For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
1,025
views
104
references
 Top references
cited by
2
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    2
    shares
      41
      similar
       All similar

      If you have found this article useful and you think it is important that researchers across the world have access, please consider donating, to ensure that this valuable collection remains Open Access.

      Prometheus is published by Pluto Journals, an Open Access publisher. This means that everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of all articles from our international collection of social science journals. Furthermore Pluto Journals authors don’t pay article processing charges (APCs).

      scite_

      Prometheus

      Volume 38, Issue 2
       
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The changing context of innovation management: A critique of the relevance of the stage-gate approach to current organizations

      Published
      research-article
      Author(s): 1 , * , , 2 , , 3 , , 4 ,
      Publication date Pub:
      Journal: Prometheus
      Publisher: Pluto Journals
      Bookmark

            Abstract

            The stage-gate method was initially developed as a description of the new product development practices within high-performing firms. At its heart the concept is simple: and the flow of activity of a stage-gate includes project action, information generation, analysis and decision. Research has shown that the stage-gate method has been extremely successful in many contexts. The question of whether the approach is suitable for all projects in all situations is a principal faultline within the literature. Proponents argue that adaptations and evolutions of the stage approach enable it to be universally applied. This paper provides a critical review of the literature and we identify chronic limitations of stage-gate when evaluated against contemporary challenges, including VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity), environment, digitization and open innovation. We remain critical about whether these contemporary currents are best approached by yet another reconfiguration of stage-gate building blocks. We argue that high uncertainty (caused by these currents) requires the flexibility to change fundamental elements of a project, including the underlying concept and the target market, which means that stage-gate is not well suited to innovation processes addressing these contemporary challenges. We propose a typology to show its suitability.

            Content

            Author and article information

            Journal
            Journal ID (doi): 10.13169/prometheus.38.2.0207
            Title: Prometheus
            Abbreviated Title: PROM
            Publisher: Pluto Journals
            ISSN (Electronic): 1470-1030
            Publication date Pub: 30 August 2022
            Volume: 38
            Issue: 2
            Pages: 207-227
            Affiliations
            [1 ]Faculty of Business and Law, University of Portsmouth
            [2 ]Business School, University of Southampton
            [3 ]Management School, University of Liverpool
            [4 ]Netherlands Study Centre for Technology Trends, The Hague, Netherlands
            Author notes

            ACCEPTING EDITOR: Steven Henderson

            Article
            DOI: 10.13169/prometheus.38.2.0207
            SO-VID: 69b38978-1eca-4d94-9fea-9260df80481c
            Copyright ©
            License:

            All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

            History
            Page count
            Pages: 21
            Categories
            Subject: Research papers

            ScienceOpen disciplines: Computer science,Arts,Social & Behavioral Sciences,Law,History,Economics

            References

            1. (2012) ‘Reconciling perspectives: a grounded theory of how people manage the process of software development’, Journal of Systems and Software, 85, 6, pp.1269–86.

            2. (2018) ‘Two paths to organizational effectiveness: product advantage and life-cycle flexibility’, Journal of Business Research, 84, March, pp.285–92.

            3. (1999) ‘Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, it’s time to accept other success criteria’, International Journal of Project Management, 17, 6, pp.337–42.

            4. (2019) ‘Revisiting automated project management in the digital age: a survey of AI approaches’, Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management, 7, 1, pp.27–39.

            5. . (2022) ‘The open innovation in science research field: a collaborative conceptualisation approach’. Industry and Innovation, 29, 2, pp.136–85.

            6. (2014) ‘What VUCA really means for you’, Harvard Business Review, 92, 1/2, available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=2389563 (accessed June 2022).

            7. (2011) ‘A comprehensive framework for collaborative networked innovation’, Production Planning and Control, 22, 5–6, pp.581–93.

            8. (2006) ‘Innovating the innovation process’, International Journal of Technology Management, 34(3–4), pp.390–404.

            9. (2008) ‘Management innovation’, Academy of Management Review, 33, 4, pp.825–45.

            10. (2010) ‘Industry and academia in convergence: micro-institutional dimensions of R&D collaboration’, Technovation, 30, 2, pp.100–8.

            11. (2012) ‘Corporate effectuation: entrepreneurial action and its impact on RandD project performance’, Journal of Business Venturing, 27, 2, pp.167–84.

            12. (2018) ‘The adoption of open innovation in large firms’, Research-Technology Management, 61, 1, pp.35–45.

            13. (2020) ‘Leveraging innovation spaces to foster collaborative innovation’, Creativity and Innovation Management, 29, 1, pp.178–91.

            14. (2002) ‘A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: boundary objects in new product development’, Organization Science, 13, 4, pp.442–55.

            15. (2010) ‘Understanding antecedents of new product development speed: a meta-analysis’, Journal of Operations Management, 28, 1, pp.17–33.

            16. (2003) Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology, Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston.

            17. (2010) ‘Business model innovation: opportunities and barriers’, Long Range Planning, 43, 2/3, pp.354–63.

            18. ChristensenC. (1997) The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

            19. (2009) ‘Formal rules in product development: sensemaking of structured approaches’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26, 5, pp.502–19.

            20. (2019) ‘The impact of artificial intelligence on innovation: an exploratory analysis’ in (eds) The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp.115–46.

            21. (2016) ‘Agile project management and stage-gate model: a hybrid framework for technology-based companies’, Journal of Engineering and Technology Manage­ment, 40, pp.1–14.

            22. (2016) ‘The agility construct on project management theory’, International Journal of Project Management, 34, 4, pp.660–74.

            23. (1990) ‘Stage-gate systems: a new tool for managing new products’, Business Horizons, 33, 3, pp.44–54.

            24. (1994) ‘Third-generation new product processes’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 11, 1, pp.3–14.

            25. (2008) ‘Perspective: the stage-gate idea-to-launch process – update. What’s new, and nexgen systems’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25, 3, pp.213–32.

            26. (2014) ‘What’s next? After stage-gate’, Research-Technology Management, 57, 1, pp.20–31.

            27. (2016) ‘Agile-stage-gate hybrids’, Research Technology Management, 59, 1, pp.21–9.

            28. (2017) ‘Idea-to-launch gating systems: better, faster, and more agile: leading firms are rethinking and reinventing their idea-to-launch gating systems, adding elements of Agile to traditional Stage-Gate structures to add flexibility and speed while retaining structure’, Research Technology Management, 60, 1, pp.48–52.

            29. (2012). Best practices in the idea-to-launch process and its governance. Research-Technology Management, 55, 2, pp.43–54.

            30. (1996) ‘Winning businesses in product development: the critical success factors’, Research Technology Management, 39, 4, pp.18–30.

            31. (2016) ‘Agile-stage-gate: new idea-to-launch method for manufactured new products is faster, more responsive’, Industrial Marketing Management, 59, pp.167–80.

            32. (2018) ‘Agile-stage-gate for manufacturers’, Research Technology Management, 61, 2, pp.17–26.

            33. (2002) ‘Optimizing the stage-gate process: what best-practice companies do – I’, Research Technology Management, 45, 5, pp.21–7.

            34. (2010) ‘Business intelligence and organizational decisions’, International Journal of Business Intelligence Research, 1, 1 pp.1–12.

            35. (2018) ‘Artificial intelligence for the real world’, Harvard Business Review, 96, 1, pp.108–16.

            36. (2006) ‘Primer on open innovation: principles and practice’, Pdma Visions, 30, 2, pp.13–17.

            37. (2018) ‘Applying organizational ambidexterity in strategic management under a “VUCA” environment: evidence from high tech companies in China’, International Journal of Innovation Studies, 2, 1, pp.42–52.

            38. (2019) ‘Effective organizational improvisation in information systems development: insights from the Tencent messaging system development’, Information and Management, 56, 4, pp.614–24.

            39. (2019) ‘Understanding distributed product engineering: dealing with complexity for situation- and demand-oriented process design’, Procedia CIRP, 84, pp.136–42.

            40. (2013) ‘Ordered to innovate: a longitudinal examination of the early periods of a new product development process implementation in a manufacturing firm’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30, 4, pp.712–31.

            41. (n.d.) ‘The stage-gate model: an overview’, Stage-Gate International, available at https://www.stage-gate.com/uncategorized/stage-gate-model-an-overview/ (accessed June 2022).

            42. (2007) ‘Modified stage-gate regimes in new product development’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24, 1, pp.20–33.

            43. (2018) ‘The future of management in a world of electronic brains’, Journal of Management Inquiry, 27, 2, pp.260–3.

            44. (2017) ‘Critical success factors in early new product development: a review and a conceptual model’, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14, pp.411–27.

            45. (2013) ‘Perspectives on innovation processes’, Academy of Management Annals, 7, 1, pp.775–819.

            46. (2017) Models of Innovation: The History of an Idea, MIT Press, Cambridge MA.

            47. (2016) ‘Transition thinking and business model innovation: towards a transformative business model and new role for the reuse centers of Limburg, Belgium’, Sustainability, 8, 2, paper 112.

            48. (1997) ‘The effect of project and process characteristics on product development cycle time’, Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 1, pp.24–35.

            49. (1996) ‘Integrating R & D and marketing: a review and analysis of the literature’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 13, pp.191–215.

            50. (2018) ‘Proximity and power in collaborative innovation projects’, Regional Studies, 52, 1, pp.35–46.

            51. (2019) ‘Turning research into revenue: generating growth from research and development can be a challenge. Julian Heaton, at Innovate UK, looks at the support available from the UK government to encourage innovation’, Imaging and Machine Vision Europe, SI, pp.26–8.

            52. (1998) ‘Rational versus soft management in complex software: lessons from flight simulation’, International Journal of Innovation Management, 2, 1, pp.1–43.

            53. (2012) ‘The contrary forces of innovation’, Industrial Marketing Management, 41, 2, pp.344–56.

            54. (2011) ‘Engineering change: an overview and perspective on the literature’, Research in Engineering Design, 22, 2, pp.103–24.

            55. (2012) ‘Stage-to-stage information dependency in the NPD process: effective learning or a potential entrapment of NPD gates?’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29, 2, pp.257–74.

            56. (2003) ‘Maps of bounded rationality: psychology for behavioral economics’, American Economic Review, 93, 5, pp.1449–75.

            57. (2018) ‘The VUCA approach as a solution concept to corporate foresight challenges and global technological disruption’, Foresight, 20, 1, pp.27–49.

            58. (1996) ‘The difficult path to lean product development’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 13, 4, pp.283–95.

            59. (2013) ‘Towards lean product and process development’, International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 26, 12, pp.1105–16.

            60. (2011) ‘Lean product development research: current state and future directions’, Engineering Management Journal, 23, 1, pp.29–51.

            61. (1987) ‘Using artificial intelligence techniques to support project management’, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 1, 1, pp.3–24.

            62. (2014) ‘Wisdom of the crowd and capabilities of a few: internal success factors of crowdsourcing for innovation’, Journal of Business Economics, 84, 3, pp.339–74.

            63. (2012) ‘Do you need a new product-development strategy? Aligning process with context’, Research-Technology Management, 55, 1, pp.34–43.

            64. (2001) ‘Developing products on “Internet Time”: the anatomy of a flexible development process’, Management Science, 47, 1, pp.133–50.

            65. (2017) ‘Evolving schemes of interpretation: investigating the dual role of architectures in new product development’, R&D Management, 47, 1, pp.36–46.

            66. (2017) ‘Resolving the commitment–flexibility dilemma in new technology ventures’, International Journal of Innovation Management, 21, 6, paper 1750047.

            67. (2012) ‘New product development practices and early-stage firms: two in-depth case studies’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29, 4, pp.639–54.

            68. (2018) ‘Management innovation in a VUCA world: challenges and recommendations’, California Management Review, 61, 1, pp.5–14.

            69. (2017) ‘Digital innovation management: reinventing innovation management’, MISQ Quarterly, 41, 1, pp.223–38.

            70. (1998) ‘Market learning and radical innovation: a cross case comparison of eight radical innovation projects’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15, 2, pp.151–66.

            71. (2008) ‘The evolution of innovation management towards contextual innovation’, European Journal of Innovation Management, 11, 4, pp.522–38.

            72. (2012) ‘The challenges of becoming agile: implementing and conducting scrum in integrated product development’, unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Architecture, Design & Media Technology, Aalborg University, June, available at https://www.academia.edu/52405809/The_Challenges_of_Becoming_Agile (accessed June 2022).

            73. , | (2017) ‘Rethinking digital manufacturing with polymers’, Science, 358, 6369, pp.1384–5.

            74. (2005) ‘Knowing what to do and doing what you know: effectuation as a form of entrepreneurial expertise’, Journal of Private Equity, 9, 1, pp.45–62.

            75. (2011) The Lean Startup, Crown Publishing Group, New York.

            76. (2013) ‘Organizational ignorance: towards a managerial perspective on the unknown’, Management Learning, 44, 3, pp.215–36.

            77. (2012) ‘Speciation: the origin of new species’, Nature Education Knowledge, 3, 10, paper 17.

            78. (2015) ‘Innovation processes: which process for which project?’, Technovation, 35, pp.59–70.

            79. (2018) ‘Design of a 3D printed concrete bridge by testing’, Virtual and Physical Prototyping, 13, 3, pp.222–36.

            80. (2001) ‘Causation and effectuation: toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency’, Academy of Management Review, 26, 2, pp.243–63.

            81. (2003) ‘Harvesting project knowledge: a review of project learning methods and success factors’, International Journal of Project Management, 21, 3, pp.219–28.

            82. (2019) ‘How project management and top management involvement affect the innovativeness of professional service organizations - an empirical study on hospitals’, Project Management Journal, 50, 4, pp.460–75.

            83. (2008) ‘Stage-gate controls, learning failure, and adverse effect on novel new products’, Journal of Marketing, 72, 1, pp.118–34.

            84. (2008) ‘Change: embrace it, don’t deny it’, Research-Technology Management, 51, 4, pp.34–40.

            85. (2014) ‘Barriers towards integrated product development: challenges from a holistic project management perspective’, International Journal of Project Management, 32, 6, pp.970–82.

            86. (2015) ‘Improved product development performance through agile/stage-gate hybrids: the next-generation stage-gate process?’ Research Technology Management, 58, 1, pp.34–45.

            87. (1986) ‘The new new product development game’, Harvard Business Review, 64, 1, pp.137–46.

            88. (2017) ‘Improving new product development using big data: a case study of an electronics company’, R&D Management, 47, 4, pp.570–82.

            89. (2017) ‘Internet of things business model innovation and the stage-gate process: an exploratory analysis’, International Journal of Innovation Management, 21, 5, paper 1740002.

            90. (2008) Nudge, Yale University Press, New Haven.

            91. (2000) ‘The effect of “front-loading” problem-solving on product development performance’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17, 2, pp.128–42.

            92. (1997) ‘The role of flexibility in the development of new products: an empirical study’, Research Policy, 26, 1, pp.105–19.

            93. (1998) ‘Agile product development: managing development flexibility in uncertain environments’, California Management Review, 41, 1, pp.8–30.

            94. (2016) ‘Innovation management practices: cross-sectorial adoption, variation, and effectiveness’, R&D Management, 46, S3, pp.1024–43.

            95. (1993) ‘Goals-and-methods matrix: coping with projects with ill defined goals and/or methods of achieving them’, International Journal of Project Management, 11, 2, pp.93–102.

            96. USAHEC (2019) ‘Q. Who first originated the term VUCA (Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity and Ambiguity)? ’, US Army Heritage and Education Centre, 22 November 2021, available at http://usawc.libanswers.com/faq/84869 (accessed June 2022).

            97. . (2014) ‘Innovating in a government context: an evaluation of a Dutch water innovation program using the cyclic innovation model’, International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 11, 3, paper 1440008.

            98. . (2020) Contextual Innovation Management: Adapting Innovation Processes to Different Situations, Routledge, London.

            99. (1990) ‘Methods for studying innovation development in the Minnesota Innovation Research Program’, Organization Science, 1, 3, pp.313–35.

            100. , . (2018) ‘Measuring the knowns to manage the unknown: how to choose the gate timing strategy in NPD projects’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 35, 2, pp.164–83.

            101. . (2010) ‘Get fat fast: surviving stage-gate in NPD’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27, 6, pp.828–39.

            102. (1999) ‘Planned flexibility: linking anticipation and reaction in product development projects’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16, 4, pp.363–76.

            103. (2014) Effective Project Management: Traditional, Agile, Extreme, Wiley & Sons, Hoboken NJ.

            104. (2009) Design for Six Sigma: A Roadmap for Product Development, McGraw-Hill, New York.

            105. (2012) ‘Organizing for innovation in the digitized world’, Organization Science, 23, 5, pp.1398–1408.

            Comments

            Comment on this article