14.11.2012 Views

Management of Technology and Innovation in Japan

Management of Technology and Innovation in Japan

Management of Technology and Innovation in Japan

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

174 C. Herstatt, B. Verworn, C. Stockstrom, A. Nagahira, <strong>and</strong> O. Takahashi<br />

needs <strong>and</strong> enhances top management support e.g. for the commitment <strong>of</strong> resources<br />

(Clayton et al. 1996, p. 449; Watts et al. 1998, p. 48).<br />

In our study, almost 90% <strong>of</strong> the companies make use <strong>of</strong> early physical prototypes,<br />

15% apply rapid prototyp<strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> 11% use virtual prototyp<strong>in</strong>g (see Figure<br />

6). Almost half <strong>of</strong> the companies use simulation to reduce technical uncerta<strong>in</strong>ty.<br />

Overall, only 5% <strong>of</strong> the respondents do not apply any methods or tool to reduce<br />

technical uncerta<strong>in</strong>ty dur<strong>in</strong>g the predevelopment phase. This supports the proposition<br />

that <strong>Japan</strong>ese companies rely on a strong methodological support to reduce<br />

uncerta<strong>in</strong>ty (Herstatt et al. 2004).<br />

N=551<br />

Methods or tools applied to reduce technical uncerta<strong>in</strong>ty<br />

Simulation<br />

Virtual reality techniques<br />

Rapid prototyp<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Early physical prototyp<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Other<br />

None<br />

5%<br />

5%<br />

11%<br />

15%<br />

Fig. 6. Methods or tools applied to reduce technical uncerta<strong>in</strong>ty<br />

Front End Project Plann<strong>in</strong>g<br />

48%<br />

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%<br />

Percentage <strong>of</strong> companies<br />

For 40% <strong>of</strong> the respondents, a systematic <strong>in</strong>itial plann<strong>in</strong>g is a st<strong>and</strong>ard procedure.<br />

49% at least sometimes plan their projects systematically. 11% do not engage <strong>in</strong><br />

systematic <strong>in</strong>itial plann<strong>in</strong>g at all. In the next section, we evaluate the effect <strong>of</strong> systematic<br />

<strong>in</strong>itial plann<strong>in</strong>g on success. In this section, we look at the different plann<strong>in</strong>g<br />

activities <strong>and</strong> support <strong>of</strong> these activities by methods <strong>and</strong> tools <strong>in</strong> more detail.<br />

In our study, almost half <strong>of</strong> the companies def<strong>in</strong>e milestones with deliverables<br />

(see Figure 7). Terms like work packages are not widespread <strong>in</strong> <strong>Japan</strong>. Instead,<br />

projects are broken down <strong>in</strong>to “teams”. Cost plans are assigned to these teams.<br />

This is the case <strong>in</strong> 64% <strong>of</strong> the companies we looked at. In addition, more than half<br />

<strong>of</strong> the companies determ<strong>in</strong>e the required staff for the project already dur<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

<strong>in</strong>itial plann<strong>in</strong>g. With regard to tools, bar charts, network diagrams <strong>and</strong> project<br />

management s<strong>of</strong>tware are not <strong>of</strong>ten used (18%, 3%, <strong>and</strong> 14% <strong>of</strong> the companies).<br />

This is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with former results (Herstatt et al. 2004).<br />

89%

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!