بررسی جعبه سیاه یکپارچه سازی تامین کننده در توسعه محصول جدید
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|21329||2014||7 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||6420 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Journal of Business Research, Volume 67, Issue 6, June 2014, Pages 1058–1064
This research examines black-box supplier integration in new product development (NPD). A model and several hypotheses are proposed to study the relationship between product task characteristics (importance and complexity), supplier integration, and product performance. Data from 136 U.S. high-tech firms were used to test the hypotheses. Results suggest that assessing the importance and complexity of NPD tasks is critical to the implementation of supplier integration innovation strategy. Firms are likely to perform NPD tasks that are related to firms' core competencies in-house. They tend to externalize complex tasks to suppliers in order to utilize suppliers' resources and to increase NPD speed. The black-box supplier integration influences the speed to market. However, it is more effective on speed to market when technology uncertainty is low than when technology uncertainty is high.
Supplier integration in NPD refers to the collaborative involvement of suppliers in a firm's NPD process in order to fulfill customer requirements (Perols, Zimmermann, & Kortmann, 2013). Different supplier integration mechanisms have been proposed including supplier partnerships, supplier development (Koufteros, Vickery, & Droge, 2012), black-box supplier integration, and gray-box supplier integration (Handfield, Ragatz, Petersen, & Monczka, 1999). Supplier integration in NPD has been viewed as a means for sharing risks and acquiring supplier expertise and technical capabilities that can be transformed to enhance the manufacturing firm's product competitive advantage (Koufteros et al., 2012). Supplier integration in NPD involves suppliers to execute certain NPD tasks such as the development of components or subassemblies. Despite the significant progress in supplier integration research, little empirical research has been reported in the NPD literature that addresses the management of various tasks in supplier integration in NPD. Koufteros et al. (2012) have conducted extensive research on the integration of supplier capabilities, supplier partnership and development, and buyer firm's competitive performance. They call for “more precisely defined supplier integration mechanisms” “in terms of activity and scope” (pp. 110) as a direction for future research. Previous research on supplier integration has investigated the role of suppliers from partial involvement to full responsibility in the development of the entire component in NPD, known as black-box integration (Handfield et al., 1999). With black-box integration, the supplier is given almost complete responsibility for certain NPD tasks based on the firm's requirements (Koufteros, Cheng, & Lai, 2007). Although some studies have addressed the task characteristics in product development, few have examined how to manage different NPD tasks in black-box supplier integration (Mikkola & Skjoett-Larsen, 2003). A better understanding of NPD task characteristics and their relationships with black-box supplier integration could improve knowledge of inter-firm cooperation in NPD. This study addresses two important issues: (1) management of different tasks in the black-box supplier integration in NPD, and (2) how the black-box supplier integration influences manufacturing firms' NPD performance. A model is developed to study relationships between NPD task characteristics (strategic importance and complexity), the black-box supplier integration, and NPD performance (product innovativeness and speed to market). Research hypotheses are developed based on resource-based theory tenets, and the literature on supplier integration and product innovation management. The resource-based theory argues for protection of the firm's core competencies, and pertains to the utilization of external resources and capabilities to improve the efficiency of the NPD process if resources are not available internally (Verona, 1999). The present research also addresses two important managerial concerns in NPD: (1) which tasks should be retained by the firm itself so that the firm's core competencies are protected and strengthened, and NPD is performed more effectively and efficiently? (2) which tasks should be delegated to suppliers so that suppliers' expertise and resources are incorporated into NPD process, and the NPD performance is enhanced? As many product managers turn their attention from primarily internal designs to the combination of internal and external designs, the present research should offer managerial guidelines for improving NPD effectiveness and using internal and external resources and capabilities to their greatest extent.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
The importance of supplier integration in a firm's NPD has received great attention in NPD research. The present study addresses NPD task management in supplier integration by examining the black-box approach in NPD. It proposes a framework to investigate the impact of strategic importance and complexity of NPD tasks on the black-box supplier integration, the impact of the black-box integration on product innovativeness and product speed to market, as well as the moderating effect of technology uncertainty on these relationships. Using a sample of 136 firms, results indicate that NPD task characteristics (strategic importance and complexity) are related to the black-box supplier integration. Our investigation also indicates that black-box supplier integration influences speed to market. How should the firm manage different NPD tasks in black-box supplier integration? The results show that complexity of NPD tasks is positively correlated with black-box integration. Wasti and Liker (1999) point out that NPD teams are typically overloaded with a diverse range of projects that require varied areas and levels of knowledge and expertise. When relying solely on internal development, it would be virtually impossible to ensure that the necessary knowledge is available when needed. Firms tend to simplify the NPD process by “giving” tasks to suppliers that have unique expertise. Consequently, the supplier can provide better solutions to the project which allow for improvement of design and performance of parts and entire products. Handfield et al. (1999) also note that today's NPD is characterized by the growing complexity of technological challenges. Firms are forced to transfer some complicated designs to a supplier who can carry out the designs more efficiently. When NPD tasks are very important for customer value creation and for building and strengthening the firm's core competencies, the firm is likely to perform these tasks internally (Amaral & Parker, 2008). The firm can thus establish its core competencies by focusing on key technologies and take advantage of a superior competitive position in the marketplace. The results are consistent with previous studies on small technology-based firms (Kurokawa, 1997) and firms in the pharmaceutical industry (Pisano, 1990). Executives interviewed during the study also support the notion of in-house designed core tasks to increase R&D department focus. The black-box integration strategy enables the firm to free up some resources and capabilities to work on more value-added technology. The results suggest that assessing the importance and complexity of NPD tasks is vital when making black-box integration decisions. Allowing the supplier to develop unimportant and complex NPD tasks enables the firm to have a more focused strategy and frees up limited resources for more value-added and/or strategic applications, thus improving NPD performance. Amaral and Parker (2008) point out that externalizing NPD tasks that are closely related to the firm's core competencies and/or to customer value creation would run the risk of losing those core competencies. Other firms may imitate the manufacturer's key technologies and compete with it. Eventually, the manufacturer may lose its competitive advantage and be in a difficult situation in the marketplace. It is also noted that externalizing complex NPD tasks is a better utilization of the firm's internal resources and capabilities. How does black-box supplier integration affect NPD performance? Based on our analysis, black-box supplier integration significantly affects product speed to market but does not influence product innovativeness. Further, black-box integration is more effective on product speed to market when technology uncertainty is low than when technology uncertainty is high. Koufteros et al. (2007) indicate the insignificant relationship between black-box integration and NPD performance. Because of the difficulties in coordinating the designs in different firms, black-box integration's effect on product speed to market is obvious in a more stable, routine environment. The insignificant relationship between black-box integration and product innovativeness is also a warning that the manufacturer's own NPD capability may deteriorate if the manufacturer relies too much on suppliers in NPD (Koufteros et al., 2007 and Primo and Amundson, 2002).