《中小型地区企业新产品开发的挑战》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《中小型地区企业新产品开发的挑战（10页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、Small and medium district enterprises and the new product development challengeLiterature dealing with the product development process in large-scale industries is abundant. However, there is general agreement that the new product development (NPD) process is not adequately studied in small and medi
2、um enterprises (SMEs) and models and tools specifically focused for these units are lacking. The innovation process in SMEs possesses certain distinguishing features that would suggest a specific approach to NPD activities. When compared with large-sized firms, the innovative process in small units
3、is more informal and less structured, the base of managerial competencies is limited, availability of financial resources is lower, the attraction towards skilled labour weaker and the propensity for interaction with other firms is limited.Effective NPD has become the focal point of competitiveness
4、in many industries, particularly those where product life has shortened, competition increased on a global basis, and customer demand for greater product variety has grown (Maylor, 1997; Pisano 1997). Consequently, research on best practices in product development, that is, practices and methods whi
5、ch make firms good product innovators, has increased (see Abdalla, 1999; Griffin, 1997).Analysing these contributions we can note that most are ascribable to concurrent engineering (CE) tools and techniques. CE suggests an “integrated” design approach, that is, a systematic approach to the integrate
6、d, concurrent design of products and processes. This would force developers to consider all elements of the production cycle right from conception to expedition, including quality, cost, schedule and user requirements.There do not appear to be any papers on the specific problems of NPD in IDs. Howev
7、er, various authors point out the characteristics of the innovativeprocess that typically develop in IDs. We can observe how the district localisation mitigates some of the limits mentioned, but can generate others:(1) District firms benefit from external economies (the presence of agencies that off
8、er specific services, a specialised labour market, support infrastructures, lower transport cost, greater facilities for interaction thanks to geographic proximity and common cultural identities, etc.) (Nassimbeni, 2003). Thus, the district location mitigates problems related to:1、 information acces
9、s and exchange;2、difficulties in developing and managing inter-organisation relationships; and3、the availability of a skilled workforce.(2) On the other hand the strong division of labour (specialisation), and the consequent fragmentation of production tasks that characterise the ID, hinder the “con
10、current” management of innovative processes. Moreover, they prevent the development of product and process holism required for effective NPD activities. Thus, path dependency towards only a few (mainly) productive tasks emerges. Finally, it does not favour “systemic” innovation. Robertson and Lagloi
11、s (1995) observe that in the past industrial districts benefited from the rapid exchange of information, thanks to the firms geographical proximity and the high mobility of personnel. However, when innovation involves changes that span stages of production or even industries, specialisation might re
12、tard the realisation that an innovation produced for one purpose could serve other needs. Moreover, innovations adopted at one stage of the process could prove to be sub-optimal for efficiency at other stages.This problem is particularly relevant nowadays, when many scholars are questioning the futu
13、re of the local system. In the era of globalisation is the district formula maintaining its vitality, is it beginning to decline, or is it just changing shape? No unequivocal answer to this question can be found in the literature. On one hand there are those who think that globality is showing up al
14、l the limits of local industrial systems (Ferrucci and Varaldo, 1993; Gottardi, 1996; Grabher, 1993). On the other we find experts who consider the contraposition between global and local only apparent (Becattini, 1999; Porter, 1990, 1998; Fabiani et al., 1998; Signorini, 1994). The literature indic
15、ates various positions regarding the prospects of local systems in the new competitive context. However it is a widely shared opinion that global economy is modifying the traditional territorial forms, changing their inner ties and strengthening their need to open up to the outside (Amin, 1993; Rull
16、ani and Romano, 1998). The district firms, both those that are situated at the end of the production line and those that cover intermediate phases, are now urged to make changes on numerous fronts. End-producers are becoming more aware ofthe need to rethink the organisation and localisation of the value chain activities. Among these, product development must be placed at the forefront. At the same time, the local subcontracting network, which in the past carried out most of the productive work
