Organizational innovations.

  4. Marketing innovations.

Innovation as specific form of change can exist defined with respect to diverse aspects, and the following stand out:

  • Drucker defines innovation every bit the specific tool of entrepreneurship, the means past which they exploit change every bit an opportunity for unlike business or a different service.

  • Porter observes innovation every bit a possibility of the visitor to proceeds competitive reward based on innovativeness and ability to realize innovation projects.

  • According to Freeman industrial innovation includes technical design, product, management, and commercial activities involved in the marketing of a new (or improved) production or the first commercial apply of a new (or improved) process or equipment.

  • Rothwell used nature of innovation to define innovation, separating 2 forms of innovation: radical innovations and incremental innovation. Incremental innovation can be described equally series of small comeback to an existing production that usually helps maintain or improve its competitive position over time. On the other side, the result of radical innovation is completely new products/services/processes, and it can be presented every bit a process in which the management of the research is known, but the ultimate goal is not.

One innovation is successful if it produces the ability of the company to constantly contribute to the growth, through continuity and adaptation. The essential question is that of the approach to innovation that should be implemented in the firm; organization and its smaller units should be guided through the complex innovation process—from ideas created to sales, revenues, and profits achieved. For instance, a very useful concept is introduced (adult, recognized) by InnovationLabs consultants, chosen Innovation Master Plan, presented in the book with the same name. The plan follows the simple structure based on 5 critically important questions about innovation in the organisation [half dozen]:

  1. Why innovate—a question about strategic nature of innovation, which explains the linkage between innovation procedure and intended results based on the innovation.

  2. What to innovate—a question most designing and developing innovation portfolio, to prepare many innovation options for a wide range of possible futures.

  3. How to innovate—a question near designing the innovation process that is going to identify, create, and develop ideas which are going to become innovations.

  4. Who innovates—identifying who is going to participate. It is necessary to identify iii roles for achieving broad and consistent innovation results. These roles are (1) innovation leaders, who set policies, expectations, goals, and the tone for the innovation civilization; (2) innovation geniuses, who come up with great ideas and insights; and (3) innovation champions, who organize the pursuit of innovation and support those who develop great ideas and turn them into business organisation value.

  5. Where to introduce—a question about constitution of infrastructure, back up systems, and tools that will be used to enable anybody inside and outside the organization, to participate effectively in the innovation process.

Since innovation means a process from idea to realization, in theory and practice, a growing consensus tin can be witnessed on innovation existence looked at as a projection. From the theoretical betoken of view, both innovation management and projection management have evolved over fourth dimension every bit two independent disciplines. On the other paw, exercise showed just the opposite, namely, the most effective way to manage the lifecycle of innovation process is past using project management. Etymologically, the term projection originates from Latin word projicere which means to throw something frontwards. Taking all this into account, the fact that innovations are mainly developed by applying the concept of project direction is not surprising at all. Moreover, unlike authors from the field pointed out that overcoming the difficulties of moving from ideas to value creating can be achieved by using the principles, methods, and techniques of project management. One of the definitions explicating the connectedness betwixt innovation and project management identifies innovation projects as the management of a system that transforms inputs into outputs and has a feedback mechanism to ensure that the project output is consistent with its objectives [7].

Therefore, some specific features that distinguish innovation projects compared to conventional ones tin can be recognized as [eight]:

  • Conventional projects should have clearly defined objectives. Innovation projects, usually, starts with weakly divers, sometimes ambiguous objectives, which become clearer in the following phases of projection. Procedures used are, mostly, experimental or research nature.

  • Projection teams are comprised of people of dissimilar professions (knowledge and skills, etc.), amid whom should exist high level of trust.

  • Considering the failure as a possible outcome, innovation project teams should with cracking business take into consideration risk management.

  • The ideas presented in innovation projects should exist "sold" to "sponsors."

Bearing in mind the classification of innovation projects based on criteria of nature (intensity), we can talk about incremental and radical ones, as mentioned earlier. Incremental innovations are the well-nigh mutual forms of innovation in many companies, and on average approximately 80% of all investments in innovation in companies refer to them. This classification can be farther developed connecting this types (incremental and radical) to key characteristics, such as project goals and objectives, uncertainties, and industrial sector. Additionally, in this classification imitation is likewise included, representing a artistic try for evolution of a product or service. Imitation is positioned before the incremental innovation, since information technology has the lowest innovative intensity. Innovation projects are executed in various industrial sectors (ranging from low- to high-tech). Speaking of high-tech sectors, the faux projects involve reverse engineering of advanced technological products. Generally, that was a key chemical element of industrialization strategy of many Southeast Asian economies [9].

Loftier performance in projects and excellent project management has get imperative in today'south business organisation environment. Hence, resources engaged to projects have to be utilized in an constructive and efficient manner with the intention of achieving maximum benefit to the stakeholders involved. Therefore, some authors define projection success as the satisfaction of all stakeholders. There are a lot of factors and issues that can influence innovation project success. Some of them are mentioned equally features of innovation projects. There cannot exist generated a universal checklist suitable for any projection, and this, also, works out for innovation. They volition differ from project to project depending on a number of issues, for example, size, uniqueness, and complexity. At the company level, successful management of innovation project should include some basic elements [8]:

  • Innovation strategy and organization.

  • Creativity and thought management.

  • Innovation portfolio.

  • Innovation models.

  • Chance management.

Advertisement

3. Inventiveness in innovation projects

The well-nigh successful companies today are those who are the nearly creative and innovative. Appropriately, innovation and creativity have become critical skills for achieving success in developed economies. To accomplish this position, leading companies often tend to altitude themselves from the competition rather than compete with them (Apple tree as an example of the blueish body of water strategy). In other words, they are able to leverage their own creativity and their innovation capabilities to achieve long-term success. The need for creative problem solving becomes a necessity since more and more management problems require artistic insights in society to find suitable solutions. Many examples in the do take shown that companies increment their productivity by stimulating creativity and exploring completely new and unknown territories (3M Company gives to its researchers fourth dimension to work on projects that they consider important for the company, and 15% of the weekly working fourth dimension they can devote to such activities [8]). Encouraging the employees' creative thinking and giving them time and resources to explore new areas for innovative ideas are the key to cost-effective business concern solutions.

One of the definitions that may be considered as the almost comprehensive, designates creativity as the production of novel and useful ideas (some would say ideas that take value). An idea is all the same novel even if someone else already invented it without your knowing or in a different context. And an thought is still useful for your company even if some other company has already applied information technology [10].

Creativity goes manus in paw with innovation. It can exist said that there is no innovation without creativity. While creativity is the ability to produce new and useful ideas, innovation is the implementation of that creativity, in the form of new product, service, procedure, and business model. In other words, every innovation starts with a artistic idea and all together represents a function of fuzzy front terminate of innovation process [10].

Creativity and innovation are used interchangeably. This is reflected in the normally accustomed definition of innovation equaling creativity plus (successful) implementation. Inventiveness past itself—coming upwards with new ideas—is not enough. von Stamm [eleven] in her work gave some examples of great inventors, who were not able to proceeds the benefits to their attempt—X-ray scanner, invented by Electric and Musical Industries (EMI) but General Electric made a commercial success; VCRs which had been invented by Ampex/Sony but were successfully commercialized by Matsushita; or the vacuum cleaner invented by Mr. Spengler simply commercialized by Hoover.

In order to be successful and to achieve implementation, companies need processes, procedures, and structures that let the timely and effective execution of the projects and that permit for expert ideas to come to right place.

Idea management systems offer people a perfect outlet to which they tin can submit their ideas and, therefore, enable for good ideas to come up to correct place. For companies, it tin can be a perfect way to capture and further develop ideas. They should no longer remain in the drawer. These systems can help to recognize the demand for ideas and to generate and evaluate them. Ideas could come up from dissimilar sources—employees, customers, or suppliers. According to the research conducted by Erasmus University Rotterdam, there are three unlike types of idea management systems (programs): HR idea management systems, R&D idea management systems, and marketing idea management systems. HR thought direction systems are used to collect ideas that better processes and save money for the company. These systems focus on the employees of the company. The ideas that employees submit are oftentimes quite modest incremental. One such organisation engages company DHL. The focus is different concerning R&D thought management systems. These systems care very much about the ideas that people submit. The ideas can come from their own staff or from outside people and organizations. Trounce uses i of these systems, named "GameChanger." R&D systems are managed by R&D department and ideas generated are radical. Finally, the focus of marketing idea management systems is on customer. In that mode, companies endeavour to appoint with customer. Starbucks is using this arrangement. Marketing systems represent very effective marketing and communication tools and result in incremental ideas.

Advertisement

four. The role of innovation strategy

One of the critical points of innovation management excellence refers to the strategic decision-making in the field. These strategic decisions should make balance between companies' ability and opportunities that exist in the surround so every bit to accomplish long-term business concern objectives. Innovation strategy should support business strategy, acting as a mediator between the visitor and its environs in the innovation domain. Information technology should be synchronized with other strategies in the arrangement, such as technological, marketing, manufacturing, and strategy of intellectual property [eight].

Innovation strategy is frequently a crucial step for new company to join the existing market. Too, the existing organizations are using this strategy as an reward if they take the power to recognize this advantage. Innovation strategy is grounded on the business organization model and engineering science of the companies. Various companies have confirmed in practise that successful implementation of innovation requests a combination of technological change with the change of business model [12].

Generally, in that location are three key areas in which innovation strategy is associated with the change of business model (Effigy one) [12, 13]:

  1. Value proposition— What is going to be sold and delivered to the market place.

  2. Supply chain— How is it going to be created and delivered to the market place.

  3. Target customer— Who is going to use it.

Figure 1.

Strategic positioning map [13].

The process of developing an innovation strategy, similar to the creation of any practiced strategy, should start with a clear understanding and articulation of specific objectives related to achieving a sustainable competitive advantage. It should answer the following questions [fourteen]:

  1. How will innovation create value for potential customers?

    Innovation can create value in many ways. Later choosing what kind of value the innovation will create, it is important to stick to that, considering the capabilities required for each are quite different and have time to accrue. Apple consistently chose to make its products easier to use than competitors' and to provide a seamless feel across its expanding family of products and services.

  2. How volition the company capture a share of the value its innovations generate?

    The big problem for innovations is that they attract imitators as quickly as customers. The intellectual property alone is not enough to block these rivals. It is essential for companies to recall of complementary assets, capabilities, products, or services that could forestall customers from deserting to rivals and keep their own position in the ecosystem strong. One of the best ways to preserve the position is to continue to invest in innovation.

  3. What types of innovations volition allow the company to create and capture value, and what resource should each type receive?

    Undoubtedly, technological innovation is a huge creator of economic value and a driver of competitive advantage, but in the by couple of decades, nosotros accept witnessed companies like Netflix, Amazon, LinkedIn, and Uber, which ability relies on business model innovation. So innovation strategy should specify how the different types of innovation fit into the concern strategy and, likewise, to allocate the resource to each innovation [14].

Equally already stated, innovation becomes necessity, non simply through new product or service development but as well through finding new business organisation models which often implies changing the rules of the game [15]. To be successful, a company has to be skillful to suspension those rules, moreover, to have the ability to strategically redefine its business and play an altogether different game in society to succeed on the long term. Having in listen aforesaid, Markides suggests strategic innovation as a solution for breaking the rules of the game [13]. These new game activities tin be performed all over a value chain in ane business system [fifteen, 16].

Equally it can be seen from Figure 2, dramatic redesign of the finish-to-cease value chain architecture tin be accomplished improving the efficiency of the end-to-cease value chain. For example, IKEA uses standardization by making one blazon of a production that enables efficient transportation. Dramatic reinvention of the concept of customer value is related to irresolute the value that customers receive. For instance, in add-on to selling hardware, IBM moved into supplying full business concern solutions. Dramatic redefinition of the customer base of operations is related to expanding the size of the marketplace. For example, at a time when computers were used only in corporations and other institutions, Apple tree made personal computers for individuals.

Figure 2.

Areas for changing the rules of the game (adjusted from Refs. [15,16]).

Kaplan in his volume [17] named the process of irresolute the game as leapfrogging. In fact, leapfrogging is about creating something completely new or doing something radically different that empowers company to significantly leap frontwards. If individuals, groups, or organizations adopt to become the new leaders of the future, they have to leapfrog old ways of doing things [17].

Very important factor for defining the innovation strategy for the company is its competence, regarding existing structure and knowledge. Some authors indicate strategy as the architecture that builds competence. The results of empirical research in this area confirmed that the caste and nature of innovativeness are in close relation to the choice of strategy of innovation leader or follower. Companies that choose first strategy mostly develop production innovation, whereas others mostly initiate process innovation [eight].

Co-ordinate to innovation matrix presented in Ref. [12], companies focus their resources in selected segments and thus create a portfolio of investments. Depending on the position of investment in the matrix, two types of innovation strategy can be recognized [12]:

  • Playing to win (PTW)—strategy of innovation leader. Company invests in new engineering science or business model in order to exist ahead of competitors. The leadership position is achieved on the basis of different types of innovation: incremental, semi-radical, and radical (due east.grand., Amazon.com, Apple tree).

  • Playing not to lose (PNTL)—strategy typically involves more incremental innovations, aiming to maintain the position of the company in the existing environment by moving slowly and with lower risk (e.grand., Johnson & Johnson, Hyundai).

Furthermore, strategy of innovation leader and follower can be perceived as proactive and reactive [eighteen]. Proactive is a strategy of innovation leader. Companies seek to predict and anticipate changes in the environment and, thus, to seize the opportunities. Reactive is a strategy of innovation follower. Companies answer to the customers' demand and needs and to competitors' activeness. As a result of previous typologies of innovation strategies, it tin can exist concluded that it is inherent to innovation leaders to engage PTW strategy and proactive strategy while innovation followers engage PNTL strategy and reactive strategy.

Advert

5. Innovation projection models

Even though the importance of innovation is recognized by most companies and they spend a lot of money on innovation, many of these initiatives do not generate reasonable profit or competitive advantage. Plenty of enquiry on this topic reveals that the main trouble does not prevarication in the invention office or the generation of innovative ideas, simply more in the successful management of the innovation process [19]. Successful innovation demands a rigorous and disciplined phase-by-stage blessing process combined with regular measurement of every critical gene, ranging from time and money spent to the success of new products in the market.

Speaking of innovation processes from idea to commercialization, literature proposes a lot of dissimilar models. Basically, six generations of models can exist institute, from simple linear to increasingly complex interactive and network ones [20] up to new concept of open up innovation (Table i).

Previous table suggests a chronological review of model development, where shifting of models from conventional and unilateral to interactive combination of button and pull models, and gimmicky, network models based on knowledge can be clearly noticed.

5.one. Stage-Gate as a linear model

Before domination of the linear models is evident, together with evolving of much sophisticated and more realistic models that overcome mutual weaknesses and limitations of the conventional approach. This can exist perceived in development and alignment of the well-known Phase-Gate® model, which, basically, followed a linear template. Stage-Gate models represent industry standard for excellence in new product/service evolution. Co-ordinate to several independent research studies, almost 80% of leading U.s.a. companies now use Stage-Gate to drive new products to market. The model enables efficiency improvement and reduction of failure in any example, whether it is launching of new production or applied science that could alter the competitive image in the market, introduction of new products that could generate additional income for the company, or defence of visitor's market share past introduction of significantly improved product (Table 2). When embraced by organizations, this model generates an organizational civilisation that includes existence of the new product development process leader, strategic responsibilities definition, high-operation teams, focus on customers and markets, excellent solutions, compliance, subject area, speed, and quality [22].

Generation Model Characteristics
Get-go Applied science push button Elementary linear sequential procedure, emphasis on R&D; market is the recipient of the R&D results
Second Market pull Elementary linear sequential process, emphasis on marketing; the market place is the source of new ideas for R&D; R&D has a reactive role
Tertiary Coupling model Recognizing interaction between dissimilar elements and feedback loops between them, accent on integrating R&D and marketing
Phase-Gate process
Fourth Interactive model Combinations of push and pull models, integration within business firm emphasis on external linkages
Fifth Network model Emphasis on noesis accumulation and external linkages, systems integration, and extensive networking
Sixth Open innovation Internal and external ideas besides as internal and external paths to market tin can be combined to advance the evolution of new technologies

Table ane.

Evolution of innovation models.

Benefits [22] Common errors and fail points [23]
Accelerated speed to market Gates with no teeth
Increased new production success rates Hollow decisions at gates
Decreased new product failures Who are the gatekeepers?
Increased organizational discipline and focus on the right projects Gatekeepers behaving desperately
Fewer errors, waste, and rework inside projects Too much bureaucracy in the idea-to-launch process
Improved alignment across business leaders Too much reliance on software as a solution
Efficient and constructive allocation of scarce resources Expecting the impossible from a process
Improved visibility of all projects in the pipeline
Improved cross functional date and collaboration
Improved communication and coordination with external stakeholders

Table 2.

Advantages and disadvantages of Phase-Gate model [21].

The model provides a conceptual and operational roadmap for guiding new product development, from idea to launch. Stage-Gate approach in its cadre represents a simple model that divides innovation procedure into singled-out stages separated by management decision gates (Table iii) [24].

Phase Preliminary investigation Build business case Development Testing and validation Full production and market place launch
Gate Initial screen Preliminary blessing Decision on business example (project blessing) Post-development review Pre-commercialization business analysis

Table iii.

Stage-Gate model.

Stages are activities assumed by members of the team in order to collect the data needed for project progress. The stages are cross functional (at that place is no research and evolution or marketing stage), and activities are undertaken in parallel to speed upward the time to market [24].

The model is organized so as in front of each phase is a gate. Gates are points where determination is made about whether or not to continue investing in an innovation project. This decision is fabricated by both internal managers and external experts, so-chosen gatekeepers. The role of the gates is to check whether the project met all the criteria identified in previous gate and to check whether the project meets the criteria for the current phase.

The main elements of every gate are the post-obit [24]:

  • Deliverables—results of deportment from the previous phase

  • Criteria—predefined criteria on which the decision on project are made (what the project is judged confronting)

  • Outputs—results of the conclusion (go/kill/agree/recycle)

The predefined criteria can exist different from qualitative to quantitative, and some of them must meet, while some should run into. Specific criteria are unlike from gate to gate and become more rigorous with the progress of the project, and some of them can be judged in every gate.

Loftier-level run a risk taking is one of the innovation project characteristics that have big influence on the innovation process stability. Thus, in order to respond in the right time and manner, information technology is necessary to carry out take chances assessment. And so, to reach stabile innovation process of big importance is to carefully choose the correct gatekeepers and criteria within the gates.

5.two. The triple A system: adaptive, active, and accelerated

The original Stage-Gate model was created in the 1980s, based on a thorough study of successful corporations that successfully launched new products to market. This study primarily, practices and lessons learned, provided the foundation for that early stage and gate model. Since then, Stage-Gate is beingness evolved and incorporated with many new practices. Some companies have also developed their own versions, adjusting it to their need [25]. Phase-Gate process, mostly, has a positive impact on the formulation, development, and launch of new products [24, 26, 27], just there are likewise criticisms; it is accused of existence too linear, also rigid, and too planned to handle more dynamic projects [28, 29]. The earth has changed a lot since the first Stage-Gate system was implemented; the environs in which the companies are doing their job is now unlike.

Apropos previous, Cooper suggested adjacent generation of thought to launch arrangement, recognized as "Triple A system." It seems a lot like the traditional procedure of Phase-Gate, but the details of the procedure and its function are quite different. In that location are nevertheless stages where work gets done and gates where decisions are made. Newness is more adaptive and flexible, active, and accelerated [25].

5.2.1. Adaptive and flexible

For the next-generation model, beingness adaptive means that it incorporates screw or iterative development to bring something early to the market through a serial of build-test-revise iterations with customers. This upgrading is very good for the process since through these iterations the product evolves past adapting to new information gathered from customers. The system is besides flexible to the extent that deportment for each stage and the deliverables to each gate are unique to each development project, based on the context of the market and the needs of the evolution process. Gates are flexible, meaning that at that place are no standard sets or universal criteria for each gate [25].

5.2.2. Active

The next-generation system also incorporates elements of agile development, the rapid development system firstly introduced by the software industry. Introduction of agile development enables usage of short time-boxed increments, in grade of sprints and scrums, in which the deliverable is something that can be demonstrated to stakeholders. This is in directly contrast to non-agile approaches, which led to the extensive delays, cost overruns, and sometimes brutally terminal failure [30]. Equally, the agile systems emphasize moving quickly and nimbly from milestone to milestone and rely on a much leaner system with all waste matter removed; at that place are no hierarchy and no unnecessary activities anywhere in the organisation [25].

5.2.three. Accelerated

The next-generation thought-to-launch system is focused on accelerating the evolution process. This imposes overlapping of the activities within stages and fifty-fifty stages. The idea of a "stage" is less relevant in this new arrangement. This feature enforces projects in the system to exist properly resourced, fully staffed by a dedicated cross functional team for maximum speed to market. Besides, fuzzy front end end is brought to the forefront, in club to make less fuzzy, so that the projection is clearly scoped and central unknowns, risks, and uncertainties identified as early on every bit possible. Here, robust IT support is provided to reduce work, provide meliorate communication, and accelerate the process [25].

5.three. Connecting the open up innovation to Stage-Gate

The main question in today's business organization environment is no longer why innovate, but how to introduce. Consequently, theory and practice recognized that not all good ideas come from inside the firm; neither all skillful ideas emerged within the particular firm should be commercialized by that same firm [31]. To bridge this gap, open innovation has emerged. Chesbrough coined the term "open innovation" to describe a epitome that assumes that firms tin can and should employ external ideas also every bit internal ideas and internal and external paths to market place, as they look to advance their technology [32]. While some recall that "open up innovation prototype" is a new concept, in that location are some authors such as Trott and Hartmann [33] who claim that this paradigm represents just an one-time vino in new bottles. They recollect that this model has been used over the by 40 years within the theory and practice on innovation direction.

For the successful implementation of this model, the organization should ascertain the business organisation in a way to use advantage of both internal and external ideas and to build an acceptable business model, which will provide greater value for the system. Since it is like shooting fish in a barrel to access to a lot of external knowledge, companies which have been using Stage-Gate model for their new product/service evolution brand a bully effort to empower their model connecting it with open up innovation features [34]. Using the open innovation in new product/service development implies its involvement in all of the stages of innovation process.

five.3.1. Ideation or discovery stage

The first stage of the innovation process/project is ever generating ideas—ideation—representing the part of fuzzy forepart end. In this stage, companies become across of their borders looking for external information (ideas for new production/service development) that could be helpful in satisfying customer's needs [35]. A lot of companies such as Starbucks, P&G, and BMW use open ideation through appointment of co-cosmos, crowdsourcing, and gamification.

5.3.2. Building the business organization case

This stage implies detailed business organisation case, that is, divers product, business justification, and a detailed action program for the next phase [24, 26, 36]. By opening up, this stage considers actions such as identification of missing internal capabilities past seeking for potential partners who will provide technological or marketing capabilities to develop and commercialize new product/service [35].

v.3.3. Evolution phase

The master purpose of this stage is implementation of the business case and development of the starting time image [24, 36]. As to the open up Phase-Gate, companies cooperate with suppliers or partners in society to solve the technology and evolution problems. Moreover, here companies tin can out-license or sell their internally developed technologies and intellectual property [35].

5.iii.4. Launch or commercialization phase

This phase starts with full production and commercial launching of the product and sales. Monitoring of the innovation projection and detecting and correcting mistakes are specific actions of the stage [24, 36]. Opening up this stage, the company tin can out-license already commercialized products if at that place is a possibility to gain more value elsewhere or to in-license, purchase, an already commercialized production for achieving new growth for the company [35].

Gates and therefore criteria within the gates must also exist modified. If some company does not have all the capabilities needed to develop or execute a project, it does not pb to a "kill," merely leads to looking for a partner to handle the missing elements [35].

P&G made an try to develop and innovate the new version of SIMPL™ [37], the one enforced with open innovation, frequently cited as SIMPL 3.0 [35]. General Electric besides engages the open Stage-Gate named "Cost-Gate" for handling an open up innovation, both outbound and inbound [35].

Advertisement

half dozen. Risk assessment in innovation projects

Considering the fact that innovation ventures comport considerable gamble that crusade more than ane half of the individual innovation undertakings to fail, companies have to find the way to succeed in commercial success. By itself, risk can appear in any attribute of innovation projection and consequently can consequence in cost overruns, schedule delays, and even poor quality [38]. Therefore, risk direction in innovation projects is an important topic for practitioners and academic scholars, and therefore today it is being increasingly incorporated into business models. According to survey conducted by Murray et al. [38], the bulk of participants—managers with extensive project management experience—confirmed that they have used some kind of risk management techniques.

The main purpose of adventure management is to improve project performance through systematic identification, appraisal, and management of project-related take chances [39]. The hazard direction process tin be considered every bit a very useful to decision-making regarding the possibility of future events and their impact on established objectives. It includes the application of logical and systematic methods for [40]:

  • Communicating and consulting throughout this procedure.

  • Establishing the context for identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating take chances associated with any activity, process, part, or product.

  • Monitoring and reviewing risks.

  • Reporting and recording the results appropriately.

Chance assessment is a part of risk management which provides a structured process of run a risk identification, risk analysis, and risk evaluation. The way in which this process is applied depends not simply on the context of the risk direction process just also on the methods and techniques used to carry out the risk assessment [40]. Diverse supporting techniques can be used to better accuracy and completeness in risk identification, risk analysis, and risk evaluation. Numerous techniques and methods for risk cess divided past the phases of chance assessment are presented in International Standard 31010 [40].

In literature and practice, information technology can be found a lot of different risk categories that can affect project objectives and that can exist observed for various projects. In this paper we presented 1 risk categorization proposed by Keizer et al. [41], which is very important since information technology is related to new product development. These categories of hazard are recognized equally disquisitional success factors in product innovation projects. Three main run a risk categories, applied science risks, organizational risks, and business risks, and 12 subcategories are identified (Tabular array 4). Engineering science risks refer to product design, manufacturing technology, and intellectual property. Organizational risks refer to internal project management and external organizational influences. Business risks refer to issues such as the impact of a new production on the company's make positioning, consumer and trade credence, commercial viability, and the potential actions of competitors [41].

Level 1 Level 2
New production development project take chances categories Applied science risks Product technology risks
Manufacturing engineering risks
Intellectual property risks
Organizational risks Supply chain and sourcing risks
Screening & appraisal
Organizational and project management risks
Business risks Product family and brand positioning risks
Consumer acceptance risks
Trade client risks
Competitor risks
Commercial viability risks
Public acceptance risks

Table 4.

NPD risk categories (adapted from Refs. [41, 42]).

This categorization of new product evolution gamble tin be found farther decomposed on 142 more project issues, which are, as well, recognized every bit critical factors for successful NPD.

Advertisement

vii. Conclusion

Generating a continuous stream of innovation successes is an elusive goal. But the quest goes on, considering the goal is and so of import to business success and excellence. This newspaper has provided an overview of some of the central factors for achieving innovation projection excellence and hence insights into how to win in developing and launching new products. The recognized critical elements are innovation strategy, creativity and idea management, innovation portfolio, innovation model, and hazard management.

Innovation strategy is very important for the innovation procedure and it represents a starting point. The office of the innovation strategy is to make residual between companies' ability and opportunities that exist in the environment so as to reach long-term concern objectives. In that location are four essential tasks in creating and implementing an innovation strategy. The first is to answer the question "How are we expecting innovation to create value for customers and for our visitor?" The second is to create a loftier-level plan for allocating resources to the different kinds of innovation; the tertiary is to manage trade-offs, because every function will naturally desire to serve its own interests; merely senior leaders tin make the choices that are best for the whole company. The final challenge facing senior leadership is recognizing that innovation strategies must evolve. Similar the process of innovation itself, an innovation strategy involves continual experimentation, learning, and adaptation. Without an innovation strategy, different parts of an organization can easily wind upward pursuing conflicting priorities—even if there is a clear concern strategy [xiv].

Creativity is also one of the disquisitional factors for companies in achieving long-term success. The demand for artistic problem solving becomes a necessity since more and more management problems crave creative insights in society to observe suitable solutions. Stimulating inventiveness and exploring completely new and unknown territories lead to increasing the productivity of the company. Introduction of idea management systems is closely connected to inventiveness and consequently ideation. These systems enable an outline for ideas to come to the right place and to be implemented.

1 of the most significant factors in achieving innovation projection excellence represents implementation of acceptable innovation model. Successful innovation project requires a rigorous phase-by-stage process. There are half dozen generations of models that evolve in line with new practices. Today, they are adaptive and flexible, agile, and accelerated and, as well, enable the involvement of external knowledge through awarding of open innovation.

Considering the fact that innovation ventures carry significant risk that causes more than one half of the individual innovation undertakings to neglect, companies have to discover the way to succeed in commercial success. In order to minimize the hazard in innovation projects, companies have to take into business relationship the risk management as one of the almost of import factors for innovation projection success.

References

  1. ane. OECD & Eurostat. Oslo Manual—Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Information. tertiary ed. Joint Publication, Paris; 2005.
  2. 2. European Commission. Internal Market, Manufacture, Entrepreneurship and SMEs [Net]. Bachelor from:http://ec.europa.european union/growth/industry/innovation_en[Accessed: 26/12/2016].
  3. 3. Petrovic, D., Mihic, M., & Stosic, B. Strategic IT portfolio management for evolution of innovative. In: Handbook on Strategic Data Technology and Portfolio Management. IGI Publishing, Hershey, PA 17033, USA; 2009. pp. 150–169. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-687-vii.
  4. 4. Stosic, B., Milutinovic, R., Zakic, N., & Zivkovic, N. Selected indicators for evaluation of eco-innovation projects. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Inquiry. 2016;29(2):177–191. DOI: ten.1080/13511610.2016.1157682.
  5. five. Westerveld, E. The project excellence model®: linking success criteria and critical success factors. International Periodical of Project Direction. 2003;21(6):411–418. DOI: 10.1016/S0263-7863(02)00112-6.
  6. half-dozen. Morris, L. The Innovation Master Plan. Walnut Creek, CA: InnovationLabs; 2011.
  7. 7. Anbari, F. Innovation project management and six sigma method. In: Rahim, Grand.A. and Golembiewski, R.T., editors. Current Topics in Management. 10th ed. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers; 2005. pp. 101–116.
  8. 8. Stosic, B. Innovation Management—Innovation Projects, Models and Methods. Belgrade: Faculty of Organizational; 2013.
  9. 9. Filippov, Southward., & Mooi, H. Innovation project direction: a research agenda. Journal on Innovation and Sustainability. 2010;1(1).
  10. 10. Amabile, T.M. Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity. Westview Press, New York; 1996.
  11. 11. von Stamm, B. Managing Innovation, Design and Creativity. 2d ed. John Wiley & Sons, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, Due west Sussex, England; 2008.
  12. 12. Davila, T., Epstein, M., & Shelton, R. Making Innovation Work: How to Manage Information technology, Measure Information technology, and Profit from It. Upper Saddle River, New Bailiwick of jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.; 2013.
  13. 13. Markides, C. Strategic innovation. Sloan Management Review. 1997;38(3):9–24.
  14. fourteen. Pisano, G.P. Y'all demand an innovation strategy. Harvard Business Review. 2015;93(half dozen):44–54.
  15. 15. Afuah, A. Strategic Innovation: New Game Strategies for Competitive Reward. New York, NY: Routledge; 2009.
  16. 16. Govindarajan, Five., & Gupta, A.K. Strategic innovation: a conceptual road map. Business Horizons. 2001;44(iv):3–12.
  17. 17. Kaplan, South. Leapfrogging: Harness the Ability of Surprise for Business Breakthroughs. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco; 2012.
  18. 18. Urban, M.Fifty., & Hauser, J.R. Design and Marketing of New Products. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Bailiwick of jersey; 1993.
  19. nineteen. Du Preez, N.D., & Louw, Fifty. A framework for managing the innovation process. In: PICMET'08-2008 Portland International Conference on Direction of Applied science & Engineering science; IEEE; 2008. pp. 546–558. DOI: ten.1109/PICMET.2008.4599663
  20. twenty. Rothwell, R. Successful industrial innovation: critical factors for the 1990s. R&D Management. 1992;22(3):221–239.
  21. 21. Stosic, B., & Milutinovic, R. Possibilities of Opening up the Phase-Gate Model. Romanian Statistical Review. 2014;62(4):41–53.
  22. 22. Phase-Gate® International. Innovation Process: Phase-Gate® Idea-to-Launch Model [Net]. Available from:http://www.phase-gate.com/resources_stage-gate_full.php[Accessed: 26/12/2016].
  23. 23. Cooper, R.One thousand., & Edgett, Due south.J. Maximizing productivity in product innovation. Inquiry Technology Management. 2008;51(2).
  24. 24. Cooper, R. Winning at New Products: Creating Value through Innovation. 3rd ed. New York: Basic Books; 2011.
  25. 25. Cooper R.G. What'south side by side—after stage-gate?. Research Technology Management. 2014;57(1):xx–31.
  26. 26. Cooper, R.K. New products: what separates the winners from the losers and what drives success. In: PDMA Handbook of New Product Development. third ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2013. pp. 3–34.
  27. 27. Cooper, R.G., & Edgett, S.J. Best practices in the idea-to-launch procedure and its governance. Research-Technology Management. 2012;55(2):43–54.
  28. 28. Becker, B. Rethinking the stage-gate process—a respond to the critics. Management Roundtable. 2006;57(1):xx–31.
  29. 29. Lenfle, Due south., & Loch, C. Lost roots: how project direction came to emphasize command over flexibility and novelty. California Management Review. 2010;53(ane):32–55.
  30. 30. Morris, Fifty., Ma, 1000., & Wu, P.C. Active Innovation: The Revolutionary Approach to Accelerate Success, Inspire Appointment, and Ignite Creativity. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey; 2014.
  31. 31. Chesbrough, H.Due west. Open innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Applied science. Harvard Business Printing, Boston, Massachusetts; 2006.
  32. 32. Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, Westward., & West, J. Open Innovation: Researching a New Prototype. Oxford University Press on Need, Groovy Clarendon Street, Oxford; 2006.
  33. 33. Trott, P., & Hartmann, D. Why 'open innovation' is one-time wine in new bottles. International Journal of Innovation Management. 2009;13(iv):715–736.
  34. 34. Grolund, J., Ronneberg, D., & Frishammar, J. Open innovation and the stage-gate process: a revised model for new product development. California Direction Review. 2010;5(3):106–131.
  35. 35. Stage-Gate® International. Open up Innovation with Stage-Gate [Internet]. Available from:http://world wide web.stage-gate.com/resources_stage-gate_openinnovation.php[Accessed: 28/12/2016].
  36. 36. Cooper, R.Thousand., & Edgett, Due south.J. Lean, Rapid, and Profitable New Product Development. Product Development Institute, Canada; 2005.
  37. 37. Cooper, R.Yard., & Mills, Thou.S. Succeeding at new product evolution the P&Grand style: a fundamental element is using the "innovation diamond". PDMA Visions. 2005;29(4):8–13.
  38. 38. Murray, S.Fifty., Grantham, K., & Damle, Due south.B. Evolution of a generic risk matrix to manage project risks. Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering. 2011;5(ane):35–51.
  39. 39. Chapman, C., & Ward, S. Projection Take a chance Direction: Processes, Techniques and Insights. John Wiley & Sons, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, Westward Sussex, England; 1996.
  40. 40. IEC/FDIS 31010:2009(East). International Standard: Take chances management—Risk Cess Techniques. Geneva, Switzerland: International Electrotechnical Commission; 2009.
  41. 41. Keizer, J.A., Halman, J.I., & Song, M. From experience: applying the risk diagnosing methodology. Periodical of Product Innovation Management. 2002;19(three):213–232.
  42. 42. Keizer, J.A., & Halman, J.I. Diagnosing risk in radical innovation projects. Research-Engineering Management. 2007;fifty(v):30–36.

Written Past

Biiljana Stošić and Radul Milutinović

Submitted: September 19th, 2016 Reviewed: January 17th, 2017 Published: Baronial 30th, 2017

© 2017 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License, which permits unrestricted utilise, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

thielcreactmed93.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/54343

Post a Comment for "what other qualitative questions should be used to select new innovation projects?"