نقشه شناختی برای تجزیه و تحلیل فرایندهای توسعه محصول جدید : یک مطالعه موردی

A few methods have been proposed in the literature to identify and address problems that arise during New Product Development (NPD). In this paper, cognitive maps are used to investigate such problems. In particular, the development of four new sofa models as performed in a company working in Southern Italy is studied. Based on direct observations and interviews with actors involved in the process, maps depicting the entire development process and the four examined cases are developed and analyzed. The analysis results show that some interpretative and cognitive issues are mainly responsible for the problems caused in NPD. Moreover, cognitive maps reveal a powerful tool to analyze and study the NPD process.

The importance of models, techniques and tools to improve the management of the New Product Development (NPD) process is broadly recognized in the literature (Wheelwright and Clark, 1992; Maylor, 2001). The adoption of structured methodologies allows problems to be more easily identified and alternative modes to perform the process be simulated and compared. Yet, only a few tools have been proposed to specifically address problems associated with cognitive issues that often arise during innovation development. Such problems are particularly crucial for NPD, which can be thought of as a sequence of cognitive processes (Kline and Rosemberg, 1986; Kessler et al., 1998; Nightingale, 1998). The knowledge-intensive nature of NPD makes cognitive processes such as knowledge creation, knowledge transfer, codification and learning very critical. In particular, interpretative barriers can emerge among the actors that are involved in the process. These actors usually interpret both the process goals and the working procedures by adopting their own thought worlds without developing a shared view of the process, so making the exchange of communications and coordination very hard (Dougherty, 1992; Heller, 2000). The goal of this paper is to study problems (e.g. long lead time, low product quality, re-works) that emerge during NPD and their causes. Specific attention is devoted towards cognitive problems. To this end we adopt cognitive maps. Cognitive maps are graphic tools used to represent concepts and ideas that individuals associate with some specific issues and the relationship among them (Eden and Ackermann, 1992; Langfield-Smith, 1992; Pidd, 1996). In this paper, cognitive maps are used to analyze a case study carried out in a firm that works in Southern Italy. The firm is specialized in the production of leather sofa. The case study includes the analysis of four new sofa model development processes. We develop, analyze and compare the cognitive maps associated to the processes in order to identify the crucial problems that occurred during the development and the way they affected the NPD performance. A map associated with the main actors involved in NPD is also developed and studied. The analysis of the different cognitive maps allow us to identify the different perspectives and some interpretative barriers that emerge during the development. The paper is organized as follows. We start by providing an overview of the NPD process and the cognitive problems that arise during it. Then, we briefly discuss cognitive mapping, describe and discuss the NPD case and develop the attendant cognitive maps. Based on the analysis results, some conclusions about problems emerging during NPD and methods to address them are finally drawn.

In this paper, cognitive maps have been used to investigate problems and needs that occur during New Product Development (NPD). In particular, we studied the NPD process as performed in a company that designs and manufactures sofas in Southern Italy. The development of four new sofa models has been directly analyzed. For each model a cognitive map has been developed. Based on interviews with actors involved in the process, a map depicting the entire process has also been developed. The main result of this paper is that cognitive maps reveal a powerful tool to analyze and study the NPD process. Though important concepts could also be assessed without their support, maps significantly facilitate the identitification of core concepts, needs, problems and attendant causes. Sofa development is quite a simple process. Map support would drastically increase if more complex NPD cases were considered (e.g. a new airplane model). The analysis carried out stresses the importance of some cognitive and interpretative problems, such as document erroneus interpretation or lack of collaboration among departments, as the main problem causes in a NPD process. Such problems are partially because the designer lacks technical competence and the involved actor lacks an attitude to manage NPD as a sequential process. Time costraint is another relevant concept. Innacurate design and re-work are often caused by it. Taken together all these problems cause several re-works and a need for improvements, that, in turn, causes development delays. The analysis did not allow to identify any relationship among problems that occur during NPD and the success of the process. In order to improve the process performance, some specific knowledge management processes should be adopted. The ambiguity of the knowledge transfer process occurring between designers and prototypists can be drastically reduced by developing a closer integration among the different actors involved in the process and adopting a process-based view of NPD (Zirger and Hartley, 1994). The integration is a pre-requisite to increase the effectiveness of the knowledge transfer processes. It facilitates the exchange of tacit knowledge and the sharing of cognitive schemes. In the considered firm, designers and prototypists should work together. A codification effort of the knowledge embedded in the product design should be undertaken. Also, as in a process every actor should have knowledge about activities carried out by the others, designers should acquire some technical knowledge so as to understand a prototypist's needs. Finally, although not particularly stressed, some prototype improvements and re-work were suggested by customers, meaning that the transfer of knowledge about customer needs is still an uncertain process. More efforts to codify customer needs should be carried out within the firm. Their knowledge should be embedded in the initial design sketches. Some managerial tools and methods may be useful to support the above-mentioned knowledge management processes. For example, CAD/CAM systems (and in particular 3CAD) can be used not only to codify the design specifications, so allowing technical information retention, retrieval and transfer, but also to enrich the content of the transferred knowledge, thereby reducing the risk of wrong interpretations. Tools such as Quality Function Deployment (QFD) may be used to develop technical specifications that specifically address customer requirements (Carbonara and Schiuma, 2004; Handfield et al., 1999). Among the techniques, we argue that cognitive maps can be used as a tool to address cognitive problems that emerge during NPD. Managers can adopt cognitive maps first to identify the existence of different process perspectives and then to create a shared view of the process. As described in Section 3, maps are often used with this purpose. Managers can also use the maps to study the process ex post (similar to what we did) so as to identify NPD problems and their causes.