Search

Prototypes are important tools in the development and production of new products. In the engineering design literature, prototypes are mainly perceived as tools for validating and verifying aspects of a design in the late stages of the design process. However, several studies have found that prototypes are important in the earlier design stages as well, and it is currently unknown how prototypes contribute to add value within the overall value chains of a business system. Using a case-study approach, we investigate this topic seeking to answer the question of how prototypes and rapid prototyping add value in the various stages of the new product development process in the automotive industry. Based on our findings, we propose that the value of prototypes can be divided into the following three categories: the artefact, i.e. the prototype; the process, i.e. prototyping; or the experiment, i.e. the data generated from experimenting with the artefact. Finally, we argue that prototypes add value to both the production and knowledge value stream. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open Innovation (OI) is a growing trend as a practice to improve the Product Development Process (PDP). It is changing the way companies create new products and technology. The automotive industry is not an exception to that trend. This industry began to implement this concept many years ago but not in a homogeneous way. Now, more than ever, innovation is playing a vital role in this industry due to the technological revolution it is facing, and new innovation tools are needed. This study aims to compare OI practices in the PDP of French companies at their headquarters and at their subsidiaries located in Brazil. It presents multiple case studies based on interviews with experienced professionals from four different companies. Public documents were also used in the analysis of the innovation process in these companies. A literature review of PDP and OI is presented to ground the questions that guided these interviews. This study reveals that, in addition to stronger technology development, headquarters in France have more structured OI practices than subsidiaries in Brazil. It was found that automakers in Brazil perform some OI practices while suppliers have few to no product development. Furthermore, in both countries and industries, outside-in OI practices are much more common than inside-out ones. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper portrays the current state of practice of a corporate foresight unit within a multinational automotive company, working with this task assignment for more than three decades. It describes how the early detection of medium- to long-term developments in the broader business environment, including social and market developments, is integrated into innovation and strategy processes. The purpose of this paper is to give an account of foresight practice in an automotive company that (1) covers the full range of roles and practices of a mature foresight group, (2) describes case examples how such roles and practices are played out in practice and (3) concludes with general recommendations for organizational design and processes. The paper highlights five major fields of foresight practice which encompass strategic issues in different working fields: early detection in new business environments, trend research for the generation of product innovations, prospective evaluation of innovation ideas, exploration and development of new business, and cross-functional dissemination of future-related issues. Practice examples in each field detail features of the integration of foresight in corporate processes. The paper finishes with characterizing the organizational architecture of a mature corporate foresight group, a discussion and overall conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Innovative features such as hands-free car entry and ignition systems, stop-start devices, telematics systems, and panoramic windshields are increasingly important to carmakers' innovation strategies. However, while product-centric innovation has been extensively studied, there is less insight into the way companies implement their feature-innovation strategies. The capability to explore, integrate, and deploy such attractive features is a critical dynamic capability; it allows carmakers to refresh their products, develop their competences, and maintain the efficiency of their traditional new product development. This research investigates the structures and processes of feature innovation in the automotive industry. It is based on a global investigation encompassing 9 generalist carmakers and 26 cases of feature innovation. The results show a clear trend, over the past decade, toward a structure of autonomous 'advanced engineering' units and processes that are responsible for exploring innovative features and transferring them to multiple products. This paper details the key attributes of these units, and the role they play along the multiproduct learning cycle. Supplementing this structural analysis, the paper also identifies the coordination patterns between exploration and new product development activities. These results provide industry-level insights into the way firms organize their feature-innovation capability, and bring empirical elements to the ambidexterity literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de Administração e Inovação (RAI) is the property of Revista de Administracao e Inovacao- RAI and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper presents an NPD managerial decision-making software system: innovationEnterprizer. Furthermore, the paper reports on the application of the system at a major European parts supplier to the German automotive industry which was carried out during September 2004. Ten facilitated sessions were conducted with managers. The main results indicated that the project team (human and integration factors) were extremely weak when compared with the formal side of innovation, for which the company had formal processes and scored very strongly. Furthermore, the consistency between units was very high, indicating that general innovation policy, which was formulated at corporate board level, was not adapted to the unit-specific level. This was despite the board's recognition that each unit has a need for its own uniquely combined set of success factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]