首页> 外文期刊>Journal of product innovation management >Strategic Innovation Decisions: What You Foresee Is Not What You Get
【24h】

Strategic Innovation Decisions: What You Foresee Is Not What You Get

机译:战略创新决策:您所预见的不是您所得到的

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This research attempts to (1) identify the factors that influence strategic decision making (i.e., a choice made among various strategic options), and (2) establish their relative importance in the context of new product development. Hence, this study's research question is formulated as follows: from a descriptive perspective what factors prevail in managers' strategic decision making on new product development, and from a normative perspective is this behavior optimal? An exploratory case research study generated a four-dimensional framework of strategic decision making. In 17 companies, the decision-making processes and subsequent implementation of 22 business innovation projects were studied. Managers' choices are determined by the assessment of (1) the business opportunity, (2) the feasibility, (3) the competitiveness, and (4) the leverage opportunities provided by the strategic option. The research question was then further addressed in a field site survey of 144 managers of ChemCorp, a global, multidivisional chemicals company. The ex ante conjoint study shows that feasibility and business opportunity prevail over competitiveness and leverage at the decision-making moment. Using PLS-Graph revealed that a manager's idiosyncrasies and the current and the future context of the division to which they belonged barely affected the relative weight of the decision-making criteria: only the division's customer power and the threat of new entrants significantly influence positively the support for business opportunity assessments. This raised an important question: if feasibility and business opportunity appear as being, overall, the two most important strategic decision-making criteria ex ante, are they key differentiators between success and failure ex post? An ex post critical incident study was conducted on 75 successful innovations and 69 failed innovations reported by the ChemCorp respondents. Using PLS-Graph, this study shows that the competitiveness of a strategic option is a very important predictor of new project success. While the findings await replication in other industries (e.g., industries of a less capital-intensive nature), they are intriguing: strategic innovation decision making may be off track when reality is accounted for.
机译:这项研究试图(1)确定影响战略决策的因素(即在各种战略选择中做出的选择),以及(2)在新产品开发的背景下确定其相对重要性。因此,本研究的研究问题表述如下:从描述性角度来看,经理人对新产品开发的战略决策中占主导地位的因素是什么,而从规范角度来看,这种行为是否最优?探索性案例研究产生了战略决策的四个维度框架。在17家公司中,研究了22个业务创新项目的决策流程和后续实施。管理者的选择取决于以下方面的评估:(1)商业机会;(2)可行性;(3)竞争能力;(4)战略选择所提供的杠杆机会。然后,在对全球多部门化学品公司ChemCorp的144位经理进行的现场调查中,进一步解决了该研究问题。事前联合研究表明,在决策时刻,可行性和商业机会优先于竞争力和杠杆作用。使用PLS-Graph揭示,经理的特质以及他们所属部门的当前和未来环境几乎不会影响决策标准的相对权重:只有部门的客户力量和新进入者的威胁会显着影响积极性。支持商机评估。这就提出了一个重要的问题:可行性和商业机会是否总体上是事前两个最重要的战略决策标准,它们是事后成败的关键区别吗? ChemCorp受访者报告了事后重大事件研究,涉及75项成功的创新和69项失败的创新。使用PLS-Graph,这项研究表明,战略选择的竞争力是新项目成功的非常重要的预测指标。尽管这些发现等待其他行业(例如资本密集度较低的行业)的推广,但它们很有趣:当考虑到现实时,战略创新决策可能会偏离轨道。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号