Purpose – The purpose of this research is to investigate how manufacturing organisations can decrease their environmental impact in the supply chain. To meet the purpose, two research questions were formulated:  1. How can a manufacturing organisation reduce its environmental impact caused by transportation?  2. How can a manufacturing organisation reduce its environmental impact caused by production?  Method – To provide the opportunity to reach a conclusion and to create a basic understanding of the research area, a literature review was conducted, which formed the basis of the theoretical framework. Through a case study at a manufacturing organisation, interviews and document analyses were used as sources for empirical data. In order to develop solutions and recommendations, collected data and theoretical framework were analysed and discussed.  Findings – The research findings indicate that there are several possible measures to implement to reduce an organisation's environmental impact in the supply chain. A decisive factor is creating a holistic and fundamental understanding of sustainability and enabling everyone involved to work according a common view and in the same direction. In addition, a requirement to pursue the same goal is that all stakeholders are involved where a prerequisite is a well-functioning internal communication.  Implications – The research did not contribute to any new theories, but through the research analysis, statements and theories from previous research were strengthened. The research suggests actions that can be used for organisations to reduce their environmental impact, but also to increase the understanding of why actions should be implemented. Society has an important responsibility for motivating and provide conditions for manufacturing organisations to reduce their footprint. This research is considered to lead to an improved environment in the form of lower emission levels where both organisations and the entire community take responsibility for the planet.  Limitations – The case study is designed as a single-case study which, from a validity perspective, is not considered as advantageous as a multiple case study because the results are difficult to generalize. In order to strengthen the study's reliability, several functional units and / or organisations could have been included in the study.

<div> <p>In this dissertation, I investigate how firms’ various strategic decisions lead to innovation failures. Extant research in the strategic management field has suggested that a firms’ strategic choices determine its innovation trajectories and outcomes. While previous studies predominantly have emphasized firms’ successful innovation outcomes, very little research has been conducted on the antecedents of innovation failures. Although firms’ successful innovation outcomes provide important implications in understanding the source of firms’ competitive advantages, failed innovations would provide us with critical insight about firms’ ability to survive and develop as they may result in unfavorable consequences, such as financial risks and negative impacts on firms’ reputations In this light, I examine how various strategic choices – such as interorganizational relationships, acquisitions, and internal R&D – affect firm’s innovation trajectories and failures.</p> <p> In Essay 1, I explore how firms’ decision to form interorganizational relationships can affect their innovation failures. In particular, I investigate how a venture’s choice to form an investment relationship with a particular venture capitalist (VC) could determine the venture’s innovation failures. I propose that the time pressure that VCs face may elicit negative consequences for their portfolio companies’ innovation quality. In Essay 2, I examine how firms’ efforts to acquire technology and knowledge from external markets through acquisitions could affect their innovation failure rates. I suggest and find that adverse selection and post-acquisition integration problems impose substantial costs on firms pursuing acquisitions leading them to experience high rate of innovation failures. In Essay 3, I examine how firms’ efforts to develop new products incrementally affect their innovation failures. I suggest that, due to the path dependent nature of product development, when firms develop and introduce new products through an incremental approach, they may face the risk of their new products being exposed to the failure associated with the products and underlying technologies upon which the new products are built.</p> </div> <br>

Managing the new product development (NPD) process, especially the first phase, the front end of innovation (FEI), is crucial for companies today in order to develop successful products and reach process and product sustainability. This has proved to be a significant challenge for start-ups since 90 percent of them fail (Krishna et al., 2016). This explorative study investigates how prototyping can be used in FEI, with a focus on Swedish start-up companies. A great deal of research has been published about prototyping in the later stages in the development process, and about FEI in general. Regarding prototyping in FEI, the existing literature is mainly located in the product design area. A substantial research gap has also been identified in a start-up context regarding prototyping in FEI. To fill in this gap, a qualitative approach was used collecting data form three different perspectives; start-up accelerators, start-ups employees and users. To accumulate these three perspectives, two sets of semi-structured interviews and two focus groups were conducted. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the collected data. The empirical findings align with the existing literature in several areas, but also gain new insights, contributing to filling the research gap. To conclude, there are a number of different specific prototyping purposes and methods, as well as crucial recommendations, that start-ups should consider in FEI to succeed. The thesis highlights that start-ups should use simple prototypes early in FEI, iterating the prototyping efforts, and gradually increasing the accuracy of the prototype during the FEI.

As business, technologies, and products changes so quickly in the modern day business environment, the complexity of launching new products into global markets increases. Therefore, the significance of the new product development (NPD) concept is rising, according to researchers. This master thesis is based, through a preliminary literature review, on the assumption that traditional NPD frameworks have deficiencies today. This is because as a NPD process is an on-going process that is performed repeatedly, the importance of putting forth new considerations to the NPD based on multi-aspect industrial characteristics today is needed for a sustainable NPD framework. Therefore, this study will put forth a new multi-aspect NPD framework with emphasis on technological-, global collaboration-, and financial elements to target the literature gap that is claimed to exist. The process of the research methodology followed a deductive approach, with an explorative-, descriptive- and analytical study. The collected data was of qualitative type, through 12 semi-structured interviews. A total of six Swedish high-technological manufacturing firms were interviewed, four of which were for empirical purposes, and two for contextual understanding. The author came to the conclusion that various deviations were found in setting the multi-aspect NPD approach in contrast to traditional NPD frameworks. The significance of “Open Innovation” concepts was adamant as being the stepping-stone for idea generation, conceptualization, and strategic partnership that was not brought up by traditional literature. Openness in all elements of the multiple-aspect NPD framework setup in this study was imperative, as the empirical findings suggested that the business environment for high-technological industries shifted towards an increased technological- and financial convergence. During the latter stages, minor deviations were found, with emphasis on collaboration elements between the R&amp;D-, production- and marketing divisions within the firms.

Background: During the last decades there has been a rapid increase in the desire of being more flexible and responsive, which has paved the way for Agile Project Management – APM. As a consequence of implementing APM into environments previously defined as traditional, it has opened up a discussion of merging APM with Traditional Project Management – TPM. This combination of methodologies is referred to as Hybrid Project Management – HPM, whose aim is to leverage benefits from both APM and TPM. Purpose: Prior research has failed to keep up with this trend. Those that have shed light on this phenomenon have failed to realize the differences between IT and non-IT sectors. With this in mind, and the call for including managers’ perspective on HPM, this study has investigated project managers’ experiences and perceptions of factors that influence hybrid project success in physical product development. In order to address this purpose this study has also investigated how project managers perceive project success. This was done since one must first determine what constitutes project success in order to identify what factors that could bear a potential influence on it. Method: From an interpretivist philosophical standpoint this, exploratory and inductive, study has been carried out through semi-structured interviews with experienced project managers within HPM. Inspired by Grounded Theory, this study has employed purposive sampling and analyzed the data through a grounded analysis technique. Conclusion: This research has successfully identified a range of various factors that influence hybrid projects’ success. Based upon this, a model exhibiting the factors influencing hybrid projects in physical product development could be constructed, as well as a model depicting how project managers perceive hybrid project success. It was found that there is a constant tension between the TPM and APM when merging the two. Instead of identifying one way to optimize the hybrid project, it is more or less about managing this balance between APM and TPM practices. It was also found that project success is a dynamic and subjective concept, rather than the static and additive concept that is often illustrated by contemporary research.

This cumulative dissertation is based on three distinct scientific papers which deal with various strategies of external knowledge sourcing. The first two papers investigate the impact of collaboration on innovation performance taking into consideration a portfolio of external partners (customers, suppliers and universities) at different stages (idea generation, R&D, design, testing and market launch) of the new product development (NPD) process. Both papers rely on representative data of German firms from a wide range of industries. It sticks out that performance effects of external collaborations are highly partner-specific. Moreover firms of different size and in different technological environments can reap the benefits of external collaborations at distinct stages of the NPD process. The third paper investigates the determinants of demand at marktes for technology (MfT). At MfT disembodied knowledge (i.e. especially patents and licences) is traded at a certain price. The paper uses data from 20 industries in 24 European countries and provides almost exclusive evidence for demand side factors that propel and contrain acquisitions at MfT.:I Acknowledgements II Tables III Figures IV Abbreviations 1. Introduction 1.1 Motivation and relevant strands of literature 1.2 Research questions and contribution of the dissertation 1.3 Abstracts of the research articles 1.3.1 Abstract chapter 2 1.3.2 Abstract chapter 3 1.3.3 Abstract chapter 4 1.4 Statement of co-authorship 2. Timing of external partnerships in low-tech and high-tech firms. When and with whom do collaborations pay off? 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Conceptual framework and hypothesis development 2.2.1 Customer collaboration 2.2.2 Supplier collaboration 2.2.3 University collaboration 2.3 Data and models 2.3.1 Database 2.3.2 Variables 2.3.3 Estimation model 2.4 Results 2.4.1 Descriptive statistics 2.4.2 Results from regression analysis 2.4.3 Robustness checks and extensions 2.5 Discussion and conclusion 2.5.1 General discussion 2.5.2 Managerial and policy implications 2.5.3 Limitations and concluding remarks References chapter 2 Appendices chapter 2 3. Alles F&E? Performanceeffekte phasenspezifischer externer Kooperation in KMU 3.1 Einleitung 3.2 Konzeptionelle Grundlagen 3.3 Theoretische Fundierung phasenspezifischer Effekte 3.3.1 Kooperation mit Kunden 3.3.2 Kooperation mit Lieferanten 3.3.3 Kooperation mit Universitäten 3.3.4 Zwischenfazit und Ableitung von Hypothesen 3.4 Daten und Operationalisierung 3.4.1 Datensatz 3.4.2 Abhängige Variable 3.4.3 Unabhängige Variablen 3.4.4 Kontrollvariablen 3.5 Empirische Strategie und Ergebnisse 3.5.1 Deskriptive Statistiken 3.5.2 Ergebnisse aus den Regressionsverfahren 3.5.3 Robustheitsprüfungen und Erweiterungen 3.6 Diskussion und Implikationen für Forschung und Praxis 3.6.1 Diskussion 3.6.2 Implikationen für die Praxis 3.6.3 Limitationen und zukünftige Forschungsfelder Literaturverzeichnis Kapitel 3 Anhang Kapitel 3 4. Markets for Technology in Europe – Mapping Demand and its Drivers 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Theoretical framework 4.2.1 The size of markets for technology 4.2.2 The nature of demand on markets for technology 4.3 Drivers of demand on markets for technology 4.3.1 Sectoral patterns of innovation 4.3.2 Technological leadership of industries 4.4 Data and Methods 4.4.1 Data 4.4.2 Variables 4.5 Results 4.5.1 Mapping markets for technology 4.5.2 Descriptive results 4.5.3 Regression results 4.5.4 Robustness checks 4.6 Discussion 4.7 Conclusion References chapter 4 5. Summary and concluding remarks 5.1 Contribution to empirical research 5.2 Limitations and future research directions 5.3 Implications for managers and policy makers 5.3.1 Implications for managers 5.3.2 Implications for policy makers Reference list Appendices / Die vorgelegte kumulative Dissertationsschrift umfasst drei unterschiedliche wissenschaftliche Aufsätze, welche sich mit unterschiedlichen Strategien der Beschaffung von unternehmensexternem Wissens befassen. Die beiden ersten Aufsätze untersuchen den Einfluss von Kooperationen mit verschiedenen externen Partnern (Kunden, Lieferanten und Universitäten) auf den Innovationserfolg von Unternehmen. Dazu wird die Kooperation mit den gewählten Partnergruppen in 5 Phasen des Neuproduktentwicklungsprozesses (NPD) (Ideenfindung, F&E, Design, Testen und Prüfen, Markteinführung) untersucht. Beide Aufsätze nutzen repräsentative Daten von deutschen Unternehmen, welche ein breites Spektrum an Branchen umfassen. Gemessene Performanceeffekte sind dabei hochgradig partnerspezifisch. Überdies profitieren Unternehmen je nach eigener Größe und technologischem Umfeld in unterschiedlichen Phasen des NPD-Prozesses von externen Kooperationen. Der dritte Aufsatz untersucht Determinanten der Nachfrage auf sogenannten Märkten für Technologie (MfT). Auf MfT wird unverkörpertes Wissen (insb. in Form von Patenten und Lizenzen) zu einem bestimmten Preis gehandelt. Die Studie beruht auf Daten aus 20 Branchen in 24 europäischen Ländern und liefert nahezu exklusive Evidenzen dafür, welche Faktoren die Nachfrage nach unverkörperter Technologie treiben und beschränken.:I Acknowledgements II Tables III Figures IV Abbreviations 1. Introduction 1.1 Motivation and relevant strands of literature 1.2 Research questions and contribution of the dissertation 1.3 Abstracts of the research articles 1.3.1 Abstract chapter 2 1.3.2 Abstract chapter 3 1.3.3 Abstract chapter 4 1.4 Statement of co-authorship 2. Timing of external partnerships in low-tech and high-tech firms. When and with whom do collaborations pay off? 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Conceptual framework and hypothesis development 2.2.1 Customer collaboration 2.2.2 Supplier collaboration 2.2.3 University collaboration 2.3 Data and models 2.3.1 Database 2.3.2 Variables 2.3.3 Estimation model 2.4 Results 2.4.1 Descriptive statistics 2.4.2 Results from regression analysis 2.4.3 Robustness checks and extensions 2.5 Discussion and conclusion 2.5.1 General discussion 2.5.2 Managerial and policy implications 2.5.3 Limitations and concluding remarks References chapter 2 Appendices chapter 2 3. Alles F&E? Performanceeffekte phasenspezifischer externer Kooperation in KMU 3.1 Einleitung 3.2 Konzeptionelle Grundlagen 3.3 Theoretische Fundierung phasenspezifischer Effekte 3.3.1 Kooperation mit Kunden 3.3.2 Kooperation mit Lieferanten 3.3.3 Kooperation mit Universitäten 3.3.4 Zwischenfazit und Ableitung von Hypothesen 3.4 Daten und Operationalisierung 3.4.1 Datensatz 3.4.2 Abhängige Variable 3.4.3 Unabhängige Variablen 3.4.4 Kontrollvariablen 3.5 Empirische Strategie und Ergebnisse 3.5.1 Deskriptive Statistiken 3.5.2 Ergebnisse aus den Regressionsverfahren 3.5.3 Robustheitsprüfungen und Erweiterungen 3.6 Diskussion und Implikationen für Forschung und Praxis 3.6.1 Diskussion 3.6.2 Implikationen für die Praxis 3.6.3 Limitationen und zukünftige Forschungsfelder Literaturverzeichnis Kapitel 3 Anhang Kapitel 3 4. Markets for Technology in Europe – Mapping Demand and its Drivers 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Theoretical framework 4.2.1 The size of markets for technology 4.2.2 The nature of demand on markets for technology 4.3 Drivers of demand on markets for technology 4.3.1 Sectoral patterns of innovation 4.3.2 Technological leadership of industries 4.4 Data and Methods 4.4.1 Data 4.4.2 Variables 4.5 Results 4.5.1 Mapping markets for technology 4.5.2 Descriptive results 4.5.3 Regression results 4.5.4 Robustness checks 4.6 Discussion 4.7 Conclusion References chapter 4 5. Summary and concluding remarks 5.1 Contribution to empirical research 5.2 Limitations and future research directions 5.3 Implications for managers and policy makers 5.3.1 Implications for managers 5.3.2 Implications for policy makers Reference list Appendices

No description available.

Innovation is a crucial activity to ensure companies’ viability and is increasingly important to sustain competitive advantage. Globalization and the accelerating technological development are creating new markets previously not explored. Companies’ capability to execute New Product development (NPD) under these circumstances is limited since this is a new setting for most companies. Literature reveals that developing highly innovative products entails higher potential of economic growth and this incentivizes companies to explore opportunities in unfamiliar markets. It is also previously empirical shown that the NPD process for products targeting unfamiliar respectively familiar markets should differ due to their varying nature. Despite this, companies tend to use the same NPD processes regardless of the market situation which furthermore can hinder companies from succeeding with innovations targeting unfamiliar markets. Considering this, the purpose of this thesis is to explore and identify which aspects within the execution of the NPD process that enable respectively inhibit companies to achieve commercial success in markets of different characteristics. To investigate this, a multiple case study was conducted at a Swedish manufacturer of industrial machines. Two cases representing unfamiliar respectively familiar markets were studied through employee interviews, observations, reading internal documents and informal meetings. The study was conducted with an abductive approach, investigating the empirical reality and existing literature simultaneously. The result of this study reveals aspects that are challenging for companies to contemplate when executing NPD in unfamiliar markets and how it contrasts to the conditions for familiar markets. Raising companies’ awareness of this enables them to be better equipped for executing NPD under unfamiliar market conditions. The main challenges concluded are allocation of human resources and competency utilization, deficient collection of market and customer information, and insufficient communication routines. Moreover, companies fail to evaluate the potential and risk of innovations and have a hard time developing and implementing an NPD process that supports both structure and flexibility in markets with different characteristics. The biggest difference with NPD for unfamiliar market is the level of uncertainty. The challenge of understanding the customer needs and the competitors becomes more tangible for unfamiliar markets, and further places agreat demand on a working communication system, flexibility, cross-functionality, good risk assessment and well-defined product requirements. / Innovation är avgörande för att säkerställa företagens lönsamhet och blir allt viktigare för att upprätthålla konkurrenskraft. Globaliseringen och den accelererande tekniska utvecklingen skapar nya marknader som tidigare inte utforskats. Företagens förmåga att genomföra utveckling av nya produkter (NPD) under dessa omständigheter är begränsade eftersom detta är en ny miljö för de flesta företag. Litteratur visar att utveckling av mycket innovativa produkter skapar större potential för ekonomisk tillväxt och detta uppmuntrar företag att utforska möjligheter i okända marknader. Det är också tidigare empiriskt visat att NPD-processen för produkter som riktar sig mot okända respektive kända marknader bör skilja sig åt på grund av deras varierande karaktär. Trots detta tenderar företag att använda samma NPD-processer oavsett marknadssituation, vilket dessutom kan hindra företag från att lyckas med innovationer som riktar sig mot okända marknader. Med bakgrund i detta är syftet med detta examensarbete att utforska och identifiera vilka aspekter inom genomförandet av NPD-processen som gör det möjligt, respektive hämmar för företag att nå kommersiell framgång på marknader med olika karakteristik. För att undersöka detta genomfördesen fallstudie hos en svensk tillverkare av industrimaskiner. Två fall som representerade okänd respektive känd marknad studerades genom intervjuer, observationer, läsning av interna dokument och informella möten. Studien genomfördes med ett abduktivt tillvägagångssätt, som undersökte den empiriska verkligheten och befintlig litteratur samtidigt. Resultatet av denna studie identifierar aspekter som är utmanande för företag när de utför NPD i okända marknader och hur detta kontrasterar mot förhållandena i kända marknader. Genom att öka företags medvetenhet om detta kan de bli bättre rustade för att utföra NPD under olika marknadsförhållanden. De främsta utmaningarna som har identifierats är allokering av personalresurser och kompetensutnyttjande, bristfällig insamling av marknads- och kundinformation samt otillräckliga kommunikationsrutiner. Dessutom misslyckas ofta företag med att utvärdera innovationers potential och risk, och har svårt att utveckla och implementera en NPD-process som stödjer både struktur och flexibilitet i marknader med olika egenskaper. Den största skillnaden med NPD i okända marknader är nivån av osäkerhet. Utmaningen att förstå kundernas behov och konkurrenterna blir mer påtaglig i okända marknader och ställer vidare stora krav på ett fungerande kommunikationssystem, flexibilitet, tvärfunktionalitet, riskbedömning och väldefinierade produktkrav.

Successful product development has been a fundamental part of many of today's companies and their continued prosperity depends on continuing to develop new products in the future. There are many models of product development. The two most common classes of development are market pull (MP) and technology push (TP). TP product development differs from MP in that the development begins with a specified technology rather than a specified customer. Because TP development is generally considered more difficult and challenging, most of the product development research has focused on MP development and many researchers and practitioners favor MP development over TP development. However, successful TP development has been shown to be a source of innovation that cannot be realized through MP development and is performed by many companies. The research in this thesis focuses on developing a comprehensive TP model to guide product developers on how to implement TP development successfully. This new TP model is developed by comparing recently published TP models to published best practices of TP development and known deficiencies of TP models. The comprehensive TP model makes improvements to the existing TP models through the addition of processes and tools that overcome deficiencies and incorporate best practices. The new comprehensive TP model includes elements of existing generic MP models, a "Technology Application Selection" (TAS) process and several new processes and tools associated with prototypes and network groups. Some of the new processes and tools are demonstrated through a case example. The comprehensive TP model provides product developers with the necessary step-by-step guide to TP product development. The model effectively deals with deficiencies of previous TP models, is sufficiently comprehensive and detailed to guide product developers, is complimentary and consistent to existing design processes and terms, is applicable to most TP product development projects, and is useful and repeatable in making product development decisions.

Background:  The increment of global population flows has challenged businesses to harness the potential of a culturally diverse environment. Nonetheless, previous studies on the effect of cultural diversity on teams has been equivocal, specifically when it is related to a firm’s innovation process. Mostly, these said studies have been focusing on cultural diversity as an input and innovation performance as an output. This means, understanding the mechanisms under which cultural diversity affects team performance has yet to be established. There is however a consensus among scholars that cultural diversity can act as a “double-edged sword” as it can be a source of friction and conflict, but also synergy and learning.  Purpose:  The purpose of this study is to explore multicultural team dynamics involved in the new product development process and determine if and how cultural diversity affects the innovation process, particularly, in a global knowledge-intensive firm. Our study aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of how cultural differences drive specific team processes, and thereby, offer both practitioners and scholars important insights.  Method:  We made use of a qualitative research approach with an exploratory design and a single holistic case study of a Swedish-based global, knowledge-intensive company. By conducting semi-structured interviews with members of multicultural NPD teams and one HR representative, we gained an understanding of different views and experiences that shape the team dynamics, which ultimately influences the innovation process.  Conclusion:  The results of this study suggest that cultural diversity does not directly impact the innovation process, but rather the effect is influenced by certain contextual factors and materializes through specific team outcomes. These outcomes could positively or negatively impact the innovation process.