The DOI matches its Crossref record; 75 of the 75 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Evaluation of Research on Integrated Product Development
Abstract
Integrated Product Development (IPD) creates overlap and interaction between activities in the new product development process and, because this increases the need to coordinate, compensates through other aspects of the new product development process (e.g., integrated tools), product definitions (e.g., incremental development), organizational context (e.g., reduced task specialization), and teaming (e.g., cross-functional teams). Since IPD has become an important new standard for managing new product development, this paper's general aim is to evaluate the research that has been conducted on it. Our three specific objectives include first critiquing the IPD literature by identifying problems with empirical research and recommending solutions. There are concerns about the overall approach, conceptualizing and operationalizing IPD characteristics, and selecting performance objectives. Second, we conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate relationships between specific IPD characteristics and project performance. We indicate where relationships do or do not exist and identify variables that may moderate these relationships. Third, we offer suggestions for extending IPD research into studies of (a) the hierarchy of teams working on a project, (b) one company managing a portfolio of projects over time, and (c) two or more firms collaborating in a strategic alliance.
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
Gioia, D. A., Mehra, A., & Weick, K. E. (1996) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259169 · Cited by 15,614
The Economic Institutions of Capitalism
Dugger, W. M. (1987) · Journal of Economic Issues · doi:10.1080/00213624.1987.11504638 · Cited by 14,786
The Economic Institutions of Capitalism
(1986) · The Antitrust Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0003603x8603100308 · Cited by 10,730
(2000) · Cited by 9,198
PRODUCT DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
(2018) · Handbook of Research on New Product Development · doi:10.4337/9781784718152.00017 · Cited by 5,504
The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.398 · Cited by 4,957
Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1997) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393807 · Cited by 4,282
Product development: Past research, present findings and future directions
Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258850 · Cited by 3,777
Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives
Kogut, B. (1988) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250090403 · Cited by 3,333
Hunter, J., & Schmidt, F. (2004) · doi:10.4135/9781412985031 · Cited by 3,023
Cited by
Koufteros, X., Vonderembse, M., & Jayaram, J. (2005) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2005.00067.x · Cited by 855
Nair, A. (2006) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2005.11.005 · Cited by 593
Understanding antecedents of new product development speed: A meta‐analysis
Chen, J., Damanpour, F., & Reilly, R. R. (2010) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2009.07.001 · Cited by 329
Mackelprang, A. W., & Nair, A. (2010) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2009.10.002 · Cited by 302
Managing Supply Risk with Early Supplier Involvement: A Case Study and Research Propositions
Zsidisin, G. A., & Smith, M. E. (2005) · Journal of Supply Chain Management · doi:10.1111/j.1745-493x.2005.04104005.x · Cited by 288
Metadata
- Authors
- Gerwin, D., & Barrowman, N. J.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2002-07
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 938-953
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W1985012054
- Cited by
- 356
- References
- 75
- FWCI
- 25.69
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An Evaluation of Research on Integrated Product Development. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.48.7.938.2818
- The paper
- Gerwin, D., & Barrowman, N. J. (2002). An Evaluation of Research on Integrated Product Development. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.48.7.938.2818
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.