Advertisement

Designers pp 269-283 | Cite as

A Model of Product Development Performance

  • Alex H. B. Duffy
  • Frank J. O’Donnell
Conference paper

Abstract

The overriding aim of much product development research is to improve the performance of the Product Development Process (PDP). Yet the concept of performance as applied to this area is currently without underlying theory and no consensus exists on its definition or the most appropriate metrics to use in evaluation. This paper presents a review of research in PDP performance to illustrate the various issues that have received attention in this area. A definition and model of performance are proposed which are directed at developing a fundamental understanding of the phenomenon. The model illustrates the main elements of performance - efficiency and effectiveness - and provides a basis upon which to identify, formalise and analyse suitable performance metrics at any level or range in the product development process. Factors influencing performance have been assessed by the authors and sample results are presented. It is concluded that, although the model determines the main elements of performance, further research is necessary to truly formalise performance and specify a suitable approach for its measurement.

Keywords

Lead Time Product Development Quality Function Deployment Design Work Product Development Process 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Neely A., Gregory M., Platts K. 1995: Performance Measurement System Design: A Literature Review and Research Agenda. International Journal of Production and Operations Management 15, 80–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gilbreath R. D. 1988: Working with Pulses Not Streams: Using Projects to Capture Opportunity. In: D.I. Cleland & W.R. King (eds) Project Management Handbook. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp. 3–15.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cusumano M.A., Nobeoka K. 1996: Strategy, Structure, and Performance in Product Development: Observations from the Auto Industry. In: T. Nishiguchi (ed.) Managing Product Development. Oxford University Press, Inc., pp. 75–120.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nobeoka K., Cusumano M.A. 1995: Multiproject Strategy, Design Transfer, and Project Performance: A Survey of Automobile Development Projects in the US and Japan. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 42, 397–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Loch C., Stein L., Terwiesch C. 1996: Measuring Development Performance in the Electronics Industry. Journal of Product Innovation Management 13, 2–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brown S.L., Eisenhardt K.L. 1995: Product Development: Past Research, Present Findings, and Future Directions. Academy of Management Review, 20, 343–378.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clark K.B., Fujimoto T. 1991: Product Development Performance: Strategy, Organisation and Management in the World Auto Industry. Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cantamessa M. 1997: Design Best Practices at Work: An Empirical Research upon the Effectiveness of Design Support Tools. In: A. Riitahuhta (ed.) Proceedings of the IIth International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED’97), Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Finland.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cordero R. 1989: The Measurement of Innovation Performance in the Firm: An Overview. Research Policy 19, 185–192.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cooper R.G., Kleinschmidt E.J. 1995: Benchmarking the Firm’s Critical Success Factors in New Product Development. Journal of Product Innovation Management 12, 374–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Griffin A. 1997: PDMA Research on New Product Development Practices: Updating Trends and Benchmarking Best Practices. Institute for the Study of Business Markets, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oliver N., Gardiner G., Mills J. 1996: Design and Development Benchmarking in the UK Electronics Industry. Judge Institute of Management Studies, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schrijver R., Graaf R.D. 1996: Development of a Tool for Benchmarking for Concurrent Engineering. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 4, 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Griffin A. 1996: The Impact of Engineering Design Tools on New Product Development Efficiency and Effectiveness. Institute for the Study of Business Markets, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    McDonough E.R., Griffin A. 1996: The Impact of Organisational Tools on New Product Development Efficiency and Effectiveness. Institute for the Study of Business Markets, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hull F.M., Collins P.D., Liker J.K. 1996: Composite Forms of Organization as a Strategy for Concurrent Engineering Effectiveness. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 43, 133–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kahn K.B. 1996: Interdepartmental Integration: A Definition with Implications for Product Development Performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management 13, 137–151.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Andreasen M.M., L. Hein 1987: Integrated Product Development. IFS ( Publications) Ltd and Springer, London.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hauptman O., Hirji K.K. 1996: The Influence of Process Concurrency on Project Outcomes in Product Development: An Empirical Study of Cross-Functional Teams. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 43, 153–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Duffy A.H.B. 1998: Design Productivity. In: A.H.B. Duffy (ed.) The Design Productivity Debate. Springer, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meyer M.H., Utterback J.M. 1995: Product Development Cycle Time and Commercial Success. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 42, 297–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Griffin A., Page A.L. 1996: PDMA Success Measurement Project: Recommended Measures for Product Development Success and Failure. Journal of Product Innovation Management 13, 478–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cooper R.G. 1994: New Products: The Factors that Drive Success. International Marketing Review 11, 60–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    O’Donnell F.J., Duffy A.H.B. 1997: Understanding Product Development Performance. Internal Report, CAD Centre, University of Strathclyde. CADC/97–22/R/04.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lawson M., Karandikar H.M. 1994: A Survey of Concurrent Engineering. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 2, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tomiyama T. 1998: Concurrent Engineering: A Successful Example for Engineering Design Research. In: A.H.B. Duffy (ed.) The Design Productivity Debate. Springer- Verlag, London pp. 175–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Coulson-Thomas C. 1997: The Future of the Organisation: Achieving Excellence through Business Transformation. Kogan Page, London.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    IDEF0 Forms and Procedures Guide, 1979, SofTech Inc., MA, USA.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Marks P., Reilly K. 1995: Aligning Technology for Best Business Results.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rolstadas, A. (ed.) 1995: Benchmarking - Theory and Practice. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alex H. B. Duffy
  • Frank J. O’Donnell

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations