Templates for Innovation: A Comment on Mumford, Bedell and Hunter

The authors confront the nontrivial issue of whether or not creativity and innovation can be planned, and proceed to support an affirmative answer with a well-organizated treatment of the applied research literature relevant to this topic. They outline and reference an incremental approach to this planning process at multiple level of aggregation (organization, group, and individual), and present both a state-of-the-art review and a general, normative approach to this daunting challenge

The Adoption of Entreprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems present significant challenges to modern businesses. Although some organizations enjoy a smooth ERP implementation, others experience very public failures. The present research develops a general models that uses differences between appropriability regimes to predict which adoption strategies will lead to successful implementation. In strong appropriability regimes, intellectual property protection (e.g. patents) helps firms secure the benefits of technological innovation. However, ERP software is usually purchased rather than developed, so it is subject to the minimal intellectual property protection typical of a weak appropriateness regime. It is the latter, weak appropriation context that is the recently adopted Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems was used to test a model of weak appropriation with significan results. Leadership (social learning theory), business process reengineering (change the company not the technology) and acquisition strategy (buy, don\u27t make) were found to be significant predictors of adoption performance (final model R-square=43%, F=5.5, p\u3c .001, df=7,52). Industry (manufacturing versus service) and scale (sales) were included as control variables but were not significant in the analysis. EDI (electronic data interchange usage), and project start date were also used as control variables and were found to have significant regression coefficients. That is, EDI tends to substitute for, and slow adoption of ERP, and early movers finish implementation sooner than competitors. In general, strong, honds-on leadership, and business process reengineering coupled with purchasing ERP systems were found to be a much more effective adaptation strategy than tailoring enterprise software. The implications of these results are discussed

Strategic Predictors of Successful Enterprise Systems Deployment

Purpose The delivered wisdom to date has enterprise system purchase and implementation as one of the most hazardous projects any organization can undertake. The aim was to reduce this risk by both theoretically and empirically finding those key predictors of a successful enterprise system deployment. Design/methodology/approach A representative sample of 60 firms drawn from the Fortune 1000 that had recently (1999-2000) adopted enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems was used to test a model of adoption performance with significant results. Findings Leadership (social learning theory), business process re-engineering (change the company not the technology) and acquisition strategy (buy, do not make) were found to be significant predictors of adoption performance (final model R 2=43 percent, F=5.5, pp Originality/value The “four factor” model we validate is a robust predictor of ERP adoption success and can be used by any organization to audit plans and progress for this undertaking

Strategic Predictors of Successful Enterprise Systems Deployment

Purpose The delivered wisdom to date has enterprise system purchase and implementation as one of the most hazardous projects any organization can undertake. The aim was to reduce this risk by both theoretically and empirically finding those key predictors of a successful enterprise system deployment. Design/methodology/approach A representative sample of 60 firms drawn from the Fortune 1000 that had recently (1999-2000) adopted enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems was used to test a model of adoption performance with significant results. Findings Leadership (social learning theory), business process re-engineering (change the company not the technology) and acquisition strategy (buy, do not make) were found to be significant predictors of adoption performance (final model R 2=43 percent, F=5.5, pp Originality/value The “four factor” model we validate is a robust predictor of ERP adoption success and can be used by any organization to audit plans and progress for this undertaking

Technology, Customization, and Reliability

This research examines the relative importance that customers place on product reliability, or things-gone-wrong, and customization, or things-gone-right, across a range of industrial settings. We integrate an evolutionary theory of technology with a dynamic theory of competition to predict that: (1) when technological intensity is relatively low or high, customers place greater value on customization and (2) when technological intensity is more intermediate, product reliability and customization are more equally important. The predictions are tested and supported using data from the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) survey

Two-tiered measurement systems in modernizing plants

In this study we predicted and found evidence to support two general themes about new production systems measurement. First, there are two tiers of measures that are becoming popular to gauge performance. These two tiers are relatively independent- system-level measures like uptime, and business-level outcomes like return on investment. Second, when measures from these two categories are significantly correlated, they are likely to be for the time or flexibility measures at the system level. The rationale for this thesis is that modernization programs implement the leading edge of manufacturing strategies, and time or flexibility are replacing quality as priorities in leading-edge domestic manufacturing.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/45528/1/10696_2004_Article_BF00170211.pd

Adoption complexity and economies of scope for new process technology in manufacturing

In a study of 39 domestic, durable goods plants, justifications for purchase of new process technology varied from the simple, single-goal approach to the complex, multiple-objective strategy. This variety contributes to a larger construct of adoption complexity, which was found to be a function of flexible manufacturing systems (FMS) (vs. cellular) purchase choice and plant size in a significant path model. Adoption complexity, in turn, significantly influences intrafirm personnel flows for implementation (e.g., mobility and job rotation). Flexible outcomes are not automatic with FMS purchase, however. Part family variety was significantly higher in larger plants and part variety was significantly promoted by personnel flows. Suggestions for further research and policy implications are discussed.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/31648/1/0000582.pd

Cross-national comparisons of product development in manufacturing

In this study we compare product development strategies and practices of five companies in the durable goods industries: one each in the United States (equipment), Sweden aerospace), Germany (electric motors), Hungary (transportation equipment), and Japan (business machines, cameras/video). In particular, we focus on the concept development phase of new product development and the attend to the aspects of the design process that may be influenced by culture. To the extent that the five cases are representative of their home countries, there appears to be ample variance across cultures to justify further, more extensive research in this arena. A model is presented which differentiates the amount of cultural influence by stage of the product development process in high technology versus low technology industries.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/30535/1/0000167.pd

Product development benchmarking versus customer focus in applications of quality function deployment

The study explores the tradeoff between efforts to benchmark on product-development practices and be customer focused in the implementation of a quality-improvement method. The results of a survey of thirty-three firms' experience with quality function deployment (QFD) reveal that benchmarking on how competitors, peers, or role models develop products facilitates process improvement but hinders customer focus. Smaller firms are also shown to gain more customer focus and process-improvement benefits from QFD than larger firms.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/47150/1/11002_2004_Article_BF00994101.pd

Openness in product and process innovation

Electronic version of an article published as International Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 16, Iss. 4, 2012, art. 1250020, pp. 1-24. DOI: 10.1142/S1363919612003812 © Imperial College Press. http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1363919612003812.Open innovation has generally been explored in terms of improved innovation performance vis-à-vis product/service innovation performance. However, process innovation is often ignored in the open innovation literature. In this study, we assess the impact of openness on innovation in products/services, and also on process innovation, drawing on a large-scale sample of Australian firms. In essence, we find that open innovation models are useful for firms seeking to innovate in processes as well as products and services. However, we find that openness to external information sources may, after a time, lead to decreasing marginal returns as measured by innovation performance. We also observe that, within our sample, the proposed complementarities between internal and external knowledge are generally only evident as precursors to the introduction of new products and services, and may not be as beneficial in stimulating process innovations. It is also shown by our study that investment in absorptive capacity has a declining marginal effect on the innovation performance of new processes, but not on the introduction of new products and services.Fang Huang and John Ric