The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Interim Report on Measuring Product Development Success and Failure
Abstract
This article represents findings of a PDMA task force studying measures of product development success and failure. This investigation sought to identify all currently used measures, organize them into categories of similar measures that perform roughly the same function, and contrast the measures used by academics and companies to evaluate new product development performance. The authors compared the measures used in over seventy-five published studies of new product development to those surveyed companies say they use. The concept of product development success has many dimensions and each may be measured in a variety of ways. Firms generally use about four measures from two different categories in determining product development success. Academics and managers tend to focus on rather different sets of product development success/failure measures. Academics tend to investigate product development performance at the firm level, whereas managers currently measure, and indicate that they want to understand more completely, individual product success.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
SAPPHO updated - project SAPPHO phase II
Rothwell, R., Freeman, C., Horlsey, A., Jervis, V. T. P., Robertson, A. B., & Townsend, J. (1974) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(74)90010-9 · Cited by 717
Cited by
Strategic orientations and new product commercialization: mediator, moderator, and interplay
Mu, J., & Di Benedetto, C. A. (2011) · R&D Management · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2011.00650.x · Cited by 184
Rodríguez, N. G., Pérez, M. J. S., & Gutiérrez, J. A. T. (2008) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.06.011 · Cited by 145
Santoro, G., Vrontis, D., & Pastore, A. (2017) · British Food Journal · doi:10.1108/bfj-02-2017-0120 · Cited by 133
Metadata
- Authors
- Griffin, A., & Page, A. L.
- Venue
- Journal of Product Innovation Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1993-09-01
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 291-308
- ISSN
- 0737-6782 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2113198229
- Cited by
- 744
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 47.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
