Based on the results of a multiple case study of seven manufacturing firms, a contingency framework for harnessing fuzziness in the front end of innovation is proposed by delineating two discrete capability paths through which new product ideas are developed into corroborated product definitions. The study illustrates that ideas characterized by high levels of fuzziness benefit from following an exploratory path, where the creative potential of fuzziness is embraced by deploying problem-formulation and problem-solving capabilities. In contrast, ideas at low levels of fuzziness benefit from following an exploitative path, where fuzziness is tolerated by drawing upon idea-refinement and process-management capabilities. When the fuzziness level of the idea and the set of capabilities to develop the idea are poorly aligned, the idea-development process is either inefficient or runs the risk of stalling. These findings have theoretical and practical implications for the front end of innovation and new product idea development. © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) largely depend on proficient idea generation activities to improve their front‐end innovation performance, yet the liabilities of newness and smallness often hamper SMEs' ability to benefit from systematic idea generation. To compensate for these liabilities, many SMEs adopt an open innovation approach by collaborating with market‐based partners such as customers and suppliers. This study investigates the relationship between SMEs' systematic idea generation and front‐end performance and investigates the moderating role of market‐based partnership for SMEs. Drawing on a survey of 146 Swedish manufacturing SMEs, this study provides two key contributions. First, the systematic idea generation and front‐end performance relationship in SMEs is non‐linear. Accordingly, higher levels of front-end performance are achieved when idea generation activities are highly systematic. Second, the returns from higher levels of systematic idea generation are positively moderated by market‐based partnerships. Thus, external cooperation with customers and suppliers pays off most toward front‐end performance when SMEs have highly systematic idea generation processes. These results indicate a contingency perspective on the role of external partnerships. They also have implications for research into the front‐end of innovation and open innovation in the context of SMEs. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Firms are increasingly relying on collaborating with external partners to drive technology development. Many firms struggle with managing the inherently uncertain and ambiguous technology development process, especially with external actors involved, because they may not have or share the same project management practices concerning coordination and control activities. To address this gap, this study examines appropriate project management practices for market-based and science‐based partnerships in three large technology‐intensive firms. Our results suggest that interorganizational technology development is problematic because firms lack sufficient partner understanding and struggle with aligning their project management practices with those of their partners. To address these problems, we identify project management practices of coordination and control to fit the contingencies of each type of partner collaboration. Our results provide implications for theory and managerial practices related to managing interorganizational technology development. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) strongly depend on idea generation to improve the front-end of innovation performance, yet internal resource and capability limitations may hamper successful idea generation in SMEs. Therefore, many SMEs may choose to collaborate with market-based partners such as customers and suppliers to compensate for lack of internal resources. We ask when and under which circumstances does such collaboration provides’ highest benefit towards front-end innovation performance? By drawing on a survey of 142 Swedish manufacturing SMEs, this paper provides two key findings. First, systematic idea generation and front-end performance relationships is non-linear, such that disproportionally higher levels of performance are achieved when idea generation is highly systematic. Second, the pay-off from high level of idea generation is largely influenced by presence of market-based partners. Thus, our findings show that external collaboration in idea generation does not pay off unless SMEs have internal systematic processes for idea generation in place before external input is sought. This implies a contingency perspective on external collaboration and provides implications for research into the front-end of innovation and open innovation, in addition to novel managerial implications about how to better involve partners in idea generation and selection.

Firms are increasingly reliant on collaborating with external partners to drive their technology development efforts in light of increasing pace of development and global competition. However, many firms struggle with managing the inherently uncertain and ambiguous process of technology development with external actors because these may not share the same technological understandings, processes and goals. Accordingly, we argue that further research is required to better understand the management of joint projects with different types of partners within technology development. To fill this gap this study examines the adaptation of traditional stage-gate processes for technology development projects with science-based and market-based partners in three large technologies oriented firms. Our results shows that open technology development projects are often problematic because firms lack partner understanding and have difficulty aligning their development processes with external partners. To address these problems we found that our firms adapted their processes by implementing externally oriented stages, gates and roles to suit the contingencies of collaboration with science-based and market-based partners respectively. Our results provide implications for theory and management practice concerning the management of open innovation and stage-gate processes.

Firms in the process industries manipulate materials properties to produce upgraded raw materials for applications and products upstream in a supply chain. About 25% of the most research intensive firms in the world belong to the process industries, so proper management of raw materials is a key concern for many firms. This article explores the concept of “raw materials management”. By studying the current world leader in powder metallurgy, the Höganäs Corporation, the article describes the external and internal factors impacting how raw materials are managed, and how raw material issues affect different aspects of firm performance. Managerial implications are presented elaborating three key-areas that firms should deal with when developing a strategic approach to raw materials management.

Front-end activities largely influence the outcomes of new product development processes, because it is here that firms create new ideas, give them direction, and set them in motion. We show that the front end can be understood as comprising three core activities: idea/concept development, idea/concept alignment, and idea/concept legitimization, which allow firms to create corroborated product definitions. The paper provides important implications for managers interested in front-end management, and devote specific attention to the differences between incremental and radical front end development and to the front end in the light of increasingly open innovation processes. 

New product development (NPD) is a knowledge-intensive activity, perhaps even more so in recent years given the shift toward more open innovation processes, which involve active inward and outward technology transfer. While the extant literature has established that knowledge is critical for NPD performance, knowledge generated through NPD can have an additional impact on external technology exploitationas when firms go beyond pure internal application of knowledge to commercialize their technologies, for example, by means of technology outlicensing. Grounded in the knowledge-based view of the firm, this paper examines how the integration of domain-specific knowledge, procedural knowledge, and general knowledge generated through NPD affects a firm's proficiency in identifying technology commercialization opportunities. Additionally, analysis of how technology opportunity identification relates to technology commercialization performance is provided. Empirically, the paper draws on survey data from 193 Swedish medium-sized manufacturing firms in four industries active with NPD, and regression analyses and structural equation modeling were used to test the hypotheses. The results highlight the importance of integrating domain-specific and general NPD knowledge to proficiently identify technology licensing opportunities. The empirical findings also provide strong support for a subsequent link between technology opportunity identification and technology commercialization performance. Altogether, these results point to strong and previously unexplored complementarities between inward and outward technology exploitation, that is, between NPD and technology licensing. As such, the results provide important theoretical implications for research into the fields of knowledge integration, technology exploitation, opportunity identification, and technology markets. Moreover, the results have significant managerial implications concerning how knowledge generated through NPD can help firms to achieve both strategic and monetary benefits when trying to profit from technology. In particular, to set up proficient technology commercialization processes, it appears beneficial for firms to integrate knowledge that is gained through the ordinary activities of developing and commercializing products. Specifically, the integration of domain-specific knowledge and general knowledge helps firms to match their technologies with new applications and markets, which is often the critical barrier to successful technology commercialization activities. Managers are thus encouraged to integrate domain-specific knowledge and general knowledge from NPD to reap additional benefits in profiting from investments in innovation and technology.

Previous research has shown uncertainty reduction to be critical in the fuzzy front end of the innovation process, but little attention has been given to the equally important concept of equivocality, although it is a defining characteristic of many front-end projects. To address this research gap, this paper report the resultsfrom a longitudinal, multiple case study of four large companiesoriented to both product and process innovation. First, our results show that both uncertainty and equivocality is more effectively reduced in successful front-end projects than in unsuccessful ones. Second, the negative consequences of equivocality appear more critical to front-end performance than the consequences following uncertainty. Third, our results show that uncertainty and equivocality are reduced sequentially in successful projects and simultaneously in unsuccessful projects. Finally, uncertainty and equivocality takes longer time to reduce in process innovation projects than in product innovation projects, which is a consequence of the systemic nature of process innovation. Altogether, these findings provide strong implications for managing front-end projects more proficiently.