Market intelligence and NPD success: a study of technology intensive companies in Finland

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate how managers in technology‐intensive companies conceptualize and perceive “intelligence” variables in successful and unsuccessful new product development (NPD) projects, and explore the role that intelligence variables play in differentiating between successful and unsuccessful NPD outcomes. Limitations and future research directions are also discussed. Design/methodology/approach The most senior person responsible for NPD within a sample of Finnish technology‐intensive companies completed a self‐administered internet survey on the role of intelligence in successful and unsuccessful NPD projects. The JMP 1‐2‐3‐software package (version 8 for Mac) by SAS was used for statistical analysis. Findings The findings indicate that managers in technology‐intensive companies rely on two broad types of intelligence, technical production and market information, during the NPD process. Most intelligence variables are positively related to NPD success. In addition, it appears that managers attach lower importance to intelligence variables in successful NPD outcomes when comparisons are made with previous research. Practical implications Managers in Finnish technology‐intensive companies should carefully analyze both technical‐production information and market information in the NPD process although technical‐production information is the more important factor in the analysis of information requirements in successful NPD outcomes relative to market information. Originality/value Although market intelligence variables have been studied in the context of differentiating successful and unsuccessful industrial NPD, they have largely focused on the NPD process in broad‐based industrial and manufacturing companies. The paper examines the role of market intelligence in the NPD process of technology‐intensive companies using Finland as the study setting.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 39 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.