Management of Technology and Innovation in Japan

282 C. Nakata and S. Im
Managerial Implications
Our study has several managerial implications. Foremost is that this study points
to the value of creating new product advantage in Japan and Korea. Henard and
Szymanski (2001) concluded in the most recent meta-analysis of the new product
literature that advantage is the most important determinant of new product success.
Our study underscores this insight by demonstrating that advantage is clearly
linked to the market and financial performance of a new product across both geographies.
Therefore, to ensure the development of high performing new products,
focusing on advantage is a potent and beneficial course. Industry leaders in Japan
and Korea, such as Sharp and Hyundai, appear to be acting on this knowledge already,
emphasizing multiple forms of superiority in new products in order to woo
and keep customers.
The second managerial implication is that our model of process antecedents is a
useful description and guide for developing new product advantage in Japan and
Korea. Cross-functional integration, new product team proficiency, and initiation
process are three critical levers that managers can manipulate to create superior
new products. It would be useful, then, for managers to regularly assess the degree
to which these levers or factors are in place and make adjustments accordingly.
For example, if managers in a Japanese company determine that the initiation
process is weak, they can draw more attention to the need for thoughtful initiation
activities such as deep customer need analysis, leveraging culture-based controls
as amae. In Korea, managers in a firm may determine that cross-functional integration
is poor, impeding the development of new product advantage. In this case,
the managers can establish more mechanisms to encourage interactions and communications
among diverse functions, including imposing a formal team structure,
offering team-based rewards, and providing computer platforms for information
sharing.
A third managerial implication is the need to observe distinctions in product
development by country. It is important to anticipate such differences, such as the
greater role of initiation process in Japan versus cross-functional integration in
Korea. If a multinational company is operating an R&D or innovation center in
these countries, or is collaborating, say, in a strategic alliance with a Japanese or
Korean company to develop new products, it may be counterproductive to impose
a uniform approach. The mistake can easily be made since Japanese and Korean
companies are both in Asia; however, presuming their approaches to innovation
work are exactly the same would be ill-advised, as clearly demonstrated in our
study. Interestingly, Japanese companies are entering into strategic alliances with
Korean firms (e.g. Sony with Samsung to develop and sell products for the LCD
market), so it is critical to be cognizant and accommodate country-based differences
in innovation methods.
A fourth implication is that the knowledge and skill proficiency of the new
product team is vital to the creation of advantage in both Japan and Korea. This
process factor, which previously had not been studied, has the greatest and only
uniformly positive impact on advantage (based on higher beta values over those