Application and performance impact of stage–gate systems – the role services in the firm's business focus. (21st September 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Schultz, Carsten; Globocnik, Dietfried; Kock, Alexander; Salomo, Søren
• Is Part Of: R & D management. Volume 49:Number 4(2019)
• Page Start: 534
• Page End: 554
• Publication Date: 2018-09-21
• Subjects: Research, Industrial -- Management -- Periodicals; 658.57
• DOI: 10.1111/radm.12341
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0033-6807

Abstract

Abstract : Although service innovation is important, knowledge of new product and service development, including the positive effect of stage‐and‐gate‐type systems, has been derived almost exclusively from studies in the manufacturing sector. In the present paper, we address two important questions: How do differences in the firm's business focus, which describes whether a firm puts more emphasis on products or services in its business activities, influence the usage of such formal innovation processes? Is stage‐and‐gate‐type systems' impact on innovation program performance contingent on the firm's business focus? Unlike previous studies, we not only differentiate service and manufacturing by industry classification codes but also apply a continuous measure to take into account the blurring of boundaries between the manufacturing and service businesses. Based on a comprehensive discussion of service‐specific characteristics and their implications for innovation management and using a cross‐industry, multi‐informant sample of innovation programs from 272 firms with 1, 985 informants, we find empirical support for firms with a stronger focus on the service business being less likely to use stage‐and‐gate‐type systems. Furthermore, the use of stage‐and‐gate‐type systems fosters innovation program performance, and this effect becomes stronger as the business focus shifts toward services. This result implies that service‐based firms can benefit from stage‐and‐gate‐type systems to a greater extent than product‐based firms. Our research also demonstrates the gap between the desired level of innovation process formalization and its current usage in practice, especially for firms with a dominating service business.