Search results

The paper provides an overview of research published in the innovation and operations management (IOM) literature on 15 methods for cost management in new product development, and it provides a comparison to an earlier review of the management accounting (MA) literature (Wouters & Morales, 2014).

This structured literature search covers papers published in 23 journals in IOM in the period 1990–2014.

The search yielded a sample of 208 unique papers with 275 results (one paper could refer to multiple cost management methods). The top 3 methods are modular design, component commonality, and product platforms, with 115 results (42%) together. In the MA literature, these three methods accounted for 29%, but target costing was the most researched cost management method by far (26%). Simulation is the most frequently used research method in the IOM literature, whereas this was averagely used in the MA literature; qualitative studies were the most frequently used research method in the MA literature, whereas this was averagely used in the IOM literature. We found a lot of papers presenting practical approaches or decision models as a further development of a particular cost management method, which is a clear difference from the MA literature.

This review focused on the same cost management methods, and future research could also consider other cost management methods which are likely to be more important in the IOM literature compared to the MA literature. Future research could also investigate innovative cost management practices in more detail through longitudinal case studies.

This review of research on methods for cost management published outside the MA literature provides an overview for MA researchers. It highlights key differences between both literatures in their research of the same cost management methods.

Some companies to aid the product development process have implemented a stage‐gate framework, as a high‐level representation of the activities required. Such a framework allows the development process to be closely monitored and controlled, using stages of work and review gates. Six different companies have been examined to show the variations in representation. Each approach was compared to a generic four‐staged framework. Companies which are organised mainly in cross‐functional teams adhere strongly to the four stages, namely a low‐phased approach. However, companies organised with a strong functional structure tend to have more phases and gates within each stage, i.e. a high‐phased approach. These additional phases tend to be placed late in the product development process rather than at the start where their effect would be greater. A generic representation of the product development process applicable to various organisations and industrial sectors, provides an architecture for carrying out any business process improvement project.

To provide an overview of research published in the management accounting literature on methods for cost management in new product development, such as a target costing, life cycle costing, component commonality, and modular design.

The structured literature search covered papers about 15 different cost management methods published in 40 journals in the period 1990–2013.

The search yielded a sample of 113 different papers. Many contained information about more than one method, and this yielded 149 references to specific methods. The number of references varied strongly per cost management method and per journal. Target costing has received by far the most attention in the publications in our sample; modular design, component commonality, and life cycle costing were ranked second and joint third. Most references were published in Management Science; Management Accounting Research; and Accounting, Organizations and Society. The results were strongly influenced by Management Science and Decision Science, because cost management methods with an engineering background were published above average in these two journals (design for manufacturing, component commonality, modular design, and product platforms) while other topics were published below average in these two journals.

The scope of this review is accounting research. Future work could review the research on cost management methods in new product development published outside accounting.

The paper centers on methods for cost management, which complements reviews that focused on theoretical constructs of management accounting information and its use.

The paper proposes a framework for the successful deployment of Industry 4.0 (I4.0) principles in the aerospace industry, based on identified success factors. The paper challenges the perception of I4.0 being aligned with de-skilling and personnel reduction and instead promotes a route to successful deployment centred on upskilling and retaining personnel for future role requirements.

The research methodology involved a literature review and industrial data collection via questionnaires to develop and validate the framework. The questionnaire was sent to a purposive sample of 50 respondents working in operations, and a response rate of 90% was achieved. Content analysis was used to identify patterns, themes, or biases, and the data were tabulated based on specific common attributes. The proposed framework consists of a series of gates and criteria that must be met before progressing to the next gate.

The proposed framework provides a feedback mechanism to review minimum standards for successful deployment, aligned with new developments in capability and technology, and ensures quality assessment at each gate. The paper highlights the potential benefits of I4.0 implementation in the aerospace industry, including reducing operational costs and improving competitiveness by eliminating variation in manufacturing processes. The identified success factors were used to define the framework, and the identified failure points were used to form mitigation actions or controls for inclusion in the framework.

The paper provides a framework for the successful deployment of I4.0 principles in the aerospace industry, based on identified success factors. The framework challenges the perception of I4.0 as being aligned with de-skilling and personnel reduction and instead promotes a route to successful deployment centred on upskilling and retaining personnel for future role requirements. The framework can be used as a guideline for organizations to deploy I4.0 principles successfully and improve competitiveness.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the ways in which management control is enacted in a product development setting, to provide new insights into the different roles that control can play in this context.

A nine‐month, in‐depth field study was carried out at a subsidiary of an Australasian multinational firm which operates in the consumer foods industry. A participant observation approach was used to collect field notes and documents from the organisation, which were analysed through the lens of ethnomethodology.

The results indicate that the role of management control during product development is mainly focused on reducing uncertainty at each stage and promoting goal congruence at the decision gates. The authors argue that this helps explain why management control has a positive effect in a product development setting.

The implication of this finding is that the role of management control changes during product development due to the involvement of different organisational members (communities of practice) and the activities that they carry out. This helps build a more holistic understanding of control in product development. As this is a field study of a specific company, the findings are not generalizable to other companies or settings. Future research needs to investigate other possible roles which management control may play in this context.

The paper extends the research in this area by showing how and why management control can take on multiple roles in practice.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the governance of inter-firm co-development in an open innovation setting and show how a stage-gate product development process can be used to support this relationship.

The authors adopt a qualitative case-study approach informed by ethnomethodology. Data were obtained via semi-structured interviews and document analysis.

They found that in an open innovation setting – where the producing partner relies on a research partner for all product development activities – a stage-gate product development process can act as a governance mechanism, as it enables the development of trust and cooperation which supports the co-development relationship.

The implication of this finding is that a stage-gate process can be a flexible governance mechanism, which can adapt over time in relation to the needs of the co-development partners in an open innovation setting. This also lays the groundwork for future research to explore the applicability of this tool in other settings, e.g. outsourcing arrangements as well as help guide the design and implementation of future governance mechanisms.

In the context of accounting research, this paper helps practitioners and academics understand how a stage-gate process can be used as a governance mechanism to manage and control co-development projects in an open innovation setting.

This paper aims to present and describe a value for money framework that can be used on alliance projects to improve the consideration of, and reporting of, value for money.

Development of the framework used a combination of interviews with domain experts, reflection on practice and a Delphi panel to develop and refine a value for money/best value outcome framework for alliance projects.

The results indicate that a robust framework for demonstrating value for money in an alliance project is feasible, and a framework was developed and tested through the Delphi panel.

The paper briefly describes the research approach but focuses on the outcome rather than the process.

The research aim of this paper is to expand the conceptual view and to illustrate how a practical assessment of value for money in project alliancing can be achieved. It presents the framework and describes it in sufficient detail for readers to be able to adopt and adapt it.

Value for money in infrastructure projects has profound implications for society; this extends and enhances techniques used to assure value for money.

The paper provides a value for money framework across the whole project design to delivery cycle.

The authors of this paper contend that too many firms' innovation initiatives are shackled with archaic budgeting and planning methodologies that are intended to protect managers from the embarrassment of blown budgets, missed deadlines, or market flops but instead suppress learning and adaptability, both critical to achieving successful commercialization of unique ideas. This paper aims to address this issue.

The authors propose that the first step to rid myopia and rigidity from the stage‐gate approach is to re‐conceive it as an assumption‐driven process centered on learning, rather than simply a sequence of activities marching towards a pre‐determined outcome.

The authors suggest that firms should adopt assumption‐driven learning in a series of sequential divergent‐convergent cycles – one cycle per stage – each centered on testing the major assumptions for that stage.

Continuous learning and unlearning is essential to the process of developing raw ideas into viable commercial applications. The key to success is to test assumptions through real‐life experiments – for example, market assumptions should be tested in‐market, manufacturability assumptions should be tested in production.

Firms should adopt assumption‐driven learning in a series of sequential divergent‐convergent cycles – one cycle per stage – each centered on testing the major assumptions for that stage.

This study aims to gain a deeper understanding of the industry practice to guide the formation of support tools with a rigorous theoretical backing. Cross-functional teams are an essential component in new product development (NPD) of complex products to promote comprehensive coverage of product design, marketing, sales, support as well as many other activities of business. Efficient use of teams can allow for greater technical competency coverage, increased creativity, reduced development times and greater consideration of ideas from a variety of stakeholders. While academics continually aspire to propose methods for improved team composition, there exists a gap between research directions and applications found within industry practice.

Through interviewing product development managers working across a variety of industries, this paper investigates the common practices of team utilization in an organizational setting. Following these interviews, this paper proposes a conceptual two-dimensional management support model aggregating the primary drivers of team success and providing direction to systematically address features of team management and composition.

Based on this work, product managers are recommended to continually address the positioning of members throughout the entire NPD process. In the early stages, individuals are to be placed to work on project components with explicit consideration toward the perceived complexity of tasks and individual competency. Throughout the development process, individuals’ positions vary based on new information while continued emphasis is placed on maintaining a shared understanding.

Bridging the gap between theory and application within product development teams is a necessary step toward improved product develop. Industrial settings require practical solutions that can be applied economically and efficiently within their organization. Theoretical reflections postulated by academia support improved team design; however, to achieve true success, they must be applicable when considering product development.

A recent training programme for senior and middle managers of Leeds Business School is examined. Following a five‐week assessment and diagnosis period, which included a two‐day outdoor activities course, participants were able to draw up their own plan of development which met specific identified needs, drawing on the resources of Leeds Business School. The effect of the programme has been to create a number of “development champions” for further staff development.